What are minimal clinically important differences for patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy? A 5-year Spine CORe™ analysis of QOD data

OBJECTIVE: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is widely used to interpret patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). However, consensus on its definition is lacking, and its long-term consistency remains unknown. The objective of this study was to determine if MCID thresholds for PROMs at 5 years after surgery for CSM remained consistent when compared to previously established 2-year values. METHODS: The Spine CORe™ study group performed a post hoc analysis of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database. Eight established anchor- and distribution-based methods were applied to define MCID thresholds for the following PROMs: Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck pain numeric rating scale (NP-NRS), arm pain numeric rating scale (AP-NRS), 5-dimension EuroQol health utility questionnaire (EQ-5D) for quality-adjusted life years, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. Predictive validity was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) analysis with North American Spine Society satisfaction as the anchor, and results were compared with calculated 2-year values from the same cohort using DeLong's test. RESULTS: A total of 1085 patients were originally enrolled, with ≥ 80% follow-up for all PROMs except the mJOA score (79%). At 5 years, optimal percentage change and ≥ 30% improvement methods were consistently highest performing for the NDI (AUC 0.71 and 0.68, respectively), NP-NRS (AUC 0.65 for both), and AP-NRS (AUC 0.73 and 0.72, respectively) scores. For the EQ-5D score, both the optimal numeric cutoff and one-half standard deviation methods performed best, yielding a consistent MCID threshold of 0.11 (AUC 0.64 for both). For the mJOA score, the severity-adjusted method provided the strongest discrimination, with an AUC of 0.74 at 5 years. MCID thresholds were consistent between 2 and 5 years, except for the severity-adjusted MCID for the mJOA score (0.74 at 5 years vs 0.65 at 2 years, p = 0.026). The 30% improvement threshold corresponded to absolute changes of 11.3 points for the NDI score, 1.5 points for the NP-NRS score, and 1.4 points for the AP-NRS score based on mean baseline scores. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this represents the largest cohort of patients with CSM in the United States with validated, long-term 5-year MCID thresholds. This study establishes practical MCID definitions for NDI (≥ 30% improvement threshold of 11.3 points), NP-NRS and AP-NRS (≥ 30% improvement thresholds of 1.5 and 1.4 points, respectively), EQ-5D (optimal numeric cutoff of 0.11), and mJOA (severity-adjusted: ≥ 3 points for severe, ≥ 2 for moderate, ≥ 1 for mild) scores that can serve as benchmarks for evaluating improvement after CSM surgery in both research and routine clinical practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Neurosurgical FOCUS
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.12.focus25939
Primary Topic
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What are minimal clinically important differences for patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy? A 5-year Spine CORe™ analysis of QOD data

Dayton Grogan, Maliya Delawan, Jean-Luc K. Kabangu, Cheerag D. Upadhyaya et al.
Neurosurgical FOCUS
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
article

What are minimal clinically important differences for patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy? A 5-year Spine CORe™ analysis of QOD data

Dayton Grogan, Maliya Delawan, Jean-Luc K. Kabangu, Cheerag D. Upadhyaya, Oren N. Gottfried, Luis M. Tumialán, Connor Berlin, Domagoj Coric, Vincent J. Alentado, Michael S. Virk, Gracie Garcia, John J. Knightly, Eric A. Potts, Kai-Ming Fu, Timothy J. Yee, Regis W. Haid, Paul Kim, Paul Park, Juan S Uribe, Jay D Turner, Praveen V Mummaneni, Kevin T Foley, Michael Y Wang, Mohamad Bydon, Anthony L Asher, Erica F Bisson, Irina-Mihaela Matache, Christopher I Shaffrey, Chun-Po Yen, Dean Chou, Andrew K Chan, Scott Meyer
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is widely used to interpret patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). However, consensus on its definition is lacking, and its long-term consistency remains unknown. The objective of this study was to determine if MCID thresholds for PROMs at 5 years after surgery for CSM remained consistent when compared to previously established 2-year values. METHODS: The Spine CORe™ study group performed a post hoc analysis of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database. Eight established anchor- and distribution-based methods were applied to define MCID thresholds for the following PROMs: Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck pain numeric rating scale (NP-NRS), arm pain numeric rating scale (AP-NRS), 5-dimension EuroQol health utility questionnaire (EQ-5D) for quality-adjusted life years, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. Predictive validity was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) analysis with North American Spine Society satisfaction as the anchor, and results were compared with calculated 2-year values from the same cohort using DeLong's test. RESULTS: A total of 1085 patients were originally enrolled, with ≥ 80% follow-up for all PROMs except the mJOA score (79%). At 5 years, optimal percentage change and ≥ 30% improvement methods were consistently highest performing for the NDI (AUC 0.71 and 0.68, respectively), NP-NRS (AUC 0.65 for both), and AP-NRS (AUC 0.73 and 0.72, respectively) scores. For the EQ-5D score, both the optimal numeric cutoff and one-half standard deviation methods performed best, yielding a consistent MCID threshold of 0.11 (AUC 0.64 for both). For the mJOA score, the severity-adjusted method provided the strongest discrimination, with an AUC of 0.74 at 5 years. MCID thresholds were consistent between 2 and 5 years, except for the severity-adjusted MCID for the mJOA score (0.74 at 5 years vs 0.65 at 2 years, p = 0.026). The 30% improvement threshold corresponded to absolute changes of 11.3 points for the NDI score, 1.5 points for the NP-NRS score, and 1.4 points for the AP-NRS score based on mean baseline scores. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this represents the largest cohort of patients with CSM in the United States with validated, long-term 5-year MCID thresholds. This study establishes practical MCID definitions for NDI (≥ 30% improvement threshold of 11.3 points), NP-NRS and AP-NRS (≥ 30% improvement thresholds of 1.5 and 1.4 points, respectively), EQ-5D (optimal numeric cutoff of 0.11), and mJOA (severity-adjusted: ≥ 3 points for severe, ≥ 2 for moderate, ≥ 1 for mild) scores that can serve as benchmarks for evaluating improvement after CSM surgery in both research and routine clinical practice.

Neurosurgical FOCUSVol. 60(5)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), Barrow Neurological Institute (US), St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center (US), University of Miami (US), University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US), University of California, San Francisco (US), Cornell University (US), University of Utah (US), University of Michigan (US), Carolinas Medical Center (US), University of Chicago (US), Carolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates (US), Michigan Headache and Neurological Institute (US), Semmes Murphey Foundation (US), Duke Medical Center (US), Indiana Spine Group (US), Maxim Integrated (United States) (US), Duke University Hospital (US), Neurological Surgery (US), Weill Cornell Medicine (US), University of Virginia (US), Columbia University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.