Systematic review of the measurement properties of performance-based functional tests in patients with neck disorders

Abstract

ObjectivesThe purpose of this systematic review is to identify and synthesise studies evaluating performance-based functional outcome measures designed to evaluate the functional abilities of patients with neck pain.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesA literature search using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, EMBASE, COCHRANE, Google Scholar and a citation mapping strategy was conducted until July 2019.Eligibility criteriaMore than half of the study’s patient population had neck pain or a musculoskeletal neck disorder and completed a functional-based test. Clinimetric properties of at least one performance-based functional tests were reported. Both traumatic and non-traumatic origins of neck pain were considered.Data extraction and synthesisRelevant data were then extracted from selected articles using an extraction guide. Selected articles were appraised using the Quality Appraisal for Clinical Measurement Research Reports Evaluation Form (QACMRR).ResultsThe search obtained 12 articles which reported on four outcome measures (functional capacity evaluations (FCE), Baltimore Therapeutic Equipment Work Simulator II (BTEWS II), Functional Impairment Test-Hand and Neck/Shoulder/Arm (FIT-HaNSA)) and a physiotherapy test package, to assess the functional abilities in patients with mechanical neck pain. Of the selected papers: one reports content validity, five construct validity, four reliability, one sensitivity to change and one both reliability and construct validity. QACMRR scores ranged from 68% to 95%.ConclusionsThis review found very good quality evidence that the FIT-HaNSA has excellent inter and intra-rater reliability and very weak to weak convergent validity. Excellent quality evidence of fair test-retest reliability, weak convergent validity and very weak known groups validity for the BTEWS II test was found. Good to excellent quality evidence exists that an FCE battery has poor to excellent reliability and very weak to strong validity. Good to excellent quality of weak to strong validity and trivial to strong effect sizes were found for a physiotherapy test package.Prospero registration numberCRD42018112358

A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Psychometric Properties of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and the Visual Analog Scale for Use in People With Neck Pain

“…Instead, we have relied on more qualitative syntheses of previously reported data to identify consistencies and differences in findings. We also acknowledge that the quality appraisal tool (QACMMRE), while it has been used in several prior systematic reviews, [94][95][96] is less commonly used than COSMIN tools. This was an intentional decision, as our initial attempts at applying the COSMIN checklist to studies evaluating the single-item NPRS resulted in the majority of sections being deemed not applicable and precluded our ability to discriminate between levels of study quality.…”

Development and validation of the ND10 to measure neck-related functional disability

“…These can lead to functional disability [ 2 , 25 , 26 ], participation restrictions [ 27 ], reduced work capacity [ 28 – 30 ], and lower quality of life [ 31 , 32 ]. There are a variety of impairment and disability measures that have been designed to assess these different constructs [ 23 , 33 – 38 ]. A survey of international practice patterns of clinicians with respect to assessing the outcomes for patients with neck pain indicated that the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPR) (a single item on pain [ 37 ]), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) (developed for upper extremity [ 39 ]) are the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) most commonly used by clinicians [ 40 ].…”

Evaluation of the content validity index of the Australian/Canadian osteoarthritis hand index, the patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation and the thumb disability exam in people with hand arthritis

“…Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often administered to assess any health-related changes that may have occurred as a consequence of health-management interventions [ 7 , 8 ]. Many properties are important [ 9 – 13 ] during an instrument development such as reliability and validity but a key property is considered to be content validity [ 14 ]. Content validity can be defined as the degree of which the instrument or the questionnaire is an adequate reflection of the construct being measured [ 15 ].…”