Search

Objective The patient-reported outcome measure (PROM)-based evaluation in lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) is today’s gold standard but has limitations. We studied the impact of lower extremity motor deficits (LEMDs) on PROMs and a new objective outcome measure. Methods We evaluated patients with lumbar DDD from a prospective 2-center database. LEMDs were graded according to the British Medical Research Council (BMRC; 5 [normal] –0 [no movement]). The PROM-based evaluation included pain (visual analogue scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] & Roland-Morris Disability Index [RMDI]), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL; Short-Form 12 physical component summary/mental component summary & EuroQol-5D index). Objective functional impairment (OFI) was determined as age- and sex-adjusted Timed-Up and Go (TUG) test value. Results One hundred five of 375 patients (28.0%) had a LEMD. Patients with LEMD had slightly higher disability (ODI: 52.8 vs. 48.2, p = 0.025; RMDI: 12.6 vs. 11.3, p = 0.034) but similar pain and HRQoL scores. OFI T-scores were significantly higher in patients with LEMD (144.2 vs. 124.3, p = 0.006). When comparing patients with high- (BMRC 0–2) vs. low-grade LEMD (BMRC 3–4), no difference was evident for the PROM-based evaluation (all p > 0.05) but patients with high-grade LEMD had markedly higher OFI T-scores (280.9 vs. 136.0, p = 0.001). Patients with LEMD had longer TUG test times and OFI T-scores than matched controls without LEMDs. Conclusion Our data suggest that PROMs fail to sufficiently account for LEMD-associated disability, which is common and oftentimes bothersome to patients. The objective functional evaluation with the TUG test appears to be more sensitive to LEMD-associated disability. An objective functional evaluation of patients with LEMD appears reasonable.

Epidural steroid injection (ESI) represents a popular treatment option in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). The main objective of the article was to determine whether the 6-minute walking test (6WT) could assist in the discrimination between ESI responders and nonresponders. We used a validated 6WT smartphone application to assess self-measured objective functional impairment (OFI) in 3 patients with DDD undergoing ESI. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Core Outcome Measures Index and the Oswestry Disability Index, were obtained at baseline and at the 3-, 7-, and 28-day follow-up. Descriptive analyses were used to compare PROMs with OFI over time. Two patients responded well to the ESI, illustrated by clinically meaningful improvements in PROMs. This improvement was accompanied by a substantial increase in the 6WT distance (case I: 358 m vs. 517 m and case II: 296 m vs. 625 m). One patient reported only moderate improvement in leg pain and conflicting results in the other PROMs. The 6WT demonstrated a persistent OFI (487 m vs. 488 m). This patient was considered a nonresponder and underwent surgical treatment. This case series illustrates the feasibility of the smartphone-based 6WT as a tool to assess OFI in patients undergoing ESI for lumbar DDD.

Introduction: Outcome assessments after surgery for degenerative lumbar disorders (DLDs) rely on subjective patient-reported outcomes (PROMs). New objective functional capacity tests, like the smartphone-based 6-min walking test (6WT), have been introduced but presumably also do not reflect the patient's real-life functional performance. Research question: Pilot study to analyze changes in smartphone-based real-life activity data for physical performance outcome in patients undergoing surgery for DLD. Material and methods: Prospective observational study of DLD patients. Objective functional capacity and subjective outcomes were measured using 6WT and PROMs. Real-life physical performance data were acquired retrospectively using Apple iPhone Health data and compared against objective capacity and subjective outcomes. Results: Eight patients (mean 46 years, 62% male) provided 286.858 smartphone mile counts. PROMs and physical capacity (6WT) significantly improved postoperatively. 6WT results increased from 352m pre-to 555/567m at 6/12 weeks postoperatively (p ​= ​0.03). For physical performance a linear mixed effect models showed an increase in daily distance in the first 4 months after surgery (slope +0.178; p ​