Description: The Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPDS or NPAD) is a questionnaire aiming to quantify neck pain and disability.1 It is a patient-reported outcome measure for patients with any type of neck pain, of any duration, with or without injury.1,2 It consists of 20 items: three related to pain intensity, four related to emotion and cognition, four related to mobility of the neck, eight related to activity limitations and participation restrictions and one on medication.1,3 Patients respond to each item on a 0 to 5 visual analogue scale of 10 cm. There is also a nine-item short version.4 Feasibility: The NPDS is published and available online (https://mountainphysiotherapy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Neck-Pain-and-Disability-Scale.pdf).1 The NPDS is an easy to use questionnaire that can be completed within 5 to 8 minutes.1,5 There is no training needed to administer the instrument but its validity is compromised if the questionnaire must be read to the patient.2 Higher scores indicate higher severity (0 for normal functioning to 5 for the worst possible situation ‘your’ pain problem has caused you).2 The total score is the sum of scores on the 20 items (0 to 100).1 The maximum acceptable number of missing answers is three (15%).4 Two studies found a minimum important change of 10 points (sensitivity 0.93; specificity 0.83) and 11.5 points (sensibility 0.74; specificity 0.70), respectively.6,7 The NPDS is available in English, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Hindi, Iranian, Korean, Turkish, Japanese and Thai. Reliability and validity: Two systematic reviews have evaluated the clinimetric properties of 11 of the translated versions.5,8 The Finnish, German and Italian translations were particularly recommended for use in clinical practice. Face validity was established and content validity was confirmed by an adequate reflection of all aspects of neck pain and disability.1,8 Regarding structural validity, the NPDS is a multidimensional scale, with moderate evidence that the NPDS has a three-factor structure (with explained variance ranging from 63 to 78%): neck dysfunction related to general activities; neck pain and neck-specific function; and cognitive-emotional-behavioural functioning. 4,5,9 A recent overview of four systematic reviews found moderate-quality evidence of high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 for the various factors).10 Excellent test-retest reliability was found (ICC of 0.97); however, the studies were considered to be of low quality.3,10 Construct validity (hypotheses-testing) seems adequate when the NPDS is compared with the Neck Disability Index and the Global Assessment of Change with moderate to strong correlations (r = 0.52 to 0.86), based on limited moderate-quality studies.3,11,12 One systematic review reported good responsiveness to change in patients (r = 0.59).12
BACKGROUND:The number of workers who have previously undergone a cancer treatment is increasing, and possible late treatment effects (fatigue, physical and cognitive complaints) may affect work ability.OBJECTIVE:The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of late treatment effects and of job resources (autonomy, supportive leadership style, and colleagues’ social support) on the future work ability of employees living 2–10 years beyond a breast cancer diagnosis.METHODS:Data at T1 (baseline questionnaire) and at T2 (9 months later) were collected in 2018 and 2019 (N = 287) among Dutch-speaking workers with a breast cancer diagnosis 2–10 years ago. Longitudinal regression analyses, controlling for years since diagnosis, living with cancer (recurrence or metastasis), other chronic or severe diseases, and work ability at baseline were executed.RESULTS:Higher levels of fatigue and cognitive complaints at baseline predicted lower future work ability. The three job resources did not predict higher future work ability, but did relate cross-sectionally with higher work ability at baseline. Autonomy negatively moderated the association between physical complaints and future work ability.CONCLUSIONS:Fatigue and cognitive complaints among employees 2–10 years past breast cancer diagnosis need awareness and interventions to prevent lower future work ability. Among participants with average or high levels of physical complaints, there was no difference in future work ability between medium and high autonomy. However, future work ability was remarkably lower when autonomy was low.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of possible late effects of cancer treatment (physical complaints, fatigue, and cognitive complaints) and of two job resources (autonomy and supportive leadership style) on future burnout complaints, among employees living 2–10 years beyond breast cancer diagnosis.Methods: Data at T1 (baseline questionnaire) and at T2 (9 months later) were collected in 2018 and 2019 (N = 287). These data were part of a longitudinal study among Dutch speaking workers with a cancer diagnosis 2–10 years ago. All complaints and job resources were self-reported. Longitudinal multivariate regression analyses were executed, controlling for years since diagnosis, living with cancer (recurrence or metastasis), and other chronic or severe diseases. Mediation by baseline burnout complaints was considered.Results: A higher level of fatigue and cognitive complaints at baseline (T1) resulted in higher future burnout complaints (at T2), with partial mediation by baseline burnout complaints. No effect of physical complaints at T1 was observed. Higher levels of autonomy or a supportive leadership style resulted in lower burnout complaints, with full mediation by baseline burnout complaints. Buffering was observed by autonomy in the relationship of cognitive complaints with future burnout complaints. No moderation was observed by supportive leadership.Conclusion: The level of burnout complaints among employees 2–10 years beyond breast cancer diagnosis may be an effect of fatigue or cognitive complaints, and awareness of this effect is necessary. Interventions to stimulate supportive leadership and autonomy are advisable, the latter especially in the case of cognitive complaints.
