Search

Despite the applicability of the lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS)-diagnosis support tool (DST) and the LSS-self-administered, self-reported history questionnaire (SSHQ), their diagnostic accuracy has never been compared with that of the well-known North American Spine Society (NASS) clinical description of LSS. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the two diagnostic tools with that of the NASS guidelines' clinical description of LSS in a Japanese secondary care hospital setting. This multicenter cross-sectional study used data from the lumbar spinal stenosis diagnostic support tool (DISTO) project, which was conducted from December 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012. Japanese adults with low back pain (LBP) aged ≥20 years were consecutively included. The reference standard was LSS diagnosed by orthopedic physicians. The diagnostic accuracy of the two support tools was compared. Of 3,331 patients, 1,416 (42.5%) patients were diagnosed with LSS. The NASS clinical description of LSS had a sensitivity of 63.9% and specificity of 89.5%. The LSS-DST and LSS-SSHQ had sensitivities of 91.3% and 83.8% and specificities of 76.0% and 57.6%, respectively, with substantial improvements in sensitivity (P < 0.0001). Similar results were obtained when we limited included patients to those aged >60 years. These findings indicated that the LSS-DST and LSS-SSHQ were more sensitive in screening patients with LBP for a diagnosis of LSS than the NASS clinical description of LSS. This study strongly supports prioritizing the use of either of these two diagnostic support tools for screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The reference values of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are still unknown. This multicenter cross-sectional survey was performed to determine the reference values and disease-specific characteristics of deterioration of QOL caused by LSS itself, not by aging, through comparison of patients with and without LSS who had an outpatient visit for low back pain by age and sex groups.Methods: The present study was performed at 564 medical centers and clinics. The JOABPEQ was measured for 8338 patients aged 20 years or over who came to an outpatient clinic for low back pain (LBP) and were examined for whether they had LSS using the LSS diagnosis support tool (LSS-DST). Scores in the five JOABPEQ domains were compared between the LSS group and the LBP without LSS group (LBP group) for each age and sex group.Results: Scores for Pain-related disorder, Gait disturbance, Social life disturbance, and Psychological disorders were significantly lower in the LSS group than in the LBP group.Conclusion: The percentiles of JOABPEQ scores in patients with LSS were clarified and could be used as reference values. Deterioration of QOL caused by LSS itself, not by aging, are characterized by Pain-related disorder, Gait disturbance, Social life disturbance, and Psychological disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Numbness in the soles of both feet at rest or bowel/bladder dysfunction can occur in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), especially in patients with cauda equina lesions. The purpose of this study was to clarify the relationship between cauda equina symptoms at rest and quality of life (QOL) in LSS patients using standardized questionnaires developed for the Japanese population.Methods: A survey was conducted in 564 hospitals and general practice clinics nationwide from December 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012. All patients who visited hospital or clinic because of low back pain were included. Patients were diagnosed with LSS using the LSS-Diagnostic Support Tool (LSS-DST), and the severity of the disease was measured using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) for quality of life. Presence of both sole numbness and/or bowel/bladder dysfunction were determined by medical interview. 3647 patients were diagnosed with LSS according to the results of the LSS-DST. 1294 of these patients (35.5%) had symptoms at rest. Of these patients, 359 patients with sole numbness, 135 patients with bowel/bladder dysfunction, and 52 patients with both numbness and bowel/bladder dysfunction were compared to the patients without rest symptoms (n = 2182). Comparisons between groups with or without sole numbness and bowel/bladder dysfunction were performed using statistical analysis of JOABPEQ responses in the categories of pain-related disorder, lumbar spine disorder, gait disturbance, social life disturbance, and psychological disorder.Results: All groups with sole numbness and/or bowel/bladder dysfunction had statistically lower (worse) scores in all categories of the JOABPEQ compared to the group without these symptoms at rest.Conclusion: LSS patients having numbness in the soles of both feet at rest or bowel/bladder dysfunction had lower measurements of QOL and activities of daily living than those patients without symptoms at rest. These symptoms appear to be related to QOL of LSS patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a major clinical problem associated with back pain, intermittent claudication, leg pain, and leg numbness. Diagnostic support tools for LSS such as the self-administered, self-reported history questionnaire (SSHQ) and developmental clinical diagnosis support tool (ST) have been validated in Japan. However, the degree of awareness and use of these two diagnostic support tools for LSS in Japan has not been clarified. The aims of the current study were to determine the degree of awareness and use of these two diagnostic support tools by Japanese physicians. Furthermore, we compared these results among nonorthopedic general practitioner (GP), orthopedic GP, and hospital-based orthopedic physicians. Methods: The LSS Diagnosis Support Tool (DISTO) Project was conducted to evaluate the degree of awareness and use of these two diagnostic support tools in Japan from 2011 to 2012. A total of 1,811 answers were obtained from physicians including nonorthopedic general practitioners (GP), orthopedic GPs, and hospital-based orthopedic physicians. Questions were (1) Do you know about these two diagnostic tools? and (2) If you know about these two diagnostic tools, have you used them? Results: The degree of awareness of ST and SSHQ was about 30 and 26 % by nonorthopedic GPs, 70 and 46 % by orthopedic GPs, and 68 and 41 % by hospital-based orthopedic physicians. The degree of awareness of ST and SSHQ by nonorthopedic GPs was significantly lower than by orthopedic GPs or hospital-based orthopedic physicians ( p < 0.001). For physicians who were aware of ST and SSHQ, the degree of use of ST or SSHQ was <50 % by nonorthopedic GPs, orthopedic GPs, and hospital-based orthopedic physicians. Conclusions: We expect that use of the ST or SSHQ tools in primary care will improve the accuracy of diagnosis and lead to improved quality of patient care. The low proportion of awareness by nonorthopedic GPs (<30 %) and use by all physicians (<50 %) indicate a need to encourage physicians to use ST and SSHQ more frequently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]