Improving Assessment of Disease Severity and Strategies for Monitoring Progression in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy [AO Spine RECODE DCM Research Priority Number 4]

1. Tetreault, L, Goldstein, CL, Arnold, P, et al. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: A spectrum of related disorders affecting the aging spine. Neurosurgery. 2015;77(suppl 4):S51-S67.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI2. Davies, BM, Mowforth, OD, Smith, EK, Kotter, MR. Degenerative cervical myelopathy. BMJ. 2018;360:k186.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline3. Nouri, A, Tetreault, L, Zamorano, JJ, Mohanty, CB, Fehlings, MG. Prevalence of Klippel-Feil Syndrome in a Surgical Series of Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Analysis of the Prospective, Multicenter AOSpine North America Study. Global Spine J. 2015;5(4):294-299.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI4. Smith, SS, Stewart, ME, Davies, BM, Kotter, MRN. The Prevalence of Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Spinal Cord Compression on Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Global Spine J. 2020:2192568220934496.
Google Scholar5. Oh, T, Lafage, R, Lafage, V, et al. Comparing quality of life in cervical spondylotic myelopathy with other chronic debilitating diseases using the short form survey 36-health survey. World Neurosurg. 2017;106:699-706.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline6. Davies, BM, Khan, DZ, Mowforth, OD, et al. RE-CODE DCM (research objectives and common data elements for degenerative cervical myelopathy): A consensus process to improve research efficiency in DCM, through establishment of a standardized dataset for clinical research and the definition of the research priorities. Global Spine J. 2019;9(suppl l):65S-76S.
Google Scholar | Medline7. Walton, MK, Powers, JH, Hobart, J, et al. Clinical outcome assessments: Conceptual foundation-report of the ISPOR clinical outcomes assessment - emerging good practices for outcomes research task force. Value Health. 2015;18(6):741-752.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline8. Boers, M, Beaton, DE, Shea, BJ, et al. OMERACT Filter 2.1: Elaboration of the conceptual framework for outcome measurement in health intervention studies. J Rheumatol. 2019;46(8):1021-1027.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline9. Singh, A, Tetreault, L, Casey, A, Laing, R, Statham, P, Fehlings, MG. A summary of assessment tools for patients suffering from cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systematic review on validity, reliability and responsiveness. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(suppl 2):209-228.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI10. Davies, BM, McHugh, M, Elgheriani, A, et al. Reported outcome measures in degenerative cervical myelopathy: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0157263.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline11. Fehlings, MG, Tetreault, LA, Riew, KD, et al. A clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: Recommendations for patients with mild, moderate, and severe disease and nonmyelopathic patients with evidence of cord compression. Global Spine J. 2017;7(suppl l-3):70S-83S.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals12. Matz, PG, Anderson, PA, Holly, LT, et al. The natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11(2):104-111.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline13. Tetreault, L, Kopjar, B, Côté, P, Arnold, P, Fehlings, MG. A clinical prediction rule for functional outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy: analysis of an international prospective multicenter data set of 757 subjects. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(24):2038-2046.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline14. Tetreault, L, Palubiski, LM, Kryshtalskyj, M, et al. Significant predictors of outcome following surgery for the treatment of degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review of the literature. Neurosurg Clin. 2018;29(1):115-e35.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline15. Tetreault, LA, Karpova, A, Fehlings, MG. Predictors of outcome in patients with degenerative cervical spondylotic myelopathy undergoing surgical treatment: results of a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(suppl 2):236-251.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI16. Pope, DH, Mowforth, OD, Davies, BM, Kotter, MRN. Diagnostic delays lead to greater disability in degenerative cervical myelopathy and represent a health inequality. Spine. 2020;45(6):368-377.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline17. Evans, S, McRae-McKee, K, Wong, MM, Hadjichrysanthou, C, De Wolf, F, Anderson, R. The importance of endpoint selection: How effective does a drug need to be for success in a clinical trial of a possible Alzheimer's disease treatment? Eur J Epidemiol. 2018;33(7):635-644.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline18. Bond, LM, McKerracher, L. Cervical spinal cord injury: tailoring clinical trial endpoints to reflect meaningful functional improvements. Neural Regen Res. 2014;9(16):1493-1497.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline19. Fehlings, MG, Badhiwala, JH, Ahn, H, et al. Safety and efficacy of riluzole in patients undergoing decompressive surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy (CSM-Protect): a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol. 2021;20(2):98-106.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline20. De Vet, H, Terwee, C, Mikkink, L, Knol, D. Measurement in Medicine: A Practical Guide. United States of Amercica. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Unviersity Press; 2011.
Google Scholar | Crossref21. Prinsen, CA, Vohra, S, Rose, MR, et al. How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a "Core Outcome Set" - a practical guideline. Trials. 2016;17(1):449.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline22. Mokkink, LB, Prinsen, CA, Bouter, LM, Vet, HC, Terwee, CB. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument. Braz J Phys Ther. 2016;20(2):105-113.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI23. Prinsen, CAC, Mokkink, LB, Bouter, LM, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1147-1157.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline24. Beaton, DE, Maxwell, LJ, Shea, BJ, et al. Instrument Selection Using the OMERACT Filter 2.1: The OMERACT Methodology. J Rheumatol. 2019;46(8):1028-1035.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline25. Boogaarts, HD, Bartels, RH. Prevalence of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(suppl 2):139-141.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI26. Ahmed, S, Berzon, RA, Revicki, DA, et al. The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: implications for clinical practice and health care policy. Med Care. 2012;50(12):1060-1070.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI27. Weldring, T, Smith, SM. Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Health Serv Insights. 2013;6:61-68.
Google Scholar | Medline28. Warsame, R, D'Souza, A. Patient Reported Outcomes Have Arrived: A Practical Overview for Clinicians in Using Patient Reported Outcomes in Oncology. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94(11):2291-2301.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline29. Vodicka, E, Kim, K, Devine, EB, Gnanasakthy, A, Scoggins, JF, Patrick, DL. Inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures in registered clinical trials: Evidence from ClinicalTrials.gov (2007-2013). Contemp Clin Trials. 2007;43:1-9.)
Google Scholar | Crossref30. Cella, D, Hahn, EA, Jensen, SE, Butt, Z, Nowinski, CJ, Rothrock, N, et al.. Patient-Reported Outcomes in Performance Measurement. New York, NY: Research Triangle Park; 2015.
Google Scholar | Crossref31. Bevans, M, Ross, A, Cella, D. Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): efficient, standardized tools to measure self-reported health and quality of life. Nurs Outlook. 2014;62(5):339-345.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline32. Kingsley, C, Patel, S. Patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures. BJA Education. 2017;17(4):137-144.
Google Scholar | Crossref33. Gnanasakthy, A, DeMuro, C, Boulton, C. Integration of patient-reported outcomes in multiregional confirmatory clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013;35(1):62-69.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline34. Powers, JH, Patrick, DL, Walton, MK, et al. Clinician-Reported Outcome Assessments of Treatment Benefit: Report of the ISPOR Clinical Outcome Assessment Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2017;20(1):2-14.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI35. Lenderking, WR, Revicki, DA. Clinician-reported Outcomes (ClinROs), Concepts and Development. The Evidence Forum.
Google Scholar36. Vernon, H, Mior, S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manip Physiol Ther. 1991;14(7):409-415.
Google Scholar | Medline | ISI37. Vernon, H . The Neck Disability Index: state-of-the-art, 1991-2008. J Manip Physiol Ther. 2008;31(7):491-502.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI38. Cleland, JA, Fritz, JM, Whitman, JM, Palmer, JA. The reliability and construct validity of the Neck Disability Index and patient specific functional scale in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Spine. 19762006;31(5):598-602.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline39. Pool, JJ, Ostelo, RW, Hoving, JL, Bouter, LM, de Vet, HC. Minimal clinically important change of the Neck Disability Index and the Numerical Rating Scale for patients with neck pain. Spine. 1976-2007;32(26):3047-3051.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline40. Carreon, LY, Glassman, SD, Campbell, MJ, Anderson, PA. Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J. 2010;10(6):469-474.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI41. Beaton, DE, Wright, JG, Katz, JN, Upper Extremity Collaborative, G. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(5):1038-1046.
Google Scholar | Medline | ISI42. Kalsi-Ryan, S, Singh, A, Massicotte, EM, et al. Ancillary outcome measures for assessment of individuals with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine. 1976-2013;38(suppl 1-22):S111-S122.
Google Scholar | Medline43. Kalsi-Ryan, S, Clout, J, Rostami, P, Massicotte, EM, Fehlings, MG. Duration of symptoms in the quantification of upper limb disability and impairment for individuals with mild degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0222134.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline44. Lins, L, Carvalho, FM SF-36 total score as a single measure of health-related quality of life: Scoping review, 4. SAGE Open Med; 2016:2050312116671725.
Google Scholar45. Ware, JE . SF-36 health survey update. Spine. 2000;25(24):3130-3139.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI46. King, JT, Roberts, MS. Validity and reliability of the Short Form-36 in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg. 2002;97(suppl l-2):180-185.
Google Scholar | Medline47. Brazier, JE, Harper, R, Jones, NM, et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ. 1992;305(6846):160-164.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline48. Badhiwala, JH, Witiw, CD, Nassiri, F, et al. Minimum Clinically Important Difference in SF-36 Scores for Use in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy. Spine. 2018;43(21):E1260-E6.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline49. Paul-Dauphin, A, Guillemin, F, Virion, JM, Briançon, S. Bias and precision in visual analogue scales: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Epidemiol. 1999;150(10):1117-1127.
Google Scholar | Crossref |

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif