Submitted:
22 August 2023
Posted:
22 August 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Participants
2.2. NOOS translation
2.3. Psychometric Validation of the Polish Version of the NOOS
2.4. Questionnaires used in external validation
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive analysis
3.2. Psychometric Validation
3.2.1. External validity
3.2.2. Reliability Analysis
3.3.3. Intra - class correlations ICC
3.3.4. Floor and Ceiling Effects
3.3.5. Reliability of the Test-Retest
4. Discussion
4.1. Strengths of the study
4.2. Limitations
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Pulik, Ł. The update on scales and questionnaires used to assess cervical spine disorders. Phys. Ther. Rev. 2020, 26, 150–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoy, D.G.; Protani, M.; De, R.; Buchbinder, R. The epidemiology of neck pain. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Rheumatol. 2010, 24, 783–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Popescu, A.; Lee, H. Neck Pain and Lower Back Pain. Med. Clin. North Am. 2020, 104, 279–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kazeminasab, S. Neck pain: global epidemiology, trends and risk factors. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2022, 23, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whitebird, R.R. What Do Orthopaedists Believe is Needed for Incorporating Patient-reported Outcome Measures into Clinical Care? A Qualitative Study. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2022, 480, 680–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Churruca, K. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): A review of generic and condition-specific measures and a discussion of trends and issues. Heal. Expect. 2021, 24, 1015–1024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Van Der Waal, J.M. The course and prognosis of hip complaints in general practice. Ann. Behav. Med. 2006, 31, 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alqahtani, M. Cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Neck OutcOme Score (NOOS-Ar) among the Saudi Arabian populace. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2021, 34, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Candeniz, Ş.; Çitaker, S.; Bakirarar, B. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the turkish version of the neck outcome score. Turkish J. Med. Sci. 2019, 49, 1707–1714. [Google Scholar]
- Score, N.O. Neck Outcome Score (NOOS ) Et spørgeskema til personer med nakkesmerter. 1–4 (2015).
- D, B., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F. & Ferraz, M. Recommendations for the Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Health Status Measures. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. 1998, 1–27.
- Guzy, G.; Vernon, H.; Polczyk, R.; Szpitalak, M. Psychometric validation of the authorized Polish version of the Neck Disability Index. Disabil. Rehabil. 2013, 35, 2132–2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- skala_bolu_2016_150x50_screen.pdf.
- Score, N.O. Neck Outcome Score ( NOOS ) A questionnaire for individuals with neck pain. 1–4 (2015).
- Juul, T.; Søgaard, K.; Roos, E.M.; Davis, A.M. Development of a patient-reported outcome: The neck outcome score (noos) -content and construct validity. J. Rehabil. Med. 2015, 47, 844–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- LoMartire, R. et al. The value of interdisciplinary treatment for sickness absence in chronic pain: A nationwide register-based cohort study. Eur. J. Pain (United Kingdom) 2021, 25, 2190–2201.
- Konstantynowicz, J. Polish validation of the sarQol®, a quality of life questionnaire specific to sarcopenia. J. Clin. Med. 2018, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rowen, D.; Carlton, J.; Elliott, J. PROM Validation Using Paper-Based or Online Surveys: Data Collection Methods Affect the Sociodemographic and Health Profile of the Sample. Value Heal. 2019, 22, 845–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
| Individual Domains of NOOS | VAS (Spearman's rho) | |
| Mobility | 0.54*** | |
| Stiffness | 0.75*** | |
| Symptoms | 0.73*** | |
| Sleep disorders | 0.70*** | |
| Daily Activities and Pain | 0.74*** | |
| Participation in everyday life | 0.44*** | |
| Quality of life | 0.77*** | |
| Individual Domains of NOOS | NDI (Spearman's rho) |
| Mobility | 0,48*** |
| Stiffness | 0,73*** |
| Symptoms | 0,77*** |
| Sleep disorders | 0,75*** |
| Daily Activities and Pain | 0,81*** |
| Participation in everyday life | 0,55*** |
| Quality of life | 0,81*** |
| NOOS 1st | NOOS 2nd | VAS | NDI | |
| NOOS 1st | NA | 0,88*** | 0,79*** | 0,87*** |
| NOOS 2nd | 0,88*** | NA | 0,84*** | 0,86*** |
| VAS | 0,79*** | 0,84*** | NA | 0,78*** |
| NDI | 0,87*** | 0,86*** | 0,78*** | NA |
| Polish NOOS | Domain | Cronbah's alpha |
| Measurement 1st | Mobility | 0.53 |
| Stiffness | 0.86 | |
| Symptoms | 0.85 | |
| Sleep disorders | 0.92 | |
| Daily Activities and Pain | 0.95 | |
| Participation in everyday life | -0.09 | |
| Quality of life | 0.93 | |
| NOOS total score (1st ) | 0.95 | |
| Measurement 2nd | Mobility | -0.17 |
| Stiffness | 0.93 | |
| Symptoms | 0.88 | |
| Sleep disorders | 0.94 | |
| Daily Activities and Pain | 0.97 | |
| Participation in everyday life | -0.14 | |
| Quality of life | 0.94 | |
| NOOS total score (2nd) | 0.95 |
| Individual domains | ICC |
| Mobility | 0.43 |
| Stiffness | 0.93 |
| Symptoms | 0.93 |
| Sleep disorders | 0.96 |
| Daily Activities and Pain | 0.97 |
| Participation in everyday life | 0.33 |
| Quality of life | 0.96 |
| NOOS score | 0.97 |
| NOOS domains | 1st | 2nd | 95% CI | ||||||
| M | SD | M | SD | t | p | LL | UL | d Cohen | |
| Mobility | 2.93 | 0.41 | 3.33 | 0.34 | -8.56 | <0.001 | -0.49 | -0.31 | 0.91 |
| Stiffness | 1.85 | 0.83 | 1.74 | 0.82 | 2.13 | 0.018 | 0.01 | 0.22 | 0.23 |
| Symptoms | 2.33 | 0.86 | 2.15 | 0.84 | 3.76 | <0.001 | 0.08 | 0.27 | 0.40 |
| Sleep disorders | 1.83 | 0.86 | 1.73 | 0.87 | 1.94 | 0.027 | 0.00 | 0.20 | 0.21 |
| Daily Activities and Pain | 1.79 | 0.85 | 1.74 | 0.87 | 0.80 | 0.213 | -0.06 | 0.14 | 0.09 |
| Participation in everyday life | 2.50 | 0.34 | 2.50 | 0.33 | -0.06 | 0.477 | -0.07 | 0.06 | 0.01 |
| Quality of life | 1.49 | 0.75 | 1.48 | 0.80 | 0.13 | 0.447 | -0.08 | 0.09 | 0.01 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).