Filipa Martins1,2, André Bento1,2, Anabela G Silva1,2. 1. School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, Aveiro, Portugal. 2. School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal; CINTESIS.UA, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, Aveiro, Portugal.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A variety of tests have been proposed to measure the performance of neck flexor muscles, but head-to-head comparisons hardly have been documented. OBJECTIVE: To compare reliability indexes, construct validity, and ability to discriminate between individuals with and without neck pain of 4 muscle tests (deep neck flexors endurance test [DNFET]; 2 variations of the craniocervical flexion test [CCFT1 and CCFT2]; and dynamometry). DESIGN: Reliability and validity study. SETTING: General community. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 66 participants, 33 with chronic idiopathic neck pain (mean ± standard deviation pain intensity: 3.2 ± 1.9) and 33 without neck pain, from the general population. METHODS/MAIN OUTCOME: Neck muscle functioning was assessed with the CCFT1, the CCFT2, the DNFET, and dynamometry on 2 separate sessions. Participants with neck pain also were assessed for pain intensity, disability, pain catastrophizing, and fear of movement. RESULTS: Relative reliability of all tests was at least moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.62), whereas measurement error was high, particularly for the DNFET (95% minimum detectable change ≥ 23.00 seconds). All tests showed moderate correlation (r ≥ 0.3) with at least 2 pain-related measures and moderate-to-strong correlations with each other. Principal component analysis retained 2 factors explaining 68%-73% of the variance of the 4 muscle tests. Significant differences between groups were found for the DNFET and dynamometry (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The reliability indexes suggest that the DNFET and the CCFT may be more appropriate for group comparisons than for individual comparisons. The 4 tests seem to have construct validity, but they also seem to measure slightly different constructs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
BACKGROUND: A variety of tests have been proposed to measure the performance of neck flexor muscles, but head-to-head comparisons hardly have been documented. OBJECTIVE: To compare reliability indexes, construct validity, and ability to discriminate between individuals with and without neck pain of 4 muscle tests (deep neck flexors endurance test [DNFET]; 2 variations of the craniocervical flexion test [CCFT1 and CCFT2]; and dynamometry). DESIGN: Reliability and validity study. SETTING: General community. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 66 participants, 33 with chronic idiopathic neck pain (mean ± standard deviation pain intensity: 3.2 ± 1.9) and 33 without neck pain, from the general population. METHODS/MAIN OUTCOME: Neck muscle functioning was assessed with the CCFT1, the CCFT2, the DNFET, and dynamometry on 2 separate sessions. Participants with neck pain also were assessed for pain intensity, disability, pain catastrophizing, and fear of movement. RESULTS: Relative reliability of all tests was at least moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.62), whereas measurement error was high, particularly for the DNFET (95% minimum detectable change ≥ 23.00 seconds). All tests showed moderate correlation (r ≥ 0.3) with at least 2 pain-related measures and moderate-to-strong correlations with each other. Principal component analysis retained 2 factors explaining 68%-73% of the variance of the 4 muscle tests. Significant differences between groups were found for the DNFET and dynamometry (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The reliability indexes suggest that the DNFET and the CCFT may be more appropriate for group comparisons than for individual comparisons. The 4 tests seem to have construct validity, but they also seem to measure slightly different constructs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.