Summary
Background. There is considerable uncertainty regarding the selection criteria of patients and timing of surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Attempts have been made to quantify CSM severity using various assessment scales to provide an adjunct to clinical decision-making. The aim of the present study was to determine, by means of a 7-item questionnaire the attitudes of clinicians regarding the importance of quantitative assessment scales in the management of CSM, their actual use in clinical practice and how current scales fall short of the ideal.
Findings. Clinical history, examination, radiological imaging and quantitative functional assessment were regarded by 117 clinicians as being almost equally important in the management of CSM. However, only 22 (19%) of clinicians admitted to using an assessment scale in clinical practice and 4 (3%) believed there was a ‘gold-standard’ assessment scale. These clinicians also considered ‘ease of use’ to be the most important attribute of an ideal assessment scale, followed by ‘reproducibility’, ‘sensitivity to change’ and ‘validity’.
Conclusions. The discrepancy between the importance attached to quantitative measurement and its actual use suggests that current scales are under-utilised or unsuitable for clinical practice. A new easy-to use scale may be required that better reflects clinical requirements.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander JT (1996) Natural history and non-operative management of cervical spondylosis, in Arnold H. Menezes VKHS (ed): Principles of spinal surgery. McGraw-Hill, New York, vol 1, p 547–558
L Bakay HL Cares RJ Smith (1970) ArticleTitleOssification in the region of the posterior longitudinal ligament as a cause of cervical myelopathy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiat 33 263–268 Occurrence Handle4986251 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CS%2BC1c7is1A%3D Occurrence Handle10.1136/jnnp.33.2.263
ATH Casey JM Bland HA Crockard (1996) ArticleTitleDevelopment of a functional scoring system for rheumatoid arthritis patients with cervical myelopathy. Ann Rheumatic Dis 55 901–906 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiC28novFE%3D
L Gonzales-Feria (1975) ArticleTitleThe effect of surgical immobilisation after laminectomy in treatment of advanced cases of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 31 185–193
Hadley MN, Sonntag VKH (1995) Cervical disc herniations: the anterior operative approach without interbody fusion. In: Menezes AH, Sonntag VKH (eds) Principles of spinal surgery. McGraw-Hill Health Professions Division, New York, pp 531–538
GR Harsh GW Sypert PR Weinstein et al. (1987) ArticleTitleCervical spine stenosis secondary to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Neurosurg 67 349–357 Occurrence Handle3112327
Herdman J, Linzbach M, Krzan M et al (1994). The European myelopathy score. In: Bauer BBMKM (ed) Advances in neurosurgery. pp 266–268
LD Lunsford DJ Bissonette PJ Jannetta et al. (1980) ArticleTitleAnterior surgery for cervical disc disease. Part 1: Treatment of lateral cervical disc herniation in 253 cases. J Neurosurg 53 1–11 Occurrence Handle7411195 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:Bi6D3cfnt1E%3D
BM McCormack PR Weinstein (1996) ArticleTitleCervical spondylosis. An update. West J Med 165 43–51 Occurrence Handle8855684 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiD3cfls1M%3D
S Nurick (1972) ArticleTitleThe pathogenesis of the spinal cord disorder associated with cervical Spondylosis. Brain 95 87–100 Occurrence Handle5023093 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CS2C2snivVM%3D
CS Ranawat P O’Leary P Pellicci et al. (1979) ArticleTitleCervical spine fusion in rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65 1003–1110
LP Rowland (1992) ArticleTitleSurgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: time for a controlled trial. Neurology 42 5–13 Occurrence Handle1734322 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By2C3s7jtV0%3D
A Singh HA Crockard (1999) ArticleTitleQuantitative assessment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy by a simple walking test. Lancet 354 370–373 Occurrence Handle10437865 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1MzmsVGktA%3D%3D
A Singh HA Crockard (2001) ArticleTitleComparison of seven different scales used to quantify severity of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and post-operative improvement. J Outcome Measurement 5 798–818
Sypert GW (1992) Anterior decompression and fusion for cervical myelopathy. In: Camins MB (ed) Disorders of the cervical spine. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, p 407–416
J Ware-JE CD Sherbourne (1992) ArticleTitleThe MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30 473–483 Occurrence Handle1593914
K Yonenobu N Hosono M Iwasaki et al. (1991) ArticleTitleNeurologic complications of surgery for cervical compression myelopathy. Spine 16 1277–1282 Occurrence Handle1750000 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By2D1cnptlU%3D
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Singh, A., Gnanalingham, K., Casey, A. et al. Use of quantitative assessment scales in cervical spondylotic myelopathy – survey of clinician’s attitudes. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 147, 1235–1238 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-005-0639-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-005-0639-7