ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PURPOSE: Clinical outcome study comparing the Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale (CNFDS) and modified Japanese orthopedic association (mJOA) assessment scales in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Comparison of instruments that measure patient-reported outcomes is needed. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted. Ninety five patients with CSM were entered into the study and completed the CNFDS and the mJOA preoperatively and postoperatively. Correlation between the CNFDS and the mJOA was evaluated preoperatively and at the end of follow-up. Responsiveness to change of CNFDS and mJOA was also assessed. Clinical outcomes were also measured with the recovery rate of mJOA score at end of follow-up. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 58.2 (standard deviation, SD=8.7) years. Mean follow-up was 2.1 years (range, 1 to 4 years). The mJOA correlated strongly with the CNFDS score preoperatively and postoperatively (r=-0.81 and -0.82, respectively; p<0.001). The CNFDS and the mJOA were able to detect changes after the surgery (p<0.001). The mean mJOA recovery rate was 51.8% (SD=13.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery for the treatment of patients with CSM is an efficacious procedure. CNFDS and mJOA scores have a strong correlation in measuring disability among CSM patients.
Subject(s)
Humans , Asian People , Cross-Sectional Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Neck , Orthopedics , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Spinal Cord Diseases , Weights and MeasuresABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PURPOSE: Clinical outcome study comparing the Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale (CNFDS) and modified Japanese orthopedic association (mJOA) assessment scales in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Comparison of instruments that measure patient-reported outcomes is needed. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted. Ninety five patients with CSM were entered into the study and completed the CNFDS and the mJOA preoperatively and postoperatively. Correlation between the CNFDS and the mJOA was evaluated preoperatively and at the end of follow-up. Responsiveness to change of CNFDS and mJOA was also assessed. Clinical outcomes were also measured with the recovery rate of mJOA score at end of follow-up. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 58.2 (standard deviation, SD=8.7) years. Mean follow-up was 2.1 years (range, 1 to 4 years). The mJOA correlated strongly with the CNFDS score preoperatively and postoperatively (r=-0.81 and -0.82, respectively; p<0.001). The CNFDS and the mJOA were able to detect changes after the surgery (p<0.001). The mean mJOA recovery rate was 51.8% (SD=13.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery for the treatment of patients with CSM is an efficacious procedure. CNFDS and mJOA scores have a strong correlation in measuring disability among CSM patients.
Subject(s)
Humans , Asian People , Cross-Sectional Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Neck , Orthopedics , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Spinal Cord Diseases , Weights and MeasuresABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PURPOSE: This study aimed to cross-culturally translate and validate the low back outcome score (LBOS) in Iran. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Lumbar disc hernia (LDH) is the most common diagnoses of low back pain and imposes a heavy burden on both individual and society. Instruments measuring patient reported outcomes should satisfy cetain psychometric properties. METHODS: The translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the original questionnaire was performed using Beaton's guideline. A total of 163 patients with LDH were asked to respond to the questionnaire at three points in time: preoperative and twice within 1-week interval after surgery assessments. The Oswestry disabilty index (ODI) was also completed. The internal consistency, test-retest, convergent validity, and responsiveness to change were assessed. Responsiveness to change also was assessed comparing patients' pre- and postoperative scores. RESULTS: The mean age of the cohort was 49.8 years (standard deviation=10.1). The Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the LBOS at preoperative and postoperative assessments ranged from 0.77 to 0.79, indicating good internal consistency. Test-retest reliability as performed by intraclass correlation coefficient was found to be 0.82 (0.62–0.91). The instrument discriminated well between sub-groups of patients who differed in the Finneson-Cooper score. The ODI correlated strongly with the LBOS score, lending support to its good convergent validity (r=––0.83; p<0.001). Further analysis also indicated that the questionnaire was responsive to change (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Iranian version of LBOS performed well and the findings suggest that it is a valid measure of back pain treatment evaluation among LDH patients.