• Spine · Jun 2021

    Less is more: 5-item neck disability index to assess chronic neck pain patients in Brazil.

    • Felipe Souza Barreto, Mariana Arias Avila, Jocassia Silva Pinheiro, Mariana Quixabeira Guimarães Almeida, Cheila de Sousa Bacelar Ferreira, Cid André Fidelis-de-Paula-Gomes, and Almir Vieira Dibai-Filho.
    • Postgraduate Program in Physical Education, Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA), São Luís, MA, Brazil.
    • Spine. 2021 Jun 15; 46 (12): E688-E693.

    Study DesignCross-sectional study.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the structural validity of the Brazilian version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) in patients with chronic neck pain.Summary Of Background DataNDI is widely used in clinical and scientific contexts, although its structure has not been evaluated in the Brazilian version.MethodsNative Brazilian Portuguese speakers, aged ≥18 years, with neck pain complaint of at least 3 months, and minimal pain rating of 3 points at rest or during neck movements were included. Exploratory factorial analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factorial analysis (CFA) were used. In EFA, the adequacy of the model was assessed using Bartlett test of sphericity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test. In CFA, the goodness-of-fit was assessed by the indices: root mean square error of approximation with 90% of confidence interval, comparative fit index, Tucker-Lewis Index, standardized root mean square residual, and χ2/degree of freedom. Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) were considered to compare the models.ResultsTwo hundred fifty-four participants with chronic neck pain were included. The NDI model with one domain and five items presented the most adequate goodness-of-fit indexes and the lowest values of AIC and BIC, when compared with models with one domain and 10, eight, or seven items, and with the model with two domains and 10 items.ConclusionIn the Brazilian context, the NDI version with one domain and five items (personal care, concentration, work, driving, and recreation) presents the best structure according to the factorial analysis.Level of Evidence: 5.Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…