Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Neck Disability Index

Kyung-Jin Song; Byung-Wan Choi; Sul-Jeon Kim; Sun-Jung Yoon

doi:10.4055/jkoa.2009.44.3.350

Journal List > J Korean Orthop Assoc > v.44(3) > 1012912

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Song, Choi, Kim, and Yoon: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Neck Disability Index

Original Article

Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association

Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association 2009; 44(3): 350-359.

Published online: 18 June 2009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4055/jkoa.2009.44.3.350

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Neck Disability Index

Kyung-Jin Song, M.D., Byung-Wan Choi, M.D.^*, Sul-Jeon Kim, M.D.^*, Sun-Jung Yoon, M.D.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Institute for Medical Sciences, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, Korea.

^*Gwangju Veterans Hospital, Gwangju, Korea.

Address reprint requests to Byung-Wan Choi, M.D. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gwangju Veterans Hospital, 887-1, Sanwol-dong, Gwangsan-gu, Gwangju 506-705, Korea. Tel: +82.62-602-6162, Fax: +82.62-602-6989, alla1013@naver.com

Abstract

Purpose

To translate and culturally adapt a Korean version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI), as well as to validate its use in Korean patient.

Materials and Methods

The NDI was linguistically translated into Korean and the prefinal version was assessed and modified by a pilot study. The Korean version was tested on 60 patients with degenerative cervical spine disease to verify the reliability and validity. The test-retest reliability, internal consistency, concurrent validity, and construct validity were examined by a comparison with the VAS and SF-36.

Results

The intraclass correlation coefficient of test-retest reliability was 0.927. The reliability estimated by the internal consistency reached a Cronbach's alpha of 0.82. The correlation of the NDI with VAS was r=0.489 (p=0.002) and correlation between NDI and SF-36 was r=-0.44 (p<0.01). The physical health component score of SF-36 showed a high correlation with the NDI as well as a high correlation between VAS and mental health component scores of SF-36.

Conclusion

The Korean version of the NDI is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring the disability in Korean patient with cervical problems and can be useful in future clinical studies in Korea.

Keywords: Neck Disability Index, Cross-cultural adaptation, Validity

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1

Comparison of the mean values of NDI, VAS, SF-36 according to the sexual difference.

Fig. 2

Comparison of the mean values of NDI, VAS, SF-36 according to the diagnosis.

Table 1

Baseline Participant Demographics

^*standard deviation.

Table 2

NDI Scores according to the Questionnaire

Table 3

Correlation between NDI, VAS and SF-36

^*physical health component score; ^†mental health component score.

Table 4

Correlation between NDI and SF-36 according to the Questionnaire of SF-36

PF, physical function; PR, physical role; BP, bodily pain; GH, general health; VT, vitality; SF, social functioning; RE, role emotion; MH, mental health.

References

1. Ackelman BH, Lindgren U. Validity and reliability of a modified version of the neck disability index. J Rehabil Med. 2002. 34:284–287.

2. Agarwal S, Allison GT, Agarwal A, Singer KP. Reliability and validity of the Hindi version of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale in cervical radiculopathy patients. Disabil Rehabil. 2006. 28:1405–1411.

3. Aslan E, Karaduman A, Yakut Y, Aras B, Simsek IE, Yaglý N. The cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of neck disability index in patients with neck pain: a Turkish version study. Spine. 2008. 33:E362–E365.

4. BenDebba M, Heller J, Ducker TB, Eisinger JM. Cervical spine outcomes questionnaire: its development and psychometric properties. Spine. 2002. 27:2116–2123.

5. Bourne RB, Maloney WJ, Wright JG. An AOA critical issue. The outcome of the outcomes movement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004. 86:633–640.

6. Bovim G, Schrader H, Sand T. Neck pain in the general population. Spine. 1994. 19:1307–1309.

7. Cleland JA, Fritz JM, Whitman JM, Palmer JA. The reliability and construct validity of the Neck Disability Index and patient specific functional scale in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Spine. 2006. 31:598–602.

8. Cook C, Richardson JK, Braga L, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Neck Disability Index and Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Spine. 2006. 31:1621–1627.

9. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996. 78:593–600.

10. Deyo RA, Andersson G, Bombardier C, et al. Outcome measures for studying patients with low back pain. . Spine. 1994. 19:Suppl. S2032–S2036.

11. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine. 2000. 25:2940–2952.

12. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993. 46:1417–1432.

13. Hains F, Waalen J, Mior S. Psychometric properties of the neck disability index. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998. 21:75–80.

14. Han CW, Lee EJ, Iwaya T, Kataoka H, Kohzuki M. Development of the Korean version of Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey: health related QOL of healthy elderly people and elderly patients in Korea. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2004. 203:189–194.

15. Jeon CH, Kim DJ, Kim SK, Kim DJ, Lee HM, Park HJ. Validation in the cross-cultural adaptation of the Korean version of the Oswestry Disability Index. J Korean Med Sci. 2006. 21:1092–1097.

16. Jordan A, Manniche C, Mosdal C, Hindsberger C. The Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998. 21:520–527.

17. Kim DY, Lee SH, Lee HY, et al. Validation of the Korean version of the oswestry disability index. Spine. 2005. 30:E123–E127.

18. Lagattuta F, Falco F. Braddom R, editor. Assessment and treatment of cervical spine disorders. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2000. Philadelphia: Saunders;762–791.

19. Miettinen T, Leino E, Airaksinen O, Lindgren KA. The possibility to use simple validated questionnaires to predict long-term health problems after whiplash injury. Spine. 2004. 29:E47–E51.

20. Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, Montazeri A, et al. Translation and validation study of the Iranian versions of the Neck Disability Index and the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Spine. 2007. 32:E825–E831.

21. Pietrobon R, Coeytaux RR, Carey TS, Richardson WJ, DeVellis RF. Standard scales for measurement of functional outcome for cervical pain or dysfunction. Spine. 2002. 27:515–522.

22. Trouli MN, Vernon HT, Kakavelakis KN, Antonopoulou MD, Paganas AN, Lionis CD. Translation of the Neck Disability Index and validation of the Greek version in a sample of neck pain patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008. 9:106.

23. Vernon H, Mior S. The neck disability index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1991. 14:409–415.

24. Vos CJ, Verhagen AP, Koes BW. Reliability and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the Neck Disability Index in patients with acute neck pain in general practice. Eur Spine J. 2006. 15:1729–1736.

25. Wheeler AH, Goolkasian P, Baird AC, Darden BV 2nd. Development of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Item analysis, face, and criterion-related validity. Spine. 1999. 24:1290–1294.

26. Wlodyka-Demaille S, Poiraudeau S, Catanzariti JF, Rannou F, Fermanian J, Revel M. French translation and validation of 3 functional disability scales for neck pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002. 83:376–382.

TOOLS

Similar articles