Comparison of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire Scores: Time-Dependent Changes in Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy and Posterior Longitudinal Ligam.
- Author:
Kazuya OSHIMA
1
;
Motoki IWASAKI
;
Hironobu SAKAURA
;
Takahito FUJIMORI
;
Yukitaka NAGAMOTO
;
Hideki YOSHIKAWA
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Questionnaires; Spinal cord diseases; Spondylosis; Ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament; Quality of life
- MeSH: Asian Continental Ancestry Group*; Cohort Studies; Humans; Longitudinal Ligaments*; Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament; Patient Satisfaction; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Spinal Cord Diseases*; Spine; Spondylosis; Surveys and Questionnaires
- From:Asian Spine Journal 2015;9(1):47-53
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PURPOSE: To identify differences in time-dependent perioperative changes between the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and the JOA Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ) score in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) who underwent cervical laminoplasty. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The JOA score does not take into consideration patient satisfaction or quality of life. Accordingly, the JOACMEQ was designed in 2007 as a patient-centered assessment tool. METHODS: We studied 21 patients who underwent cervical laminoplasty. We objectively evaluated the time-dependent changes in JOACMEQ scores and JOA scores for all patients before surgery and at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: The average total JOA score and the recovery rate improved significantly after surgery in both groups, with a slightly better recovery rate in the OPLL group. Cervical spine function improved significantly in the CSM group but not in the OPLL group. Upper- and lower-extremity functions were more stable in the CSM group than in the OPLL group. The effectiveness rate of the JOACMEQ for measuring quality of life was quite low in both groups. In both groups, the Spearman contingency coefficients were dispersed widely except for upper- and lower-extremity function. CONCLUSIONS: Scores for upper- and lower-extremity function on the JOACMEQ correlated well with JOA scores. Because the JOACMEQ can also assess cervical spine function and quality of life, factors that cannot be assessed by the JOA score alone, the JOACMEQ is a more comprehensive evaluation tool.
