Brazilian version of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire does not have a well-defined internal structure in patients with chronic neck pain

Objective: To investigate the structural validity of the Brazilian version of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire in patients with chronic neck pain. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Community participants collected via online platform. Subjects: Participants with neck pain (minimal pain intensity of 3 points at rest on 11-point Numerical Rating Scale), both genders and aged ⩾18 years old. Main measure: The Numerical Rating Scale, Neck Disability Index, Pain-Related Catastrophizing Thoughts Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire were completed. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to identify dimensionality and to compare different structures of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire. Results: We included 103 participants. The sample consisted mostly of adults (mean age = 33.64 years, standard deviation = 10.48 years), females (n = 82, 79.6%), lean, single and with higher education. The exploratory factor analysis with implementation of the parallel analysis identified the one-dimensional structure of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire, with a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value of 0.80 and Bartlett’s test significant ( P < 0.05). We observed that all structures tested in this study presented a high amount of residues in confirmatory factor analysis, which were identified by the value of root mean square error of approximation > 0.08 and chi-square/degree of freedom > 3.00. Conclusion: The internal structure of the Brazilian version of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire is not clear and well-defined. It was not possible to identify the construct measured by the instrument in individuals with chronic neck pain.

Patient reported outcomes in a large cohort of patients receiving osteopathic care in the United Kingdom

Objective The use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) to evaluate care is being advocated increasingly in clinical settings. Electronic data capture is both resource and environmentally friendly and convenient. This purpose of this study was to test and implement a nationwide system to collect routine PROM data from osteopathic patients using a web and mobile app. Methods A prospective study design was used to monitor outcomes of care for patients attending osteopathic clinics. Demographic and service data were collected, the primary outcomes were the Bournemouth Questionnaire and a Global Rating of Change score. Data concerning patients’ satisfaction and experience of care were collected also. Data were collected at baseline, one week, and six weeks post-treatment. Results A total of 1721 patients completed the PROM app questionnaire. The majority (65.8%) of patients who used the PROM app were between 40 and 69 years old with 11% being 70 years and over. At baseline 39.8% of patients reported they’d had their symptoms for 13 weeks or more. Low back pain was the most common symptom (55.8%). Patients reported high scores for both satisfaction and experience of osteopathic care: 88.1% were very satisfied at six weeks post-baseline and 93.5% reported very good experience at six weeks post-baseline. Data from the Global Rating of Change scale indicated that at one week post-baseline 89.1% of patients reported some measure of improvement, and at six weeks this figure rose to 92.8%. The mean sum score for the Bournemouth Questionnaire went from 30.8 at baseline to 13.3 at six weeks post-baseline. This represented a significant and clinically meaningful positive change score of 56.8%. Conclusion The app was well-completed and the data very encouraging. These data will help to form the basis for standards of care for patients attending osteopathic practices.

Translation, Cross-cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire: Persian Version

Introduction: The Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (NBQ) is being used widely in various countries. This study evaluated the validity and reliability of the Persian version of NBQ. Methods: This methodological study investigated 170 patients with chronic neck pain (NP). The psychometric properties of NBQ were evaluated in two stages. First, the standard scale was translated based on Guillemin’s guidelines for cross-cultural adaption and face validity tested in a pilot group (N=25). Second, it was conducted on a sample of 170 diverse chronic pain patients. Construct validity was determined with convergent validity by short-form McGill pain questionnaire. Then, the reliability was confirmed using Cronbach’s alpha and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: The instrument demonstrated a good face validity and the participants made minor changes. A slight change was applied on content validity. In construct validity, Pearson’s correlation coefficient was 0.85, which was statistically significant and showed strong correlation. A Cronbach’s alpha of 0.87 was obtained. This confirmed the remarkable internal consistency and stability (0.92). Conclusion: The Persian version of NBQ showed a good internal consistency and reliability and it could be considered as a valuable tool for assessing patients with cervical pain in Iranian population.