Hidetaka Furuya, Kenji Hirohata, Sho Mitomo, Masahiro Hoshino, Tomoko Sakai, Tetsuya Jinno, Robert A Hart
{"title":"Responsiveness of the Japanese version of the lumbar stiffness disability index.","authors":"Hidetaka Furuya, Kenji Hirohata, Sho Mitomo, Masahiro Hoshino, Tomoko Sakai, Tetsuya Jinno, Robert A Hart","doi":"10.1007/s00586-025-09120-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to investigate the psychometric characteristics of the Japanese version of the Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (J-LSDI) in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery, with a focus on its responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences (MCID).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, single-institution cohort study enrolled adult individuals diagnosed with degenerative spinal pathologies who underwent surgical intervention approximately 1 year prior inclusion in the study. Participants were stratified into three groups according to the number of lumbar segments included in the arthrodesis construct: Group 1 (no fusion or single-level fusion); Group 2 (fusion across two to four levels); and Group 3 (fusion involving five or more levels). Within the distribution-based framework, responsiveness was quantified using effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) and MCID were determined for participants who reported either \"minimal\" or \"moderate\" improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 488 participants completed the J-LSDI at baseline and 1 year. In Group 1, the LSDI scores improved from preoperatively to postoperatively, with moderate ES and SRM values (ES = 0.78; SRM = 0.59). In Group 2, the preoperative and postoperative LSDI scores did not differ, with low ES and SRM values (ES = 0.13; SRM = 0.12). In Group 3, the LSDI scores worsened from preoperatively to postoperatively, with high ES and SRM values (ES = 1.20; SRM = 0.90). The optimal cutoff points for the MCID in Groups 1, 2, and 3 were - 8.0, 0.2, and 17.1, respectively. The AUCs for the MCID in Groups 1, 2, and 3 were 0.72, 0.73, and 0.76, respectively, indicating moderate accuracy. Between-group analysis of variance revealed no significant differences in preoperative LSDI scores (p = 0.40), while significant differences were observed in postoperative scores at 1 year (p < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study underscores the clinical relevance and measurement reliability of the J-LSDI as an effective tool for evaluating the functional impact of spinal stiffness on activities of daily living among Japanese patients, in both the preoperative and postoperative phases of spinal surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":12323,"journal":{"name":"European Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-025-09120-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: We aimed to investigate the psychometric characteristics of the Japanese version of the Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (J-LSDI) in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery, with a focus on its responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences (MCID).
Methods: This prospective, single-institution cohort study enrolled adult individuals diagnosed with degenerative spinal pathologies who underwent surgical intervention approximately 1 year prior inclusion in the study. Participants were stratified into three groups according to the number of lumbar segments included in the arthrodesis construct: Group 1 (no fusion or single-level fusion); Group 2 (fusion across two to four levels); and Group 3 (fusion involving five or more levels). Within the distribution-based framework, responsiveness was quantified using effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) and MCID were determined for participants who reported either "minimal" or "moderate" improvement.
Results: A total of 488 participants completed the J-LSDI at baseline and 1 year. In Group 1, the LSDI scores improved from preoperatively to postoperatively, with moderate ES and SRM values (ES = 0.78; SRM = 0.59). In Group 2, the preoperative and postoperative LSDI scores did not differ, with low ES and SRM values (ES = 0.13; SRM = 0.12). In Group 3, the LSDI scores worsened from preoperatively to postoperatively, with high ES and SRM values (ES = 1.20; SRM = 0.90). The optimal cutoff points for the MCID in Groups 1, 2, and 3 were - 8.0, 0.2, and 17.1, respectively. The AUCs for the MCID in Groups 1, 2, and 3 were 0.72, 0.73, and 0.76, respectively, indicating moderate accuracy. Between-group analysis of variance revealed no significant differences in preoperative LSDI scores (p = 0.40), while significant differences were observed in postoperative scores at 1 year (p < 0.01).
Conclusion: This study underscores the clinical relevance and measurement reliability of the J-LSDI as an effective tool for evaluating the functional impact of spinal stiffness on activities of daily living among Japanese patients, in both the preoperative and postoperative phases of spinal surgery.
期刊介绍:
"European Spine Journal" is a publication founded in response to the increasing trend toward specialization in spinal surgery and spinal pathology in general. The Journal is devoted to all spine related disciplines, including functional and surgical anatomy of the spine, biomechanics and pathophysiology, diagnostic procedures, and neurology, surgery and outcomes. The aim of "European Spine Journal" is to support the further development of highly innovative spine treatments including but not restricted to surgery and to provide an integrated and balanced view of diagnostic, research and treatment procedures as well as outcomes that will enhance effective collaboration among specialists worldwide. The “European Spine Journal” also participates in education by means of videos, interactive meetings and the endorsement of educative efforts.
Official publication of EUROSPINE, The Spine Society of Europe