Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Testing of the Urdu version of Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale
Psychometric Testing of CNFDS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54393/pjhs.v4i06.843Keywords:
Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale, Non-Specific Neck Pain, Psychometric, Reliability, Translation, ValidityAbstract
Neck pain is one of the common problems among people. Different measures have been developed to assess the rate of neck pain and disabilities. Patients with neck pain frequently use and easily understand the Copenhagen neck functional disability scale (CNFDS). Objective: To cross-culturally adapt and translate CNFDS into Urdu and examine the psychometric properties of Urdu version of CNFDS (CNFDS -U) in individuals with non-specific neck pain (NSNP). Methods: The CNFDS was translated into Urdu and cross-culturally adapted in compliance with the established standards. This study was carried out on 200 patients having neck pain and 50 healthy respondents. The CNFDS-U, Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (NBQ), and Neck Pain Disability Index Urdu version (NDI-U) were all completed by a combined 200 individuals with NSNP and 50 healthy subjects. The patients with NSNP completed the aforementioned questionnaires and Global Rating of Change Scale (GROC) following three weeks of physiotherapy. CNFDS-U was evaluated for psychometric testing. Results: The CNFDS-U shows excellent internal consistency (α = 0.84) and test-retest reliability (ICC2,1 =0.97). Regarding construct validity, moderate correlations exist between CNFDS-U and NBQ (r=0.51, p<0.001) and CNFDS-U and NDI-U (r=0.64, p<0.001). Its responsiveness was demonstrated by a statistically significant difference in CNFDS-U change scores between improved and stable groups (p< 0.001). Conclusions: The CNFDS-U is a valid, reliable, and responsive scale for evaluating NSNP in populations that can understand Urdu.
References
Jahre H, Grotle M, Småstuen M, Guddal MH, Smedbråten K, Richardsen KR, et al. Risk factors and risk profiles for neck pain in young adults: Prospective analyses from adolescence to young adulthood—The North-Trøndelag Health Study. Plos One. 2021 Oct; 16(8): e0256006. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256006
Kazeminasab S, Nejadghaderi SA, Amiri P, Pourfathi H, Araj-Khodaei M, Sullman MJ, et al. Neck pain: global epidemiology, trends and risk factors. BMC musculoskeletal disorders. 2022 Dec; 23(1): 1-13. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04957-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04957-4
Bachtiar F, Maharani FT, Utari D. Musculoskeletal disorder of workers during work from home on covid-19 pandemic: a descriptive study. InInternational conference of health development. Covid-19 and the role of healthcare workers in the industrial era (ICHD 2020). Atlantis Press. 2020 Nov; 153-60.
Jahre H, Grotle M, Smedbråten K, Dunn KM, Øiestad BE. Risk factors for non-specific neck pain in young adults. A systematic review. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2020 Dec; 21(1): 1-2. doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-03379-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03379-y
Jun D, Johnston V, McPhail SM, O’Leary S. A longitudinal evaluation of risk factors and interactions for the development of nonspecific neck pain in office workers in two cultures. Human Factors. 2021 Jun; 63(4): 663-83. doi: 10.1177/0018720820904231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820904231
Odebiyi DO and Okafor UA. Musculoskeletal Disorders, Workplace Ergonomics and Injury Prevention. InErgonomics-New Insights. IntechOpen. 2023 Feb. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.106031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106031
Basakci Calik B, Yagci N, Oztop M, Caglar D. Effects of risk factors related to computer use on musculoskeletal pain in office workers. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2022 Jan; 28(1): 269-74. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2020.1765112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2020.1765112
Tunçez IH, Demir LS, Kunt M, Şahin TK. Ergonomic evaluation of desk-bound work offices of a community health center and effect of ergonomic intervention on the health complaints of the workers. Nobel Medicus Journal. 2020 May; 16(2): 1-1.
Bobos P, MacDermid JC, Walton DM, Gross A, Santaguida PL. Patient-reported outcome measures used for neck disorders: an overview of systematic reviews. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 2018 Oct; 48(10): 775-88. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2018.8131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2018.8131
Jordan A, Manniche C, Mosdal C, Hindsberger C. The Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale: a study of reliability and validity. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 1998 Oct; 21(8): 520-7.
Barreto FS, Pontes-Silva A, Oliveira FLB, de Oliveira Pires F, Bassi-Dibai D, Fidelis-de-Paula-Gomes CA, et al. Measurement properties of the Brazilian version of the Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale in patients with chronic neck pain. European Spine Journal. 2022 Feb; 31(2): 346-52. doi: 10.1007/s00586-021-07070-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-021-07070-1
Elbeltagy AM, El Sayed WH, Allah SS. Validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale in neck pain patients. Asian Spine Journal. 2018 Oct; 12(5): 817. doi: 10.31616/asj.2018.12.5.817. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2018.12.5.817
Angilecchia D, Mezzetti M, Chiarotto A, Daugenti A, Giovannico G, Bonetti F. Development, validity and reliability of the Italian version of the Copenhagen neck functional disability scale. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2018 Dec; 19(1): 1-9. doi: 10.1186/s12891-018-2332-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-2332-z
Aghaei HN, Azimi P, Shahzadi S, Azhari S, Mohammadi HR, Alizadeh P, et al. Outcome measures of functionality, social interaction, and pain in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a validation study for the iranian version of the copenhagen neck functional disability scale. Asian Spine Journal. 2015 Dec; 9(6): 901. doi: 10.4184/asj.2015.9.6.901. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2015.9.6.901
Yapali G, Günel MK, Karahan S. The cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale in patients with chronic neck pain: Turkish version study. Spine. 2012 May; 37(11): E678-82. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31824b549c. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31824b549c
Ghasemi F, Yoosefinejad AK, Pirouzi S, Ghaem H. Evaluating the cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Persian versions of the copenhagen neck function disability scale and neck bournemouth questionnaire. Spine. 2019 Jan; 44(2): E126-32. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002781. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002781
Forestier R, Françon A, Saint Arroman F, Bertolino C. French version of the Copenhagen neck functional disability scale. Joint Bone Spine. 2007 Mar; 74(2): 155-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2006.03.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2006.03.002
Misterska E, Jankowski R, Glowacki M. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Neck Disability Index and Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale for patients with neck pain due to degenerative and discopathic disorders. Psychometric properties of the Polish versions. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2011 Dec; 12(1): 1-8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-12-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-12-84
Huang Z, Yan J, Li S, Yuan L, Zhang Y, Wu Y, et al. Psychometric validation of the simplified Chinese Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale in patients with chronic nonspecific neck pain. PM&R. 2022 Jun. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.12863. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.12863
Kyriazos TA. Applied psychometrics: sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology. 2018 Aug; 9(08): 2207. doi: 10.4236/psych.2018.98126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.98126
Farooq MN, Mohseni-Bandpei MA, Gilani SA, Hafeez A. Urdu version of the neck disability index: a reliability and validity study. BMC musculoskeletal disorders. 2017 Dec; 18: 1-1. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1469-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1469-5
Bolton JE and Humphreys BK. The Bournemouth Questionnaire: a short-form comprehensive outcome measure. II. Psychometric properties in neck pain patients. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 2002 Mar; 25(3): 141-8. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2002.123333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mmt.2002.123333
Bobos P, MacDermid J, Nazari G, Furtado R. Psychometric properties of the global rating of change scales in patients with neck disorders: a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression. BMJ Open. 2019 Nov; 9(11): e033909. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033909. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033909
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000 Dec; 25(24): 3186-91. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Kennedy I. Sample size determination in test-retest and Cronbach alpha reliability estimates. British Journal of Contemporary Education. 2022 Feb; 2(1): 17-29. doi: 10.52589/BJCE-FY266HK9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52589/BJCE-FY266HK9
Taber KS. The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education. 2018 Dec; 48: 1273-96. doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Dawson J and Fitzpatrick R. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume. 1996 Mar; 78(2): 185-90. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.78B2.0780185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.78B2.0780185
DeVon HA, Block ME, Moyle‐Wright P, Ernst DM, Hayden SJ, Lazzara DJ, et al. A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. Journal of Nursing scholarship. 2007 Jun; 39(2): 155-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00161.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00161.x
Mokkink LB, Boers M, Van Der Vleuten CP, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL, et al. COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2020 Dec; 20: 1-3. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01179-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01179-5
Terwee CB, Prinsen C, Chiarotto A, De Vet H, Bouter LM, Alonso J, et al. COSMIN methodology for assessing the content validity of PROMs–user manual. Amsterdam: VU University Medical Center. 2018. Available at: https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-methodology-for-content-validity-user-manual-v1.pdf.
Schober P, Boer C, Schwarte LA. Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation. Anesthesia & analgesia. 2018 May; 126(5): 1763-8. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864
Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2007 Jan; 60(1): 34-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
Osborne JW. Regression & linear modeling: Best practices and modern methods. Sage Publications; 2017 Jan. doi: 10.4135/9781071802724. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071802724
Arooj A, Amjad F, Tanveer F, Arslan AU, Ahmad A, Gilani SA. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of Urdu version of upper limb functional index; a validity and reliability study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2022 Jul; 23(1): 691. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05628-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05628-8
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Bouter LM, De Vet HC. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2010 Dec; 10(1): 1-8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-22
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Pakistan Journal of Health Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access journal and all the published articles / items are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. For comments
