{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029710144927536233, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002898550724637681, 'mean_word_length': 5.483568075117371, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The update on scales and questionnaires used to assess cervical spine disorders

Abstract Musculoskeletal disorders affect 20%–33% of all the global population, and its prevalence is continually increasing. According to the World Health Organisation, persistent neck pain (NP) is currently one of the leading causes of disability. Therefore, the assessment of the effectiveness of treatment methods and severity of the disease is a necessity. However, due to the multiplicity of the clinical assessment tools used and different inconsistent scoring methods between researchers, some inaccuracies may arise. This review article is an up-to-date overview that provides an insight into the scales and questionnaires used to assess cervical spine disorders. We discuss generic outcome measures, i.e. NMQ (Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire) and VAS (Visual Analog Scale) and the tools specific for cervical pains: NDI (Neck Disability Index), NOOS (Neck Outcome Score), NPAD (Neck Pain and Disability Scale), and NPQ (Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire). Each of these measures is presented together with the information about its origin, scoring method, and interpretation. This descriptive review is designed as an introduction to the questionnaires and scales used in the assessment of neck ailments and can serve as a practical guide for beginner clinicians and researchers.