Clinical outcome measures and their evidence base in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review to inform a core measurement set (AO Spine RECODE-DCM)

BMJ Open, 2022 · DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057650 · Published: January 1, 2022

Neurology Spinal Disorders Research Methodology & Design

Simple Explanation

This study systematically reviews the measurement properties of outcome measures used in degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) research. The goal is to inform the development of a core measurement set (CMS) for consistent reporting and meaningful assessment of DCM. The review identifies and evaluates existing instruments to recommend suitable tools for measuring outcomes in DCM clinical research.

Study Duration

Not specified

Participants

7395 patients

Evidence Level

Systematic Review

Key Findings

1
No single instrument had evaluations for all 10 measurement properties defined by COSMIN, and less than half had assessments for all three domains (reliability, validity, and responsiveness).
2
Nine instruments are interpretable by clinicians, including arm and neck pain scores, SF-12/36, JOA/mJOA/JOACMEQ, NDI, and VAS for pain.
3
There is a need for an agreed set of tools to measure outcomes in DCM.

Research Summary

This systematic review evaluates outcome measures used in assessing patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) to inform the development of a core measurement set. The review identified 29 instruments but found a paucity of high-quality evidence for their measurement properties, especially regarding content and structural validity. The findings suggest a need for agreed tools to measure outcomes in DCM, with nine interpretable instruments identified for potential inclusion in the core measurement set.

Practical Implications

Standardized Outcome Measurement

The study supports the development of a core measurement set (CMS) to standardize outcome reporting in DCM clinical research, enabling better comparison and aggregation of study results.

Informed Instrument Selection

Clinicians and researchers can use the review to select interpretable and feasible outcome measures for DCM assessment, such as the arm and neck pain scores, SF-12/36, JOA/mJOA/JOACMEQ, NDI, and VAS for pain.

Future Research Directions

The identified gaps in evidence highlight the need for further research to evaluate the measurement properties of DCM instruments, particularly regarding content and structural validity, and to develop new assessments.

Clinical outcome measures and their evidence base in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review to inform a core measurement set (AO Spine RECODE-DCM)

Simple Explanation

Key Findings

Research Summary

Practical Implications

Standardized Outcome Measurement

Informed Instrument Selection

Future Research Directions

Study Limitations

Your Feedback

Was this summary helpful?

Clinical outcome measures and their evidence base in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review to inform a core measurement set (AO Spine RECODE-DCM)

Simple Explanation

Key Findings

Research Summary

Practical Implications

Standardized Outcome Measurement

Informed Instrument Selection

Future Research Directions

Study Limitations

Your Feedback

Was this summary helpful?