Minimal clinically important change of the neck disability index and the numerical rating scale for patients with neck pain

Spine

Volumn 32, Issue 26, 2007, Pages 3047-3051

  Pool, Jan J M ^a   Ostelo, Raymond W J G ^a,b   Hoving, Jan L ^a,c   Bouter, Lex M ^a   De Vet, Henrica C W ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Amsterdam School of Allied Health Education   (Netherlands)

^c MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Disability; Minimal clinically important change; Neck pain; Pain

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NECK DISABILITY INDEX SCALE; NECK PAIN; NUMERICAL RATING SCALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RATING SCALE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC;

ADULT; COHORT STUDIES; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NECK PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 37349044632     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815cf75b     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Borghouts JA, Koes BW, Vondeling H, et al. Cost-of-illness of neck pain in The Netherlands in 1996. Pain 1999;80:629-36.
2. Picavet HSJ, Schouten JSAG. Musculoskeletal pain in the Netherlands: prevalences, consequences and risk groups, the DMC3-study. Pain 2003;102:167-78.
3. Croft PR, Lewis M, Papageorgiou AC, et al. Risk factors for neck pain: a longitudinal study in the general population. Pain 2001;93:317-25.
4. Hoving JL, Koes BW, de Vet HC, et al. Manual therapy, physical therapy, or continued care by a general practitioner for patients with neck pain: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:713-22.
5. Wlodyka-Demaille S, Poiraudeau S, Catanzariti JF, et al. French translation and validation of 3 functional disability scales for neck pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:376-82.
6. Vernon H. The Neck Disability Index: patient Assessment and Outcome Monitoring in Whiplash. J Musculoskeletal Pain 1996;4:95-104.
7. Bolton JE, Wilkinson RC. Responsiveness of pain scales: a comparison of three pain intensity measures in chiropractic patients. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1998;21:1-7.
8. Hoving JL, O'Leary EF, Niere KR, et al. Validity of the neck disability index, Northwick Park neck pain questionnaire, and problem elicitation technique for measuring disability associated with whiplash-associated disorders. Pain 2003;102:273-81.
9. Pietrobon R, Coeytaux RR, Carey TS, et al. Standard scales for measurement of functional outcome for cervical pain or dysfunction: a systematic review. Spine 2002;27:515-22.
10. Vernon H, Mior S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991;14:409-15.
11. Cepeda MS, Africano JM, Polo R, et al. What decline in pain intensity is meaningful to patients with acute pain? Pain 2003;105:151-7.
12. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:407-15.
13. Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, et al. On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res 2003;12:349-62.
14. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:395-407.
15. Bolton JE. Sensitivity and specificity of outcome measures in patients with neck pain: detecting clinically significant improvement. Spine 2004;29:2410-7.
16. Wlodyka-Demaille S, Poiraudeau S, Catanzariti JF, et al. The ability to change of three questionnaires for neck pain. Joint Bone Spine 2004;71:317-26.
17. van der Roer N, Ostelo RW, Bekkering GE, et al. Minimal clinically important change for pain intensity, functional status and general health status in patients with non-specific low back pain. Spine 2006;31:578-82.
18. Ostelo RW, de Vet HC, Knol DL, et al. 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire was preferred out of six functional status questionnaires for post-lumbar disc surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 2004;57:268-76.
19. Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002;14:109-14.
20. Farrar JT, Young J, LaMoreaux L, et al. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 2001;94:149-58.
21. Norman GR, Stratford P, Regehr G. Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:869-79.
22. Fritz JM, Irrgang JJ. A comparison of a modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale. Phys Ther 2001;81:776-88.
23. Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ. Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 1996;65:71-6.