What are minimal clinically important differences for patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy? A 5-year Spine CORe™ analysis of QOD data.
Date
2026-05
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Citation Stats
Attention Stats
Abstract
The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is widely used to interpret patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). However, consensus on its definition is lacking, and its long-term consistency remains unknown. The objective of this study was to determine if MCID thresholds for PROMs at 5 years after surgery for CSM remained consistent when compared to previously established 2-year values. The Spine CORe™ study group performed a post hoc analysis of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database. Eight established anchor- and distribution-based methods were applied to define MCID thresholds for the following PROMs: Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck pain numeric rating scale (NP-NRS), arm pain numeric rating scale (AP-NRS), 5-dimension EuroQol health utility questionnaire (EQ-5D) for quality-adjusted life years, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. Predictive validity was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) analysis with North American Spine Society satisfaction as the anchor, and results were compared with calculated 2-year values from the same cohort using DeLong's test. A total of 1085 patients were originally enrolled, with ≥ 80% follow-up for all PROMs except the mJOA score (79%). At 5 years, optimal percentage change and ≥ 30% improvement methods were consistently highest performing for the NDI (AUC 0.71 and 0.68, respectively), NP-NRS (AUC 0.65 for both), and AP-NRS (AUC 0.73 and 0.72, respectively) scores. For the EQ-5D score, both the optimal numeric cutoff and one-half standard deviation methods performed best, yielding a consistent MCID threshold of 0.11 (AUC 0.64 for both). For the mJOA score, the severity-adjusted method provided the strongest discrimination, with an AUC of 0.74 at 5 years. MCID thresholds were consistent between 2 and 5 years, except for the severity-adjusted MCID for the mJOA score (0.74 at 5 years vs 0.65 at 2 years, p = 0.026). The 30% improvement threshold corresponded to absolute changes of 11.3 points for the NDI score, 1.5 points for the NP-NRS score, and 1.4 points for the AP-NRS score based on mean baseline scores. To the authors' knowledge, this represents the largest cohort of patients with CSM in the United States with validated, long-term 5-year MCID thresholds. This study establishes practical MCID definitions for NDI (≥ 30% improvement threshold of 11.3 points), NP-NRS and AP-NRS (≥ 30% improvement thresholds of 1.5 and 1.4 points, respectively), EQ-5D (optimal numeric cutoff of 0.11), and mJOA (severity-adjusted: ≥ 3 points for severe, ≥ 2 for moderate, ≥ 1 for mild) scores that can serve as benchmarks for evaluating improvement after CSM surgery in both research and routine clinical practice.
Type
Department
Description
Provenance
Subjects
Citation
Permalink
Published Version (Please cite this version)
Publication Info
Berlin, Connor, Maliya Delawan, Irina-Mihaela Matache, Jean-Luc K Kabangu, Dayton Grogan, Gracie Garcia, Praveen V Mummaneni, Andrew K Chan, et al. (2026). What are minimal clinically important differences for patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy? A 5-year Spine CORe™ analysis of QOD data. Neurosurgical focus, 60(5). p. E6. 10.3171/2025.12.focus25939 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/34626.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
Scholars@Duke
Christopher Ignatius Shaffrey
I have more than 25 years of experience treating patients of all ages with spinal disorders. I have had an interest in the management of spinal disorders since starting my medical education. I performed residencies in both orthopaedic surgery and neurosurgery to gain a comprehensive understanding of the entire range of spinal disorders. My goal has been to find innovative ways to manage the range of spinal conditions, straightforward to complex. I have a focus on managing patients with complex spinal disorders. My patient evaluation and management philosophy is to provide engaged, compassionate care that focuses on providing the simplest and least aggressive treatment option for a particular condition. In many cases, non-operative treatment options exist to improve a patient’s symptoms. I have been actively engaged in clinical research to find the best ways to manage spinal disorders in order to achieve better results with fewer complications.
Oren N Gottfried
I specialize in the surgical management of all complex cervical, thoracic, lumbar, or sacral spinal diseases by using minimally invasive as well as standard approaches for arthritis or degenerative disease, deformity, tumors, and trauma. I have a special interest in the treatment of thoracolumbar deformities, occipital-cervical problems, and in helping patients with complex spinal issues from previously unsuccessful surgery or recurrent disease.I listen to my patients to understand their symptoms and experiences so I can provide them with the information and education they need to manage their disease. I make sure my patients understand their treatment options, and what will work best for their individual condition. I treat all my patients with care and concern – just as I would treat my family. I am available to address my patients' concerns before and after surgery. I aim to improve surgical outcomes for my patients and care of all spine patients with active research evaluating clinical and radiological results after spine surgery with multiple prospective databases. I am particularly interested in prevention of spinal deformity, infections, complications, and recurrent spinal disease. Also, I study whether patient specific variables including pelvic/sacral anatomy and sagittal spinal balance predict complications from spine surgery.
Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.
