Submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Master’s Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa, 2016. / Background: Neck pain is a condition that is becoming more common throughout the world and most people can expect to experience some degree of neck pain sometime during their life. There is a need for early diagnosis and follow-up of neck pain to assess a patient’s level of self-rated disability due to the escalating disability burden and compensation costs associated with neck pain. For this reason, disability questionnaires are increasingly used for clinical assessment and as an outcome measurement for the treatment of neck pain. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of disability questionnaires have thus become increasingly necessary when dealing with different cultural groups. Methods: This is a quantitative validity and reliability assessment study comparing the English versions of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the Quadruple Visual Analogue Scale (QVAS) to their translated Afrikaans counterparts. The first step was to translate the questionnaires into Afrikaans. The translated questionnaires were then scrutinised and critiqued by an Expert group, who are fluent in both the Afrikaans and English languages, and back translated to English in order or establish their face validity. A small pilot study was conducted with the original and translated versions of the questionnaires to establish their content validity. The translated and original versions of the NDI and QVAS were given to a study group to complete with a suitable time delay between the completions of the questionnaires. The results from the study group were statistically analysed to establish concurrent validity and reliability. Results: There were 50 participants each completing one English NDI and QVAS and one Afrikaans NDI and QVAS. The results indicate high reliability for both the Afrikaans NDI (α = 0.900) and QVAS (α = 0.883). The Afrikaans NDI and QVAS are deemed reliable compared to their English counterparts. The results indicated a significant level of concurrent validity for both the NDI and the QVAS. Both the Afrikaans versions of the NDI and QVAS were deemed reliable and concurrent validity was established. The NDI and QVAS were successfully translated and the Afrikaans versions can now be used in the Afrikaans population as viable alternatives to the English NDI and QVAS. / M

A dissertation completed in partial compliance with the requirements for a Master's Degree in Technology Chiropractic, Durban Institute of Technology, 2006. / Neck pain is a common problem, globally, as well as in South Africa. Zulu is the first language of a very large proportion of the South African population, and as such, addressing the needs of this population group with respect to neck pain is a priority. Many reliable pain indexes exist in English to record the degree of disability with regards to neck pain. These are invaluable tools in aiding the health practitioner to assess the progress of treatment and the severity of the patient's disability. Two of the most credible and frequently used indexes are the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College Neck Disability Index (CMCC NDl) and the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SFMPQ). However, no such scale exists in Zulu. The purpose of this pilot investigation was, firstly, to analyze and critique the Zulu translations of the CMCC NDl and the SFMPQ in order to establish their face validity. Secondly, to establish their concurrent validity ensuring that the translated questionnaires are specific and sensitive enough to use as tools in data collection when compared to their English counterparts. Thirdly, to make recommendations for further improvement in terms of the Zulu questionnaires and lastly, to make recommendations for further studies for improvement in terms of the use of these questionnaires as research tools amongst the Zulu speaking population of South Africa. Firstly, the CMCC NDl and the SFMP questionnaires were translated into Zulu by means of a focus group. These versions were then assessed by means of a focus (or discussion) group, to assess their face validity. Changes were made to the original translations according to the recommendations of this group. These versions were then assessed with regards to their concurrent validity with the original English versions. Fifty volunteers, who were literate in both English and Zulu and who have suffered with neck pain, filled in both the Zulu and English versions of both questionnaires. / M

Submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Master’s Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa, 2016. / Background: Neck pain is a condition that is becoming more common throughout the world and most people can expect to experience some degree of neck pain sometime during their life. There is a need for early diagnosis and follow-up of neck pain to assess a patient’s level of self-rated disability due to the escalating disability burden and compensation costs associated with neck pain. For this reason, disability questionnaires are increasingly used for clinical assessment and as an outcome measurement for the treatment of neck pain. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of disability questionnaires have thus become increasingly necessary when dealing with different cultural groups. Methods: This is a quantitative validity and reliability assessment study comparing the English versions of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the Quadruple Visual Analogue Scale (QVAS) to their translated Afrikaans counterparts. The first step was to translate the questionnaires into Afrikaans. The translated questionnaires were then scrutinised and critiqued by an Expert group, who are fluent in both the Afrikaans and English languages, and back translated to English in order or establish their face validity. A small pilot study was conducted with the original and translated versions of the questionnaires to establish their content validity. The translated and original versions of the NDI and QVAS were given to a study group to complete with a suitable time delay between the completions of the questionnaires. The results from the study group were statistically analysed to establish concurrent validity and reliability. Results: There were 50 participants each completing one English NDI and QVAS and one Afrikaans NDI and QVAS. The results indicate high reliability for both the Afrikaans NDI (α = 0.900) and QVAS (α = 0.883). The Afrikaans NDI and QVAS are deemed reliable compared to their English counterparts. The results indicated a significant level of concurrent validity for both the NDI and the QVAS. Both the Afrikaans versions of the NDI and QVAS were deemed reliable and concurrent validity was established. The NDI and QVAS were successfully translated and the Afrikaans versions can now be used in the Afrikaans population as viable alternatives to the English NDI and QVAS. / M