Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 May 15;44(10):691-697.
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002928.

Minimum Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State of Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Patients

So Kato  1 , Yasushi Oshima  1 , Yoshitaka Matsubayashi  1 , Yuki Taniguchi  1 , Sakae Tanaka  1 , Katsushi Takeshita  2
Affiliations

Minimum Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State of Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Patients

So Kato et al. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). .

Abstract

Study design: A retrospective analysis.

Objective: The aim of this study was to elucidate the psychometric properties of the original Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, including the minimum detectable change (MDC), minimum clinically important difference (MCID), and patient-accepted symptom state (PASS).

Summary of background data: Despite the worldwide popularity of modified JOA score (mJOA), the original JOA score is still commonly used in East Asian countries, including Japan. However, unlike mJOA score, the psychometric properties of JOA score remain poorly understood.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of laminoplasty for degenerative cervical myelopathy patients in a single academic institution. Pre- and postoperative JOA scores were collected, and the recovery rate was calculated. Anchor-based methods were used to determine the cut-off values by a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The patients were also asked to answer an anchor question analyzing their postoperative health transition used for the MDC and another question assessing the patient satisfaction used for the MCID and PASS.

Results: A total of 101 patients were included in the analysis. The mean preoperative JOA score was 10.3 [standard deviation (SD): 2.4), and the mean postoperative JOA score was 13.4 (SD: 2.5). The mean recovery rate was 44%. A total of 68% of the patients admitted that their health condition was at least "somewhat better" than their preoperative condition, and 66% were at least "somewhat satisfied" with the treatment results. On the basis of ROC curve analyses, the MDC and MCID for JOA score in degenerative cervical myelopathy patients were calculated to be 2.5. The PASS was estimated to be 14.5, and the MCID for JOA recovery rate was 52.8%.

Conclusion: The MDC, MCID, and PASS for JOA score for degenerative cervical myelopathy patients were reported by anchor-based ROC curve analyses.

Level of evidence: 4.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Japanese Orthopaedic Association. Scoring system for cervical myelopathy. J Jpn Orthop Assoc 1994; 68:490–503.
    1. Yonenobu K, Abumi K, Nagata K, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the japanese orthopaedic association scoring system for evaluation of cervical compression myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001; 26:1890–1894. discussion 5.
    1. Benzel EC, Lancon J, Kesterson L, et al. Cervical laminectomy and dentate ligament section for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord 1991; 4:286–295.
    1. Chiles BW 3rd, Leonard MA, Choudhri HF, et al. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: patterns of neurological deficit and recovery after anterior cervical decompression. Neurosurgery 1999; 44:762–769. discussion 9-70.
    1. Keller A, von Ammon K, Klaiber R, et al. [Spondylogenic cervical myelopathy: conservative and surgical therapy]. Schweiz Med Wochenschr 1993; 123:1682–1691.

MeSH terms