Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Responsiveness and minimal important change of the NeckPix© in subjects with chronic neck pain undergoing rehabilitation

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

Abstract

Purpose

The NeckPix© is a simple and rapid means of measuring the beliefs of subjects with chronic neck pain concerning pain-related fears of a specific set of activities of daily living. The original version showed satisfactory psychometric properties. This observational study is aimed at evaluating its responsiveness and minimal important changes (MICs) in subjects with chronic neck pain.

Methods

At the beginning, at the end of an 8-week rehabilitation programme as well as at the one-year follow-up, 153 subjects completed the NeckPix©. After the programme and at follow-up, subjects and physiotherapists also completed the global perceived effect (GPE) scale, which was divided to produce a dichotomous outcome. Responsiveness was calculated by distribution [effect size (ES); standardised response mean (SRM)] and anchor-based methods [receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves; correlations between change scores of the NeckPix© and GPEs]. ROC curves were also used to compute MICs.

Results

The ES ranged from 0.95 to 1.26 and the SRM from 0.84 to 0.98 at post-treatment and follow-up based on subjects’ and physiotherapists’ perspective. The ROC analyses revealed AUCs of 0.89 and 0.97 at post-treatment and follow-up, respectively; MICs (sensitivity; specificity) were of 6 (0.82; 0.88) and 8 (0.80; 0.92) at post-treatment and of 8 (0.95; 0.90 based on subjects and 0.95; 0.92 based on physiotherapists perspective) at follow-up. The correlations between change scores of the NeckPix© and GPEs ranged from −0.69 to −0.82.

Conclusions

The NeckPix© was sensitive in detecting clinical changes in subjects with chronic neck pain undergoing rehabilitation. We recommend taking the MICs provided into account when assessing subjects’ improvement or planning studies in this clinical context.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jensen IB, Bergström G, Ljungquist T, Bodin L (2005) A 3-year follow-up of a multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme for back and neck pain. Pain 115:273–283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Johansen JB, Røe C, Bakke ES et al (2013) The determinants of function and disability in neck patients referred to a specialized outpatient clinic. Clin J Pain 29:1029–1035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Monticone M, Ambrosini E, Rocca B, et al (2016) Group-based multimodal exercises integrated with cognitive-behavioural therapy improve disability, pain and quality of life of subjects with chronic neck pain: A randomized controlled trial with one-year follow-up. Clin Rehabil 269215516651979

  4. Monticone M, Cedraschi C, Ambrosini E et al (2015) Cognitive‐behavioural treatment for subacute and chronic neck pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (5):CD010664. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010664.pub2

  5. Vlaeyen JW, Kole-Snijders AM, Boeren RG, Van Eek H (1995) Fear of movement/(re) injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance. Pain 62:363–372

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Vlaeyen JW, de Jong J, Geilen M et al (2002) The treatment of fear of movement/(re) injury in chronic low back pain: further evidence on the effectiveness of exposure in vivo. Clin J Pain 18:251–261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Leeuw M, Goossens ME, van Breukelen GJ et al (2007) Measuring perceived harmfulness of physical activities in patients with chronic low back pain: the photograph series of daily activities—short electronic version. J Pain 8:840–849

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Monticone M, Vernon H, Brunati R et al (2015) The NeckPix©: development of an evaluation tool for assessing kinesiophobia in subjects with chronic neck pain. Eur Spine J 24:72–79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Saltychev M, Mattie R, McCormick Z, Laimi K (2017) Psychometric properties of the neck disability index amongst patients with chronic neck pain using item response theory. Disabil Rehabil 1–6

  10. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR et al (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Ostelo RW et al (2006) Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:54

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Prinsen CA, Vohra S, Rose MR et al (2016) How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set”–a practical guideline. Trials 17:449

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD (2000) Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 53:459–468

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL et al (2010) The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol 10:22

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Nordin M, Carragee EJ, Hogg-Johnson S et al (2009) Assessment of neck pain and its associated disorders: results of the bone and joint decade 2000–2010 task force on neck pain and its associated disorders. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 32:S117–S140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Monticone M, Baiardi P, Vanti C et al (2012) Chronic neck pain and treatment of cognitive and behavioural factors: results of a randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur Spine J 21:1558–1566

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Kamper SJ, Ostelo RW, Knol DL et al (2010) Global Perceived Effect scales provided reliable assessments of health transition in people with musculoskeletal disorders, but ratings are strongly influenced by current status. J Clin Epidemiol 63(760–766):e1

    Google Scholar 

  18. Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J (2008) Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 61:102–109

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zweig MH, Campbell G (1993) Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem 39:561–577

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Atkinson G, Nevill A (1997) Comment on the use of concordance correlation to assess the agreement between two variables. JSTOR

  21. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 837–845

  22. DeVet HC, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL (2011) Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Lemeunier N, da Silva-Oolup S, Chow N, et al (2017) Reliability and validity of clinical tests to assess the anatomical integrity of the cervical spine in adults with neck pain and its associated disorders: Part 1—a systematic review from the cervical assessment and diagnosis research evaluation (CADRE) collaboration. Eur Spine J 1–17

  24. Groeneweg R, Haanstra T, Bolman CA et al (2017) Treatment success in neck pain: the added predictive value of psychosocial variables in addition to clinical variables. Scand J Pain 14:44–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the patients and the physiotherapists who took part in the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Monticone.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 989 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Monticone, M., Frigau, L., Vernon, H. et al. Responsiveness and minimal important change of the NeckPix© in subjects with chronic neck pain undergoing rehabilitation. Eur Spine J 27, 1324–1331 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5343-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5343-9

Keywords

Navigation