Annette Bennedsgaard Jespersen1, Malin Eleonora Av Kák Gustafsson2. 1. Department of Regional Health Research, Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Middelfart, Region of Southern Denmark, P V Tuxensvej 12, 5500, Middelfart, Denmark. annette.bennedsgaard.jespersen@rsyd.dk. 2. Department of Regional Health Research, Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Middelfart, Region of Southern Denmark, Faaborgvej 237, 5250, Odense, Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) plays a significant role in lumbar spinal stenosis research and is used to assess patient's walking limitations. The World Health Organisation describes the constructs of walking capacity and performance and recommend measuring both to fully describe patient's walking ability. Objective methods to assess walking capacity and performance is being investigated and used alongside the traditional use of PROs. This review of the literature was made to provide an overview of relations between the ODI and outcome measures of walking capacity and performance in spinal stenosis research, and to provide a strategy for improving such measures in future research. METHODS: The review was conducted according to the Prisma Statement. In February 2017, a search was performed in Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane database. Authors independently screened articles by title, abstract, and full text, and studies were included if both authors agreed. Articles with correlation analysis between the ODI, walking capacity and performance measures by accelerometer or GPS were included. RESULTS: The results support a correlation between the ODI and walking capacity measures. The available studies using ODI and accelerometers were too few to reach a conclusion regarding correlation between ODI and walking performance. No articles with GPS measure were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The ODI should not stand alone when evaluating walking limitations in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. To enable a comprehensive assessment of walking ability, a walking test should be used to assess walking capacity and accelerometers should be investigated and standardized in measuring walking performance. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
PURPOSE: The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) plays a significant role in lumbar spinal stenosis research and is used to assess patient's walking limitations. The World Health Organisation describes the constructs of walking capacity and performance and recommend measuring both to fully describe patient's walking ability. Objective methods to assess walking capacity and performance is being investigated and used alongside the traditional use of PROs. This review of the literature was made to provide an overview of relations between the ODI and outcome measures of walking capacity and performance in spinal stenosis research, and to provide a strategy for improving such measures in future research. METHODS: The review was conducted according to the Prisma Statement. In February 2017, a search was performed in Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane database. Authors independently screened articles by title, abstract, and full text, and studies were included if both authors agreed. Articles with correlation analysis between the ODI, walking capacity and performance measures by accelerometer or GPS were included. RESULTS: The results support a correlation between the ODI and walking capacity measures. The available studies using ODI and accelerometers were too few to reach a conclusion regarding correlation between ODI and walking performance. No articles with GPS measure were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The ODI should not stand alone when evaluating walking limitations in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. To enable a comprehensive assessment of walking ability, a walking test should be used to assess walking capacity and accelerometers should be investigated and standardized in measuring walking performance. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Authors: Mikkel Bo Schneller; Peter Bentsen; Glen Nielsen; Jan Christian Brønd; Mathias Ried-Larsen; Erik Mygind; Jasper Schipperijn Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Donald L Patrick; Jordi Alonso; Paul W Stratford; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Dennis M Bienstock; Dhruv Shankar; Jinseong Kim; Michael Gao; Komal Srivastava; Wesley H Bronson; Saad B Chaudhary; Jashvant Poeran; James C Iatridis; Andrew C Hecht Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 2.210