RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Nepalese version of Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaire for Assessment of Neuropathic pain: A Validation Study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.09.17.21263734
DO 10.1101/2021.09.17.21263734
A1 Shakya, Bigen M
A1 Shrestha, Anil
A1 Poudyal, Amod K
A1 Shrestha, Ninadini
A1 Acharya, Binita
A1 Gurung, Renu
A1 Shakya, Sujata
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/21/2021.09.17.21263734.abstract
AB Objective This study aimed to translate and validate DN4 questionnaire into Nepalese version.Design An observational study design was adopted.Setting A tertiary level teaching hospital of Kathmandu, NepalParticipants We included 166 purposively selected patients visiting pain clinics of the hospital over one year timeMethods The Nepalese version of the DN4 questionnaire was used to detect neuropathic pain among the chronic pain patients of the hospital. The English version of the questionnaire was translated into Nepali based on the standard guideline with the help of linguistic experts. The patients diagnosed with nociceptive or neuropathic pain were interviewed twice in two weeks interval. We analyzed test-retest reliability and strength of the test by using Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) Curve, respectively. Internal Consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha (∞). Diagnostic accuracy was assessed through measures like sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratio.Results The study showed a good test-retest reliability (ICC=0.877) and internal consistency reliability (∞=0.710). The AUC were 0.932 (0.894-0.971) for the first test, and 0.955 (0.921-0.990) for the second test. The sensitivity and specificity values were found highest at the 4 cut-off point (4 score out of 10), that are 75% and 95.3% for test 1, and 76.2% and 98.8% for test 2. Similarly positive and negative predictive values are 93.8% and 80.4% respectively for the first test and 98.4% and 81.7% respectively for the second test.Conclusions The Nepalese version of DN4 questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for the diagnosis of neuropathic pain. This can be used for screening neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain in clinical as well as epidemiological settings.Strengths and Limitations of this StudyThis study validated Nepalese version of DN4 questionnaire, so, it can be used as a standard tool to assess neuropathic pain among the Nepalese population.As interview was conducted with the patients, this might minimize the reliability and validity issue.This questionnaire is only applicable to those who can communicate properly in Nepalese language.There can be problem of understanding among the participants as few words do not have exact Nepali words with the same meaning.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or non-profit sectors.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Institutional Review Committee of, Tribhuvan University, Institute of Medicine, Nepal (338(6-11)E2/075/76).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe raw data can be made available upon genuine request.