Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reliability, responsiveness and interpretability of the neck disability index-Dutch version in primary care

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To establish an evidence-based recommendation for the pragmatic use of the Neck Disability Index-Dutch Version (NDI-DV) in primary care based on an assessment of the reliability, the responsiveness, and the interpretability of the NDI-DV.

Study design and setting/methods

At baseline, the NDI-DV was completed by 337 patients with neck pain presenting to 97 chiropractic clinics in Belgium and the Netherlands. Three months after inclusion, 265 patients provided data to assess the responsiveness and interpretability. Reliability was assessed in 155 patients (retested after 10 days) by calculating the intra-class correlation coefficient for agreement (ICCagreement) and the measurement error (standard error of measurement, SEM), the latter resulting in the smallest detectable change (SDC). The minimal important change (MIC) was assessed by the anchor-based MIC distribution using self-reported perceived recovery as anchor. We tested interpretability by relating SDC to MIC.

Results

The ICCagreement was 0.88. The SEMagreement was 1.95 resulting in a SDC of 5.40. The NDI-DV appeared to be responsive, being able to distinguish improved from stable patients with an area under the curve of 0.85. The MIC was 4.50.

Conclusion

The NDI-DV has good reliability and responsiveness and may be used in clinical practice in Belgium and the Netherlands. A change score of 5 is important for patients, but has a 7 % chance to be due to measurement error.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Powers JH (2007) Patient reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective. Value Health 10(Suppl 2):125–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Schellingerhout JM, Verhagen AP, Heymans MW, Koes BW, de Vet HC, Terwee CB (2012) Measurement properties of disease-specific questionnaires in patients with neck pain: a systematic review. Qual Life Res 21(4):659–670

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schellingerhout JM, Heymans MW, Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, Koes BW, Terwee CB (2011) Measurement properties of translated versions of neck-specific questionnaires: a systemic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 11:87

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL et al (2010) International consensus on taxonomy, terminology and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient reported outcomes: result of the COSMIN study. J Clin Epidemiol 63:737–745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL (2011) Measurement in medicine. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Jorritsma W, de Vries GE, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JHB, Reneman MF (2012) Detecting relevant changes and responsiveness of neck pain and disability scale and neck disability index. Eur Spine J 21:2550–2557

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jorritsma W, de Vries GE, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JHB, Reneman MF (2012) Neck pain and disability scale and neck disability index: validity of Dutch language versions. Eur Spine J 21:93–100

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Köke AJA, Heuts PHTG, Vlayen JWS, Weber WEJ (1996) Neck disability index. In: Köke AJA (ed) Meetinstrumenten chronische pijn. Deel 1 functionele status. Pijn Kennis Centrum Maastricht, pp 94–95

  10. Vernon H, Mior S (1991) The Neck disability index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manip Physiol Ther 14:409–415

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. De Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Bouter LM (2006) When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol 59:1033–1039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Macdermid JC, Walton DM, Avery S, Blanchard A, Etruw E, Mcalpine C, Goldsmith CH (2009) Measurement properties of the neck disability index: a systematic review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 39(5):400–417

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nunally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. de Vet HCW, Ostelo RWJG, Terwee CB, van der Roer N, Knol DL, Beckerman H, Boers M, Bouter LM (2007) Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach. Qual Life Res 16:131–142

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR (1995) Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 4:293–307

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Van der Roer N, Ostelo RW, Bekkering GE, Van Tulder MW, De Vet HCW (2006) Minimal clinically important change for pain intensity, functional status, and general health status in patients with nonspecific low back pain. Spine 31:578–582

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. De Boer MR, De Vet HC, Terwee CB, Moll AC, Volker-Dieben HJ, Van Rens GH (2005) Changes to the subscales of two vision-related quality of life questionnaires are proposed. J Clin Epidemiol 58:1260–1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vos CJ, Verhagen AP, Koes BW (2006) Reliability and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the neck disability index in patients with acute neck pain in general practice. Eur Spine J 15:1729–1736

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pool JJ, Ostelo RW, Hoving JL, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW (2007) Minimal clinically important change of the neck disability index and the numerical rating scale for patients with neck pain. Spine 32:3047–3051

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. van der Velde G, Beaton D, Hogg-Johnston S, Hurwitz E, Tennant A (2009) Rash analysis provides new insight into the measurement properties of the neck disability index. Arthritis Rheum 61(4):544–551

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Terwee CB, Roorda LD, Dekker J, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Peat G, Jordan KP, Croft P, de Vet HCW (2010) Mind the MIC: large variation among populations and methods. J Clin Epidemiol 63:524–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Luc Ailliet, the corresponding author, is as a Ph.D. student financially supported by the European Chiropractic Union, the Belgian Chiropractic Union, the Dutch Chiropractic Association (NCA) and l’Institut Franco-Européen de Chiropratique (IFEC, Paris, France). The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors, and no official endorsements by supporting agencies are intended or should be inferred.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Luc Ailliet, S. M. Rubinstein, H. C. W. de Vet, M. W. van Tulder & C. B. Terwee

  2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Luc Ailliet, H. C. W. de Vet & C. B. Terwee

  3. Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Institute of Health Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    S. M. Rubinstein & M. W. van Tulder

Authors
  1. Luc Ailliet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. M. Rubinstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. C. W. de Vet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. W. van Tulder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C. B. Terwee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luc Ailliet.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ailliet, L., Rubinstein, S.M., de Vet, H.C.W. et al. Reliability, responsiveness and interpretability of the neck disability index-Dutch version in primary care. Eur Spine J 24, 88–93 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3359-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3359-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation