Advertisement

European Spine Journal

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 80–88 | Cite as

Neck pain and disability due to neck pain: what is the relation?

  • René FejerEmail author
  • Jan Hartvigsen
Original Article

Abstract

Pain and disability are interrelated, but the relationship between pain and disability is not straightforward. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between neck pain (NP) intensity, NP duration, and disability based on the population-based ‘Funen Neck and Chest Pain’ study. Pain intensity was measured using 11-box numerical rating scales, pain duration was measured using the Standardized Nordic Questionnaire, and disability was measured by the Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale. Spearman rank correlation coefficients and logistic regression analyses were used to measure correlations and strength of associations between pain intensity, pain duration, and disability given domain specific characteristics (socioeconomic, health and physical, comorbidity, and variables related to consequences of NP). Neck pain was very common, but mainly mild and did not result in major disability. The correlations between NP intensity and disability were moderate but strongly associated, whereas weaker correlations and almost no associations were found between NP duration and disability. Pain duration is a poor indicator of disability. Given these variations, pain intensity and disability should be considered as two distinct dimensions and measured separately. These results have implications for future clinical and epidemiological studies.

Keywords

Cross-sectional postal survey Neck pain Neck disability Neck pain duration Correlations 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Danish Foundation of Chiropractic Research and Post Graduate Education, and the Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital.

References

  1. 1.
    Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berglund A, Alfredsson L, Jensen I, Cassidy JD, Nygren A (2001) The association between exposure to a rear-end collision and future health complaints. J Clin Epidemiol 54(8):851–856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brauer C, Thomsen JF, Loft IP, Mikkelsen S (2003) Can we rely on retrospective pain assessments? Am J Epidemiol 157(6):552–557PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bredkjaer SR (1991) Musculoskeletal disease in Denmark. The Danish Health and Morbidity Survey 1986–87. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 241:10–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bunketorp L, Stener-Victorin E, Carlsson J (2005) Neck pain and disability following motor vehicle accidents-a cohort study. Eur Spine J 14(1):84–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chiu TT, Lam TH, Hedley AJ (2005) Correlation among physical impairments, pain, disability, and patient satisfaction in patients with chronic neck pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86(3):534–540PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clair D, Edmondston S, Allison G (2004) Variability in pain intensity, physical and psychological function in non-acute, non-traumatic neck pain. Physiother Res Int 9(1):43–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Colton T (1974) Statistics in medicine. Brown & Company, Boston, LittleGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cooper JE, Tate RB, Yassi A, Khokhar J (1996) Effect of an early intervention program on the relationship between subjective pain and disability measures in nurses with low back injury. Spine 21(20):2329–2336PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cote P, Cassidy JD, Carroll L (2000) The factors associated with neck pain and its related disability in the Saskatchewan population. Spine 25(9):1109–1117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Downie WW, Leatham PA, Rhind VM, Wright V, Branco JA, Anderson JA (1978) Studies with pain rating scales. Ann Rheum Dis 37(4):378–381PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dworkin SF, von Korff M, LeResche L, Dicker BG, Barlow W (1990) Measurement of characteristic pain intensity in field research. Pain Suppl 5:S290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fejer R, Hartvigsen J, Kyvik KO, Jordan A, Christensen HW, Høilund-Carlsen PF (2006) The Funen neck and chest pain study: an analysis of baseline data, non-respondents and patterns of missing data. Eur J Epidemiol 21:589–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fejer R, Jordan A, Hartvigsen J (2005) Categorising the severity of neck pain: establishment of cut-points for use in clinical and epidemiological research. Pain 119(1–3):176–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fejer R, Kyvik KO, Hartvigsen H (2004) The prevalence of neck pain in the world population: a systematic critical review of the literature. Eur Spine J 15:834–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hermann KM, Reese CS (2001) Relationships among selected measures of impairment, functional limitation, and disability in patients with cervical spine disorders. Phys Ther 81(3):903–914PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hopman-Rock M, Odding E, Hofman A, Kraaimaat FW, Bijlsma JW (1996) Physical and psychosocial disability in elderly subjects in relation to pain in the hip and/or knee. J Rheumatol 23(6):1037–1044PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jensen MP, Karoly P, Braver S (1986) The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain 27(1):117–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jensen MP, McFarland CA (1993) Increasing the reliability and validity of pain intensity measurement in chronic pain patients. Pain 55(2):195–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM, Fisher LD (1999) Comparative reliability and validity of chronic pain intensity measures. Pain 83(2):157–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jensen MP, Turner LR, Turner JA, Romano JM (1996) The use of multiple-item scales for pain intensity measurement in chronic pain patients. Pain 67(1):35–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jordan A, Manniche C, Mosdal C, Hindsberger C (1998) The Copenhagen neck functional disability scale: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 21(8):520–527PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kuorinka I, Jonsson B, Kilbom A, Vinterberg H, Sorensen FB, Andersson G et al (1987) Standardised Nordic Questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon 18:233–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leboeuf-Yde C, Manniche C (2001) Low back pain: time to get off the treadmill. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 24(1):63–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leveille SG, Guralnik JM, Hochberg M, Hirsch R, Ferrucci L, Langlois J et al (1999) Low back pain and disability in older women: independent association with difficulty but not inability to perform daily activities. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 54(10):M487–M493PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Linton SJ, Melin L (1982) The accuracy of remembering chronic pain. Pain 13(3):281–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Marchiori DM, Henderson CN (1996) A cross-sectional study correlating cervical radiographic degenerative findings to pain and disability. Spine 21(23):2747–2751PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nielson WR, Mior S (2001) Prevention of chronic pain: the unexplored frontier. Clin J Pain 17(4 suppl):S68–S69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    OECD (1999) Classifying educational programmes—manual for ISCED-97 implementation in OECD countries. OECD editor. http://www.oecd.org, OECD
  30. 30.
    Penny KI, Purves AM, Smith BH, Chambers WA, Smith WC (1999) Relationship between the chronic pain grade and measures of physical, social and psychological well-being. Pain 79(2–3):275–279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rothman KJ, Greenland S (1998) Modern epidemiology, 2nd edn Williams & Wilkins, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    StataCorp (2003) Stata Statistical Software. (8.2). Stata Corporation, College StationGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Statistics Denmark (2005) Statistics Denmark. http://www.dst.dk. 1-4-2005
  34. 34.
    The Danish Central Office of Civil Registration (2005) The Danish Central Office of Civil Registration. http://www.cpr.dk. 1-4-2005
  35. 35.
    Thomas RJ, McEwen J, Asbury AJ (1996) The Glasgow Pain Questionnaire: a new generic measure of pain; development and testing. Int J Epidemiol 25(5):1060–1067PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    UNESCO (1997) International standard classification of education—ISCED-1997. UNESCO, editor. http://www.uis.unesco.org
  37. 37.
    van Duijn M, Lötters F, Burdorf A (2005) Interrelationships between pain, disability, general health, and quality of life and associations with work-related and individual factors. Spine 29(19):2178–2183Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    von Korff M, Jensen MP, Karoly P (2000) Assessing global pain severity by self-report in clinical and health services research. Spine 25(24):3140–3151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, Somerville D, Main CJ (1993) A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low-back-pain and disability. Pain 52(2):157–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Weiner DK, Haggerty CL, Kritchevsky SB, Harris T, Simonsick EM, Nevitt M et al (2003) How does low back pain impact physical function in independent, well-functioning older adults? Evidence from the Health ABC Cohort and implications for the future. Pain Med 4(4):311–320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wlodyka-Demaille S, Poiraudeau S, Catanzariti JF, Rannou F, Fermanian J, Revel M (2004) The ability to change of three questionnaires for neck pain. Joint Bone Spine 71(4):317–326PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Clinical Locomotion Science, Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, Faculty of Health SciencesUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdense MDenmark
  2. 2.School of Chiropractic, Division of Health SciencesMurdoch UniversityPerthAustralia
  3. 3.Nordic Institute of Chiropractic and Clinical Biomechanicspart of Clinical Locomotion ScienceOdenseDenmark

Personalised recommendations