Responsiveness of the German version of the Neck Disability Index in chronic neck pain patients: a prospective cohort study with a seven‑week follow‑up
Authors
Anke Langenfeld
Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Minderbroedersberg 4‑6, 6211 LK Maastricht, the Netherlands
Antonia Pia Gassner
Department of Chiropractic Medicine, Integrative Spinal Research (ISR Group), Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008 Zurich, Switzerland
Brigitte Wirth
School of Management and Law, Winterthur Institute of Health Economics, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Gertrudstr. 15, 8400 Winterthur, Switzerland
Malin Beth Mühlemann
Department of Chiropractic Medicine, Integrative Spinal Research (ISR Group), Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008 Zurich, Switzerland
Luana Nyirö
Department of Chiropractic Medicine, Integrative Spinal Research (ISR Group), Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008 Zurich, Switzerland
Caroline Bastiaenen
Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University, Minderbroedersberg 4‑6, 6211 LK Maastricht, the Netherlands
Jaap Swanenburg
University of Zurich, Raemistrasse 71, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland
Keywords:
Chronic neck pain, German version of the Neck Disability Index, Responsiveness
Abstract
Background: The need for an efficient and feasible strategy to deal with neck pain has a high priority for many countries. Validated assessment tools like the Neck Disability Index (NDI) to evaluate the functional status of a neck pain patient are urgently needed to treat and to follow-up patients purposefully. A German version (NDI-G) was shown to be valid and reliable, but has so far not been tested for responsiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the NDIG` s responsiveness. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study with a seven-week follow-up. Fifty chronic neck pain patients filled out NDI-G twice. Additionally, the Patients’ Global Impression of Change score (PGIC) was assessed at follow-up. Wilcoxon and Spearman tests were used to assess direction and strength of the association between the change in NDI-G and PGIC. The receiver operating characteristics method and the area under the curve (AUC) were calculated to assess sensitivity and specificity of the NDI-G change over time. Results: The Wilcoxon test showed statistically significant differences for NDI-G at baseline and follow-up in the total sample, the “clinically improved” and “clinically not improved” subgroups as indicated in the PGIC. Spearman test resulted in a moderate correlation between the NDI-G and the PGIC ( rS = -0.53, p = 0.01) at follow-up. AUC showed an acceptable discrimination [AUC = 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.64 – 0.91)] of the NDI-G, with a cutoff score of 1.5, between clinically improved and clinically not improved patients, based on the PGIC. Conclusions: The NDI-G is responsive to change in chronic neck pain. Together with the results of a previous study on its validity and reliability, the NDI-G can be recommended for research and clinical settings in patients with neck pain in German speaking countries.
Responsiveness of the German version of the Neck Disability Index in chronic neck pain patients: a prospective cohort study with a seven‑week follow‑up. (2022). Archives of Physiotherapy, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-022-00149-y