Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Diagnostic accuracy of the lumbar spinal stenosis-diagnosis support tool and the lumbar spinal stenosis-self-administered, self-reported history questionnaire.
Tominaga, Ryoji; Kurita, Noriaki; Sekiguchi, Miho; Yonemoto, Koji; Kakuma, Tatsuyuki; Konno, Shin-Ichi.
Afiliação
  • Tominaga R; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima, Japan.
  • Kurita N; Department of Orthopaedic and Spinal Surgery, Aizu Medical Center, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
  • Sekiguchi M; Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
  • Yonemoto K; Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
  • Kakuma T; Department of Innovative Research and Education for Clinicians and Trainees, Fukushima Medical University Hospital, Fukushima, Japan.
  • Konno SI; Center for Innovative Research for Communities and Clinical Excellence, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
PLoS One ; 17(5): e0267892, 2022.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35511759
ABSTRACT
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.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Estenose Espinal / Dor Lombar Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Estenose Espinal / Dor Lombar Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article