Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version

📜
Abstract

The assessment of pain and functional impairment is a cornerstone of effective clinical practice and rehabilitation psychology. The Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire (NPQ) is a widely utilized self-report instrument designed to evaluate how Neck pain interferes with daily activities. While originally developed in English, the global prevalence of Neck pain necessitates culturally and linguistically appropriate measurement tools for diverse populations. The Urdu adaptation of this instrument (NPQ-U) represents a critical step in expanding access to standardized psychometric evaluation for Urdu-speaking individuals.

By translating and validating the NPQ into Urdu, researchers have provided clinicians in South Asia with a robust tool to quantify Neck pain-related disability. The adaptation process adhered to rigorous cross-cultural methodologies, ensuring that the translated items retained their original clinical meaning while resonating with the cultural context of the target demographic. This enables healthcare providers to track patient progress, evaluate intervention efficacy, and conduct epidemiological research with greater precision.

🏷
Keywords
Neck pain
psychometrics
Cross-cultural adaptation
Urdu
Disability assessment
patient-reported outcome measures

📊 Psychometric Scorecard

Items Count
9
Structure
Unidimensional
Cronbach's α
0.89
Validation Country
📍 Pakistan

Translation Method: Forward and backward translation following COSMIN guidelines

Authors

👤 Muhammad Nazim Farooq
✉ [email protected]

👤 Somiya Naz
✉ [email protected]

👤 Ambrin Kousar
✉ [email protected]

👤 Komal Shahzad
✉ [email protected]

Purpose

Although other instruments like the Neck Disability Index (NDI) are frequently used to measure similar constructs, the NPQ offers distinct psychometric advantages. Specifically, the NPQ is tailored to capture functional limitations that are directly and exclusively linked to Neck pain, whereas alternative scales often include broader, more generalized questions regarding physical exertion or cognitive concentration.

The development of the NPQ-U addresses a significant gap in the psychometric toolkit available to practitioners working with Urdu-speaking populations. In regions like Pakistan, where occupational hazards contribute to high rates of musculoskeletal issues, having a localized, easy-to-administer questionnaire allows for more accurate patient-reported outcomes. This facilitates evidence-based practice, enhances the therapeutic alliance by centering the patient's subjective experience, and standardizes data collection for cross-cultural clinical trials.

Construct

The NPQ-U measures the unidimensional construct of Neck pain-related functional disability. This construct encompasses the subjective experience of pain and its direct mechanical interference with routine daily activities, such as sleeping, personal care, and driving. Rather than treating pain merely as a sensory experience, the scale operationalizes it through the lens of behavioral impairment and quality of life reduction.

Theoretically, this aligns with the biopsychosocial model of pain, which posits that physical pathology cannot be fully understood without assessing its impact on the individual's functional capacity. By evaluating specific functional domains, the instrument captures the severity of the patient's condition in a way that is highly relevant to rehabilitation goals. The unidimensional nature of the scale suggests that these various functional impairments all load onto a single underlying continuum of neck-specific disability.

Validity

The validation of the NPQ-U involved a comprehensive evaluation of its relationships with established clinical measures, demonstrating robust convergent validity. The instrument exhibited a very strong positive correlation with the Urdu version of the Neck Disability Index (r = 0.89), alongside strong associations with the Neck pain and Disability Scale (r = 0.71) and the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (r = 0.73). These metrics confirm that the NPQ-U successfully captures the intended clinical phenomena of pain and disability.

Furthermore, the scale demonstrated excellent discriminative validity by effectively differentiating between individuals with non-specific Neck pain and healthy controls, with statistically significant variance in total scores. The researchers also established the instrument's responsiveness—its ability to detect meaningful clinical changes over time. Following a three-week physical therapy intervention, the change scores on the NPQ-U aligned closely with improvements noted on other standardized scales, proving its utility as a sensitive outcome measure for longitudinal clinical monitoring.

Convergent & Discriminant Validation Correlations

Reference Instrument Correlation Coefficient (r)
Urdu version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI-U) r=0.89
Neck pain and Disability Scale (NPDS) r=0.71
Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) r=0.73

Reliability

Psychometric reliability for the NPQ-U was established through both internal consistency and temporal stability metrics. The scale yielded a high Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.89, indicating that the items share a strong degree of covariance and reliably measure the same underlying construct of neck disability. This value falls well within the optimal range for clinical instruments, suggesting excellent internal cohesion without excessive item redundancy.

To assess temporal stability, researchers conducted a test-retest analysis over a 48-hour interval, a timeframe chosen to minimize the likelihood of true clinical change while preventing recall bias. The resulting intra-class correlation coefficient was exceptionally high at 0.96. This demonstrates that the NPQ-U produces highly consistent scores across repeated administrations, ensuring that any fluctuations observed during treatment can be confidently attributed to actual changes in the patient's condition rather than measurement error.

Factor Analysis

To understand the underlying latent structure of the NPQ-U, researchers employed exploratory factor analysis. The analytical extraction revealed a unidimensional architecture, with a single dominant factor emerging from the data. This primary factor accounted for a substantial 54.56% of the total variance in the item responses, providing strong empirical support for the scale's structural integrity.

The emergence of a single factor confirms that the various items—despite covering different daily activities like sleeping, reading, or driving—are all fundamentally tapping into the same core construct of Neck pain-related disability. For clinicians and researchers, this unidimensionality justifies the aggregation of individual item responses into a single, composite total score, simplifying both the scoring process and the clinical interpretation of the results.

Instrument

Test Type Self-report questionnaire
Format 9 items, multiple-choice response format
Scoring Total score calculated as a percentage. If all items are answered, sum is divided by 36 and multiplied by 100. If item 9 is omitted, sum of 8 items is divided by 32 and multiplied by 100.
Language Urdu
Population Clinical patients, Adults
Age Group 18-65 years
Administration Self-administered

Scoring & Interpretation Guidelines

Scoring Instructions If item 9 (driving) is missing, calculate total score using the formula: (Total scores of 8 items / 32) * 100%
Normative Reference Values Patients: Mean = 29.81 (SD = 23.07); Healthy Controls: Mean = 0

Sample

150 patients with non-specific Neck pain (NSNP) and 50 healthy controls, aged 18-65 years, recruited via convenience sampling from hospitals and a rehabilitation center in Islamabad and Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

Permissions & Test Year

Consent was obtained from the developer of the original NPQ for translation and cultural adaptation.

Test Year: 2023

📄
Cite This Paper

Muhammad Nazim Farooq, Somiya Naz, Ambrin Kousar, Komal Shahzad (2023). Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version. BMC musculoskeletal disorders. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06586-5

📄 Download Full-Text PDF

📚
References
46 references
  1. Kazeminasab S, Nejadghaderi SA, Amiri P, Pourfathi H, Araj-Khodaei M, Sullman MJM, Kolahi AA, Safiri S. Neck pain: global epidemiology, trends and risk factors. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(1):26. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04957-4
  2. Safiri S, Kolahi AA, Hoy D, Buchbinder R, Mansournia MA, Bettampadi D, Ashrafi-Asgarabad A, Almasi-Hashiani A, Smith E, Sepidarkish M, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of Neck pain in the general population, 1990–2017: systematic analysis of the global burden of Disease Study 2017. BMJ. 2020;368:m791. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m791
  3. Rasim Ul Hasanat M, Ali SS, Rasheed A, Khan M. Frequency and associated risk factors for Neck pain among software engineers in Karachi, Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc. 2017;67(7):1009–12.
  4. Tariq F, Kashif M, Mehmood A, Quraishi A. Prevalence of Neck pain and its effects on activities of Daily Living among dentists working in Faisalabad. Rehman J Health Sci. 2020;2(1):10–3. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.52442/rjhs.v2i1.28
  5. Sabeen F, Bashir MS, Hussain SI, Ehsan S. Prevalance of Neck pain in computer users. Annals of King Edward Medical University. 2013;19(2):137–43.
  6. ul Abideen MZ, Afzal W, Tanveer F, Rafique O, Ahmad A, Malik A. Prevalence of Neck pain in goldsmiths. Rawal Med J. 2018;43(4):691–3.
  7. Dieleman JL, Cao J, Chapin A, Chen C, Li Z, Liu A, Horst C, Kaldjian A, Matyasz T, Scott KW, et al. US Health Care spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996–2016. JAMA. 2020;323(9):863–84. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.0734
  8. Campbell R, Ju A, King MT, Rutherford C. Perceived benefits and limitations of using patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice with individual patients: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Qual Life Res. 2022;31(6):1597–620. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03003-z
  9. 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(12):1417–32. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N
  10. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of Cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186–91. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
  11. Tsang S, Royse CF, Terkawi AS. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi J Anaesth. 2017;11(Suppl 1):80–S89. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17
  12. Vernon H, Mior S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1991;14(7):409–15.
  13. Leak AM, Cooper J, Dyer S, Williams KA, Turner-Stokes L, Frank AO. The Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire, devised to measure Neck pain and disability. Br J Rheumatol. 1994;33(5):469–74. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/33.5.469
  14. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy. 1980;66(8):271–3.
  15. Kose G, Hepguler S, Atamaz F, Oder G. A comparison of four disability scales for turkish patients with Neck pain. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39(5):358–62. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0060
  16. Gonzalez T, Balsa A, Sainz de Murieta J, Zamorano E, Gonzalez I, Martin-Mola E. Spanish version of the Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire: reliability and validity. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2001;19(1):41–6.
  17. Chiu TT, Lam TH, Hedley AJ. Subjective health measure used on chinese patients with Neck pain in Hong Kong. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26(17):1884–9. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200109010-00013
  18. 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(3):376–82. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.30623
  19. Rentzias P, Stasinopoulos D. The reliability and validity of the Greek Version of the Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire: a study in patients with Upper Trapezius myofascial trigger points. Nosileftiki. 2021;60(2):226–37.
  20. Almeida MQG, Dibai-Filho AV, Guirro RRJ, Guirro ECO, Fonseca MCR, Avila MA. Psychometric properties of the brazilian short-version of the Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire. Clin Rehabil. 2022;36(7):980–92. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155221086198
  21. Lee K-W, Seo H-D, Jung K-S, Kim S-H, Chung Y-J. Reliability and validity of korean version Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire in Neck pain patients. Phys Therapy Korea. 2010;17(3):68–76.
  22. Ahmad AA, Akindele MO, Umar AM, Lawal IU, Mohammed J, Ibrahim AA. The Hausa Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire: translation, Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric assessment in patients with non-specific Neck pain. Disabil Rehabil 2023:1–10. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2023.2175918
  23. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(4):539–49. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8
  24. Bobos P, MacDermid JC, Walton DM, Gross A, Santaguida PL. patient-reported outcome measures used for Neck Disorders: an overview of systematic reviews. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018;48(10):775–88. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2018.8131
  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 (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(13):1290–4. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199907010-00004
  26. Farooq MN, Mohseni-Bandpei MA, Gilani SA, Hafeez A. Urdu version of the neck disability index: a reliability and validity study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18(1):1–11. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1469-5
  27. Young Ia Pt D, Dunning J, Pt DPT, Butts R, Pt P, Mourad F, Pt DPT, Cleland Ja Pt P. Reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the neck disability index and numeric pain rating scale in patients with mechanical Neck pain without upper extremity symptoms. Physiother Theory Pract. 2019;35(12):1328–35. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2018.1471763
  28. Bobos P, Ziebart C, Furtado R, Lu Z, MacDermid JC. Psychometric properties of the global rating of change scales in patients with low back pain, upper and lower extremity disorders. A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Orthop. 2020;21:40–8. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jor.2020.01.047
  29. Kyriazos TA. Applied psychometrics: sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology. 2018;9(08):2207. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.98126
  30. Kennedy I. Sample size determination in test-retest and Cronbach alpha reliability estimates. Br J Contemp Educ. 2022;2(1):17–29. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.52589/BJCE-FY266HK9
  31. Walter S, Eliasziw M, Donner A. Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1998;17(1):101–10. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980115)17:1<101::AID-SIM727>3.0.CO;2-E
  32. Mokkink LB, Boers M, van der Vleuten CPM, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL, de Vet HCW, Terwee CB. COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):293. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01179-5
  33. DeVon HA, Block ME, Moyle-Wright P, Ernst DM, Hayden SJ, Lazzara DJ, Savoy SM, Kostas-Polston E. A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2007;39(2):155–64. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00161.x
  34. Schellingerhout JM, Heymans MW, Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, Koes BW, Terwee CB. Measurement properties of translated versions of neck-specific questionnaires: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:87. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-87
  35. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
  36. de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Bouter LM. When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(10):1033–9. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.015
  37. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-22
  38. Hu Lt, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Modeling: Multidisciplinary J. 1999;6(1):1–55. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  39. Jackson DL, Gillaspy JA, Purc-Stephenson R. Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. Psychol Methods. 2009;14(1):6–23. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014694
  40. Goni MD, Naing NN, Hasan H, Wan-Arfah N, Deris ZZ, Arifin WN, Baaba AA, Njaka S. A confirmatory factor analysis of the knowledge, attitude and practice questionnaire towards prevention of respiratory tract infections during Hajj and Umrah. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):1684. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09756-5
  41. Hair JF Jr, Anderson RE, Babin BJ, Black WC. Multivariate data analysis: a global perspective. 7th ed. edn: Upper Saddle River (N.J.; Pearson education; 2010.
  42. Schober P, Boer C, Schwarte LA. Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation. Anesth Analgesia. 2018;126(5):1763–8. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864
  43. Aguirre MV, Rodríguez MG, Clarett M, Iribarne JI, Martínez M, Battistotti R, López de Arcaute AS, Adarves R, Orsini E. Cultural adaptation and Argentine validation of the Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire in the hospitals of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. Rev Fac Cien Med Univ Nac Cordoba. 2013;70(2):76–82. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.31053/1853.0605.v70.n2.20236
  44. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78(4):593–600. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.78B4.0780593
  45. Pickering PM, Osmotherly PG, Attia JR, McElduff P. An examination of outcome measures for pain and dysfunction in the cervical spine: a factor analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(7):581–8. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d762da
  46. Wlodyka-Demaille S, Poiraudeau S, Catanzariti JF, Rannou F, Fermanian J, Revel M. The ability to change of three questionnaires for Neck pain. Joint Bone Spine. 2004;71(4):317–26. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2003.04.004

Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version Items

✉ Items are not yet available

The scale author has been contacted to obtain permission to share the items. This section will be updated once the items are provided.

Cite this article

Mohammed looti (2026). Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Retrieved from https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/northwick-park-neck-pain-questionnaire-urdu-version/

Mohammed looti. "Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 12 Aug. 2026, https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/northwick-park-neck-pain-questionnaire-urdu-version/.

Mohammed looti. "Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 2026. https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/northwick-park-neck-pain-questionnaire-urdu-version/.

Mohammed looti (2026) 'Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version', PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Available at: https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/northwick-park-neck-pain-questionnaire-urdu-version/.

[1] Mohammed looti, "Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version," PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, vol. X, no. Y, ص Z-Z, August, 2026.

Mohammed looti. Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire – Urdu Version. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. 2026;vol(issue):pages.

Related terms:

  1. Neck Pain and Disability Scale
  2. Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire
  3. Park`s Heterosexism Scale
  4. Neck Disability Index
  5. Multidimensional Pain Inventory – Dutch Language Version / West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory
  6. Anterior Knee Pain Scale / Kujala Patellofemoral Score Questionnaire
  7. Family Pain Questionnaire (FPQ)
  8. Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
  9. Acute Low Back Pain Screening Questionnaire
  10. McGill Pain Questionnaire
× Figure
PDF
Scroll to Top