Systematic review of the measurement properties of performance-based functional tests in patients with neck disorders

McGee, Steven; Sipos, Taylor; Allin, Thomas Højgaard; Chen, Celia; Greco, Alexandra; Bobos, Pavlos; MacDermid, Joy C.

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031242

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead, we have relied on more qualitative syntheses of previously reported data to identify consistencies and differences in findings. We also acknowledge that the quality appraisal tool (QACMMRE), while it has been used in several prior systematic reviews, [94][95][96] is less commonly used than COSMIN tools. This was an intentional decision, as our initial attempts at applying the COSMIN checklist to studies evaluating the single-item NPRS resulted in the majority of sections being deemed not applicable and precluded our ability to discriminate between levels of study quality.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Psychometric Properties of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and the Visual Analog Scale for Use in People With Neck Pain

Modarresi

Lukacs

Ghodrati

et al. 2021

The Clinical Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To conduct a systematic search and synthesis of evidence about the measurement properties of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) as patientreported outcome measures in neck pain research.Methods and Materials: CINAHL, Embase, PsychInfo, and MedLine databases were searched to identify studies evaluating the psychometric properties of the NPRS and the VAS used in samples of which > 50% of participants were people with neck pain. Quality and consistency of findings were synthesized to arrive at recommendations.Results: A total of 46 manuscripts were included. Syntheses indicated high-to-moderate-quality evidence of good-to-excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.58 to 0.93) test-retest reliability over an interval of 7 hours to 4 weeks. Moderate evidence of a clinically important difference of 1.5 to 2.5 points was found, while minimum detectable change ranged from 2.6 to 4.1 points. Moderate evidence of a moderate association (r = 0.48 to 0.54) between the NPRS or VAS and the Neck Disability Index. Findings from other patient-reported outcomes indicated stronger associations with ratings of physical function than emotional status. There is limited research addressing the extent that these measures reflect outcomes that are important to patients.Discussion: It is clear NPRS and the VAS ratings are feasible to implement, provide reliable scores and relate to multi-item patientreported outcome measures. Responsiveness (meaningful change) of the scales and interpretation of change scores requires further refinement. The NPRS can be a useful single-item assessment complimenting more comprehensive multi-item patient-reported outcome measures in neck pain research and practice.

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Psychometric Properties of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and the Visual Analog Scale for Use in People With Neck Pain

Modarresi

Lukacs

Ghodrati

et al. 2021

The Clinical Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These can lead to functional disability [ 2 , 25 , 26 ], participation restrictions [ 27 ], reduced work capacity [ 28 – 30 ], and lower quality of life [ 31 , 32 ]. There are a variety of impairment and disability measures that have been designed to assess these different constructs [ 23 , 33 – 38 ]. A survey of international practice patterns of clinicians with respect to assessing the outcomes for patients with neck pain indicated that the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPR) (a single item on pain [ 37 ]), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) (developed for upper extremity [ 39 ]) are the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) most commonly used by clinicians [ 40 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of the ND10 to measure neck-related functional disability

MacDermid

Walton

2022

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Previous neck-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have tended to measure both symptoms and disability. This multi-staged study developed and evaluated a neck-specific PROM focusing on functional disability. Methods This study integrated findings from systematic reviews on neck-specific outcome measures, patient interviews, qualitative studies on neck disability, and iterative item testing to develop a 10-item measure of neck-related disability (ND10). Content validity was assessed by classifying items using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and perspective linking. Patients (n = 78) with neck pain completed cognitive interviews, exploring items of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and ND10, and completed structured questions related to literacy and relevance. Test–retest reliability and internal consistency were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients, Bland Altman graphs, and Cronbach’s alpha. Concurrent convergent validity was evaluated by comparing the ND10 to the NDI, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH). Known group validity was determined by comparing ND10 scores from patients, who rated their neck as more or less than 1/2 of “normal” on the SANE, using t-tests. Results The ND10 requires respondents to make rational judgements about their neck-related body function and disability. It has high internal consistency (0.94) and re-test reliability (0.87; SEM = 3.2/100; MDC = 7.5); and no re-test bias (mean re-test difference of 0.6). It followed expected correlation patterns, being highly correlated with related multi-item PROMs (r = 0.85–0.91), and moderately correlated to the single-item SANE. More patients agreed that the ND10 was easily readable than did so for the NDI (84% vs 68%; p < 0.05). All the PROMs distinguished the patients who perceived themselves as being abnormal/normal defined by a dichotomized SANE (p < 0.01). Conclusion The ND10 is reliable and valid for measuring neck-related functional disability. Longitudinal and cross-cultural translation studies are needed to support future use.

show abstract

“…Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often administered to assess any health-related changes that may have occurred as a consequence of health-management interventions [ 7 , 8 ]. Many properties are important [ 9 – 13 ] during an instrument development such as reliability and validity but a key property is considered to be content validity [ 14 ]. Content validity can be defined as the degree of which the instrument or the questionnaire is an adequate reflection of the construct being measured [ 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the content validity index of the Australian/Canadian osteoarthritis hand index, the patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation and the thumb disability exam in people with hand arthritis

Bobos

MacDermid

Boutsikari

et al. 2020

Health Qual Life Outcomes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN), the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) and the Thumb Disability Exam (TDX) are patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) designed to assess pain and hand function in patients with hand arthritis, hand pain and disability, or thumb pathology respectively. This study evaluated the content validity of AUSCAN, PRWHE and TDX in people with hand arthritis. Methods This study enrolled participants with hand arthritis to rate the items of all 3 PROM in terms of relevance and clarity. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was computed for each item in each scale (I-CVI) as well as for the overall scale (S-CVI). Kappa was used to determine the inter-rater agreement among the raters. Results Overall, 64 individuals with hand arthritis (27% with OA, 67% with rheumatoid arthritis and 6% with psoriatic arthritis) participated in the study. The I-CVI for all items and all scales were very high (I-CVI > 0.76) and the modified Kappa agreement among the raters demonstrated excellent agreement (k > 0.76). The S-CVI for all PROMs was very high for relevance (AUSCAN = 0.92, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.94; PRWHE = 0.85, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.88 and TDX = 0.87, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.89) and for clarity (AUSCAN = 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00; PRWHE = 0.95, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97 and TDX = 0.91, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.94), respectively. Conclusions This study demonstrated very high content validity indices for the AUSCAN, PRWHE and TDX; with strong consensus across raters. This augments prior studies demonstrating appropriate statistical measurement properties, to provide confidence that all three measures assess important patient concepts of pain and disability.

show abstract

Systematic review of the measurement properties of performance-based functional tests in patients with neck disorders

Cited by 5 publications

References 46 publications

A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Psychometric Properties of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and the Visual Analog Scale for Use in People With Neck Pain

A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Psychometric Properties of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and the Visual Analog Scale for Use in People With Neck Pain

Development and validation of the ND10 to measure neck-related functional disability

Evaluation of the content validity index of the Australian/Canadian osteoarthritis hand index, the patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation and the thumb disability exam in people with hand arthritis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About