Literature DB >> 22209240

Quantification of walking ability in subjects with neurogenic claudication from lumbar spinal stenosis--a comparative study.

James Rainville1, Lisa A Childs, Enrique B Peña, Pradeep Suri, Janet C Limke, Cristin Jouve, David J Hunter.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Walking limitations caused by neurogenic claudication (NC) are typically assessed with self-reported measures, although objective evaluation of walking using motorized treadmill test (MTT) or self-paced walking test (SPWT) has periodically appeared in the lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) literature.
PURPOSE: This study compared the validity and responsiveness of MTT and SPWT for assessing walking ability before and after common treatments for NC. STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Fifty adults were recruited from an urban spine center if they had LSS and substantial walking limitations from NC and were scheduled to undergo surgery (20%) or conservative treatment (80%). OUTCOME MEASURES: Walking times, distances, and speeds along with the characteristics of NC symptoms were recorded for MTT and SPWT. Self-reported measures included back and leg pain intensity assessed with 0 to 10 numeric pain scales, disability assessed with Oswestry Disability Index, walking ability assessed with estimated walking times and distances, and NC symptoms assessed with the subscales from the Spinal Stenosis Questionnaires.
METHODS: Motorized treadmill test used a level track, and SPWT was conducted in a rectangular hallway. Walking speeds were self-selected, and test end points were NC, fatigue, or completion of the 30-minute test protocol. Results from MTT and SPWT were compared with each other and self-reported measures. Internal responsiveness was assessed by comparing changes in the initial results with the posttreatment results and external responsiveness by comparing walking test results that improved with those that did not improve by self-reported criteria.
RESULTS: Mean age of the participants was 68 years, and 58% were male. Neurogenic claudication included leg pain (88%) and buttock(s) pain (12%). Five participants could not safely perform MTT. Walking speeds were faster and distances were greater with SPWT, although the results from both tests correlated with each other and self-reported measures. Of the participants, 72% reported improvement after treatment, which was confirmed by significant mean differences in self-reported measures. Motorized treadmill test results did not demonstrate internal responsiveness to change in clinical status after treatment but SPWT results did, with increased mean walking times (6 minutes) and distances (387 m). When responsiveness was assessed against external criterion, both SPWT and MTT demonstrated substantial divergence with self-reported changes in clinical status and alternative outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS: Both MTT and SPWT can quantify walking abilities in NC. As outcome tools, SPWT demonstrated better internal responsiveness than MTT, but neither test demonstrated adequate external responsiveness. Neither test should be considered as a meaningful substitution for disease-specific measures of function. Copyright Â
© 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22209240      PMCID: PMC3315838          DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  47 in total

1.  Computed tomography findings 4 years after surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. No correlation with clinical outcome.

Authors:  A Herno; O Airaksinen; T Saari; M Pitkänen; H Manninen; O Suomalainen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 2.  Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations.

Authors:  J A Husted; R J Cook; V T Farewell; D D Gladman
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 3.  The Oswestry Disability Index.

Authors:  J C Fairbank; P B Pynsent
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Validity and reproducibility of self-report measures of walking capacity in lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Christy C Tomkins-Lane; Michele C Battié
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Examination findings and self-reported walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  M D Iversen; J N Katz
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2001-07

6.  Effectiveness of salmon calcitonin nasal spray in the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial.

Authors:  Vinod K Podichetty; Allen M Segal; Michael Lieber; Daniel J Mazanec
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  The reliability of the Shuttle Walking Test, the Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire, the Oxford Spinal Stenosis Score, and the Oswestry Disability Index in the assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Roland K Pratt; Jeremy C T Fairbank; Andrew Virr
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Functional mobility performance in an elderly population with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  M Whitehurst; L E Brown; S G Eidelson; A D'angelo
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 3.966

9.  Test-retest reproducibility of the exercise treadmill examination in lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  H G Deen; R S Zimmerman; M K Lyons; M C McPhee; J L Verheijde; S M Lemens
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 7.616

10.  Prospective functional evaluation of the surgical treatment of neurogenic claudication in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  J Tenhula; L G Lenke; K H Bridwell; P Gupta; D Riew
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  2000-08
View more
  21 in total

1.  Level of Evidence for Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of Physical Capacity Tasks Designed to Assess Functioning in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review Using the COSMIN Standards.

Authors:  Max Jakobsson; Annelie Gutke; Lidwine B Mokkink; Rob Smeets; Mari Lundberg
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2019-04-01

2.  Changes in dural sac caliber with standing MRI improve correlation with symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Yvonne Yan On Lau; Ryan Ka Lok Lee; James Francis Griffith; Carol Lai Yee Chan; Sheung Wai Law; Kin On Kwok
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Comparison between walking test and treadmill test for intermittent claudication associated with lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

Authors:  Shinji Tanishima; Satoru Fukada; Hiroyuki Ishii; Toshiyuki Dokai; Yasuo Morio; Hideki Nagashima
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  A new possibility to assess the perioperative walking capacity using a global positioning system in neurosurgical spine patients: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Richard Bostelmann; Sandra Schneller; Jan Frederick Cornelius; Hans Jakob Steiger; Igor Fischer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-09       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  [Diagnostics and conservative treatment of cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis].

Authors:  A Hug; S Hähnel; N Weidner
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 1.214

6.  Evaluation of outcome measures for neurogenic claudication: A patient-centered approach.

Authors:  John D Markman; Jennifer S Gewandter; Maria E Frazer; Christine Pittman; Xueya Cai; Kushang V Patel; Babak S Jahromi; Robert H Dworkin; Laurie B Burke; John T Farrar
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 9.910

7.  Correlation between the Oswestry Disability Index and objective measurements of walking capacity and performance in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Annette Bennedsgaard Jespersen; Malin Eleonora Av Kák Gustafsson
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Objective measurement of function following lumbar spinal stenosis decompression reveals improved functional capacity with stagnant real-life physical activity.

Authors:  Matthew Smuck; Amir Muaremi; Patricia Zheng; Justin Norden; Aman Sinha; Richard Hu; Christy Tomkins-Lane
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2017-09-28       Impact factor: 4.166

9.  Evaluation of the effects of differences in silicone hardness on rat model of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Hyunseong Kim; Jin Young Hong; Wan-Jin Jeon; Junseon Lee; In-Hyuk Ha
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  An outcome measure of functionality in patients with lumber spinal stenosis: a validation study of the Iranian version of Neurogenic Claudication Outcome Score (NCOS).

Authors:  Parisa Azimi; Hassan Reza Mohammadi; Ali Montazeri
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2012-09-24       Impact factor: 2.474

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.