Dataset Information

Validation of the korean version of the neck pain and disability scale.

ABSTRACT:

Study design

A prospective study.

Purpose

To evaluate the reliability and validity of the adapted Korean version of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPDS).

Overview of literature

The validity of Korean version of NPDS has not been completely demonstrated yet.

Methods

Translation/retranslation of the English version of NPDS was conducted, and all steps of the cross-cultural adaptation process were performed. The Korean version of the visual analog scale (VAS) measure of pain, NPDS and the previously validated Short Form-36 (SF-36) were mailed to 91 patients, who had been surgically treated for degenerative cervical disease. Eighty-one patients responded to the first mailing of questionnaires and 69 of the first time responder returned their second survey. Factor analysis and reliability assessment by kappa statistics of agreement for each item, the intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's ? were conducted. Concurrent and construct validity were also evaluated by comparing the responses of NPDS with the results of VAS and responses of SF-36.

Results

Factor analysis extracted 3 factors. All items had a kappa statistics of agreement greater than 0.6. The NPDS showed excellent test/re-test reliability. Internal consistency of Cronbach's ? was found to be very good. The NPDS was correlated with the VAS. The Korean version of NPDS showed good significant correlation with SF-36 total score and with single SF-36 domains scores.

Conclusions

The adapted Korean version of the NPDS was successfully translated and is considered suitable for outcome assessments in the Korean-speaking patients with neck pain.

SUBMITTER: Lee JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3779768 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of the korean version of the neck pain and disability scale.

Lee Jung Sub JS Suh Kuen Tak KT Kim Jeung Il JI Lee Hong Seok HS Goh Tae Sik TS

Asian spine journal 20130904 3

<h4>Study design</h4>A prospective study.<h4>Purpose</h4>To evaluate the reliability and validity of the adapted Korean version of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPDS).<h4>Overview of literature</h4>The validity of Korean version of NPDS has not been completely demonstrated yet.<h4>Methods</h4>Translation/retranslation of the English version of NPDS was conducted, and all steps of the cross-cultural adaptation process were performed. The Korean version of the visual analog scale (VAS) measu ...[more]

PMID: 24066212

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNeck pain is a highly prevalent condition resulting in major disability. Standard scales for measuring disability in patients with neck pain have a pivotal role in research and clinical settings. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) is a valid and reliable tool, designed to measure disability in activities of daily living due to neck pain. The purpose of our study was the translation and validation of the NDI in a Greek primary care population with neck complaints.MethodsThe original version of the questionnaire was used. Based on international standards, the translation strategy comprised forward translations, reconciliation, backward translation and pre-testing steps. The validation procedure concerned the exploration of internal consistency (Cronbach alpha), test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Bland and Altman method), construct validity (exploratory factor analysis) and responsiveness (Spearman correlation coefficient, Standard Error of Measurement and Minimal Detectable Change) of the questionnaire. Data quality was also assessed through completeness of data and floor/ceiling effects.ResultsThe translation procedure resulted in the Greek modified version of the NDI. The latter was culturally adapted through the pre-testing phase. The validation procedure raised a large amount of missing data due to low applicability, which were assessed with two methods. Floor or ceiling effects were not observed. Cronbach alpha was calculated as 0.85, which was interpreted as good internal consistency. Intraclass correlation coefficient was found to be 0.93 (95% CI 0.84-0.97), which was considered as very good test-retest reliability. Factor analysis yielded one factor with Eigenvalue 4.48 explaining 44.77% of variance. The Spearman correlation coefficient (0.3; P = 0.02) revealed some relation between the change score in the NDI and Global Rating of Change (GROC). The SEM and MDC were calculated as 0.64 and 1.78 respectively.ConclusionThe Greek version of the NDI measures disability in patients with neck pain in a reliable, valid and responsive manner. It is considered a useful tool for research and clinical settings in Greek Primary Health Care.

Project description:BackgroundThe NDI, COM and NPQ are evaluation instruments for disability due to NP. There was no Spanish version of NDI or COM for which psychometric characteristics were known. The objectives of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the Spanish version of the Neck Disability Index Questionnaire (NDI), and the Core Outcome Measure (COM), to validate its use in Spanish speaking patients with non-specific neck pain (NP), and to compare their psychometric characteristics with those of the Spanish version of the Northwick Pain Questionnaire (NPQ).MethodsTranslation/re-translation of the English versions of the NDI and the COM was done blindly and independently by a multidisciplinary team. The study was done in 9 primary care Centers and 12 specialty services from 9 regions in Spain, with 221 acute, subacute and chronic patients who visited their physician for NP: 54 in the pilot phase and 167 in the validation phase. Neck pain (VAS), referred pain (VAS), disability (NDI, COM and NPQ), catastrophizing (CSQ) and quality of life (SF-12) were measured on their first visit and 14 days later. Patients' self-assessment was used as the external criterion for pain and disability. In the pilot phase, patients' understanding of each item in the NDI and COM was assessed, and on day 1 test-retest reliability was estimated by giving a second NDI and COM in which the name of the questionnaires and the order of the items had been changed.ResultsComprehensibility of NDI and COM were good. Minutes needed to fill out the questionnaires [median, (P25, P75)]: NDI. 4 (2.2, 10.0), COM: 2.1 (1.0, 4.9). Reliability: [ICC, (95%CI)]: NDI: 0.88 (0.80, 0.93). COM: 0.85 (0.75,0.91). Sensitivity to change: Effect size for patients having worsened, not changed and improved between days 1 and 15, according to the external criterion for disability: NDI: -0.24, 0.15, 0.66; NPQ: -0.14, 0.06, 0.67; COM: 0.05, 0.19, 0.92.ValidityResults of NDI, NPQ and COM were consistent with the external criterion for disability, whereas only those from NDI were consistent with the one for pain. Correlations with VAS, CSQ and SF-12 were similar for NDI and NPQ (absolute values between 0.36 and 0.50 on day 1, between 0.38 and 0.70 on day 15), and slightly lower for COM (between 0.36 and 0.48 on day 1, and between 0.33 and 0.61 on day 15). Correlation between NDI and NPQ: r = 0.84 on day 1, r = 0.91 on day 15. Correlation between COM and NPQ: r = 0.63 on day 1, r = 0.71 on day 15.ConclusionAlthough most psychometric characteristics of NDI, NPQ and COM are similar, those from the latter one are worse and its use may lead to patients' evolution seeming more positive than it actually is. NDI seems to be the best instrument for measuring NP-related disability, since its results are the most consistent with patient's assessment of their own clinical status and evolution. It takes two more minutes to answer the NDI than to answer the COM, but it can be reliably filled out by the patient without assistance.Trial registrationClinical Trials Register NCT00349544.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measures support health professionals in evaluating the results of clinical research and practice. The Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale (CNFDS) has shown promising measurement properties to measure disability in patients with neck pain, but an Italian version of this questionnaire is not available. The objective of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the CNFDS into Italian (CNFDS-I), and to assess its validity and reliability in patients with neck pain. METHODS:The CNFDS-I was developed according to well-established guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures. A cross-sectional clinimetric study was conducted to evaluate its validity and reliability. Patients with chronic neck pain (pain >?3 months) participated in this study. The following measurement properties (defined by the COSMIN initiative) were assessed: structural validity (exploratory factor analysis), internal consistency (Cronbach's ?), construct validity [by testing hypotheses on expected correlations with the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (NBQ), and pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)]. Test-retest reliability [Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for agreement (ICCagreement)], and measurement error [Smallest Detectable Change (SDC)] were also assessed in 50 clinically stable patients. Floor/ceiling effects and acceptability were calculated. RESULTS:One-hundred and sixty-two patients (mean age?=?47.9?±?14.5 years, 70% female) were included. The CNFDS-I exhibited sufficient unidimensionality (one factor explained 83% of the variability) and internal consistency (??=?0.83). Construct validity was sufficient as all correlations with the other questionnaires were as expected (r?=?0.846 with NDI, r?=?0.708 with NBQ, r?=?0.570 with VAS). Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICCagreement?=?0.99, 95% CI from 0.995 to 0.999), while measurement error was equal to 8.31 scale points (27% scale range). No floor/ceiling effects were detected. The average time for filling the questionnaire was two minutes. CONCLUSIONS:The CNFDS-I proved to be a valid and reliable outcome measure to assess disability in patients with chronic neck pain. Head-to-head comparison studies on the CNFDS-I measurement properties against other disability measures for neck pain (e.g. NDI and NBQ) are required to determine the relative merits of these different measures.

Project description:BackgroundPreterm birth (PTB) is a complex and significant challenge in obstetrics. Thus, clinicians and researchers have paid a keen interest in the identification of women at a high risk for PTB. This study aimed to develop a PTB risk assessment scale based on the preliminary 32-item Preterm Birth Risk Assessment Scale-Korean version (PBRAS-K).MethodsWe enrolled 298 participants (167 in the exploratory factor analysis group from March 3, 2021 to August 31, 2021 and 131 in the confirmatory factor analysis group from December 3, 2021 to February 14, 2022) who delivered before 37+0 weeks after experiencing preterm symptoms and were admitted to high-risk pregnancy maternal-fetal intensive care units (MFICUs). After an item-reduction process in the exploratory factor analysis, the psychometric property scales were assessed using SPSS Statistics version 27.0, and the confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using AMOS version 27.0.ResultsThe Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test and Bartlett's χ2 test of sphericity confirmed the adequacy of the sample for factor analysis (KMO = .81 (> .80), χ2 = 1841.38, p < .001). The final version of the PBRAS-K comprised 23 items within seven dimensions. Factor analysis identified items explaining 65.9% of the total variance. The PBRAS-K achieved a mean score of 35.58 (± 10.35) and showed high internal consistency and satisfactory reliability (Cronbach's alpha = .85). Regarding concurrent validity, the PBRAS-K exhibited a low-to-moderate correlation with the PTB risk (r = .45, p < .001). As for criterion validity and convergent validity, the PBRAS-K showed a positive and high correlation with the Somatic Awareness Scale with Spontaneous Preterm Labor (SPL-SAS) (r = .65, p < .001) and pregnancy-related stress (r = .57, p < .001), respectively. Risk scoring for preterm delivery and SPL-SAS were moderately correlated (r = .53, p < .001).ConclusionsPBRAS-23-K is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the risk for PTB in pregnant women. Clinical nurses are encouraged to apply and obtain information regarding effective interventions in MFICUs. This scale provides meaningful results and reflects the opinions of women who had experienced PTB. The PBRAS-23-K should be evaluated for standardization and cut-off scores using larger sample sizes in the future.

Dataset Information

Validation of the korean version of the neck pain and disability scale.

Study design

Purpose

Overview of literature

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Validation of the korean version of the neck pain and disability scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets