Martin Allan R, Jentzsch Thorsten, Wilson Jamie R F, Moghaddamjou Ali, Jiang Fan, Rienmueller Anna, Badhiwala Jetan H, Akbar Muhammad A, Nater Anick, Oitment Colby, Ganau Mario, Massicotte Eric M, Fehlings Michael G
Spinal Program, Krembil Neuroscience Centre, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California - Davis, Sacramento, CA.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021 Aug 15;46(16):1063-1069. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003956.
Prospective cross-sectional blinded-assessor cohort study.
The aim of this study was to determine the inter-rater reliability of the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score in a large cohort of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) patients.
The mJOA score is widely accepted as the primary outcome measure in DCM; it has been utilized in clinical practice guidelines and directly influences treatment recommendations, but its reliability has not been established.
A refined version of the mJOA was administered to DCM patients by two or more blinded clinicians. Inter-rater reliability was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), agreement, and mean difference for mJOA total score and subscores. Data were also analyzed with analysis of variance for differences by mJOA severity (mild: 15-17, moderate: 12-14, severe: <12), assessor, assessment order, previous surgery, age, and sex.
One hundred fifty-four DCM patients underwent 322 mJOA assessments (183 paired assessments). ICC was 0.88 for total mJOA, 0.79 for upper extremity (UE) motor, 0.84 for lower extremity (LE) motor, 0.63 for UE sensation, and 0.78 for urinary function subscores. Paired assessments were identical across all four subscores in 25%. The mean difference in mJOA was 0.93 points between assessors, and this differed by severity (mild: 0.68, moderate: 1.24, severe: 0.87, P = 0.001). Differences of ≥ 2 points occurred in 19%. Disagreement between mild and moderate severity occurred in 12% of patients. Other variables did not demonstrate significant relationships with mJOA scores.
The inter-rater reliability of total mJOA and its subscores is good, except for UE sensory function (moderate). However, the vast majority of assessments differed between observers, indicating that this measure should be interpreted carefully, particularly when near the threshold between severity categories, or when a patient is reassessed for deterioration. Further efforts to educate clinicians on administration and to refine the UE sensory subscore may enhance the reliability of this tool.Level of Evidence: 1.
前瞻性横断面盲法评估队列研究。
本研究旨在确定改良日本骨科协会(mJOA)评分在一大群退行性颈椎病(DCM)患者中的评分者间信度。
mJOA评分被广泛接受为DCM的主要结局指标;它已被用于临床实践指南并直接影响治疗建议,但其信度尚未确立。
由两名或更多名盲法临床医生对DCM患者进行改良版mJOA评分。使用组内相关系数(ICC)、一致性以及mJOA总分和各子分数的平均差异来测量评分者间信度。还通过方差分析对mJOA严重程度(轻度:15 - 17分,中度:12 - 14分,重度:<12分)、评估者、评估顺序、既往手术、年龄和性别等方面的差异进行了数据分析。
154例DCM患者接受了322次mJOA评估(183对配对评估)。mJOA总分的ICC为0.88,上肢(UE)运动子分数的ICC为0.79,下肢(LE)运动子分数的ICC为0.84,UE感觉子分数的ICC为0.63,排尿功能子分数的ICC为0.78。在所有四个子分数中,25%的配对评估结果相同。评估者之间mJOA的平均差异为0.93分,且因严重程度而异(轻度:0.68分,中度:1.24分,重度:0.87分,P = 0.001)。差异≥2分的情况占19%。轻度和中度严重程度之间的不一致在12%的患者中出现。其他变量与mJOA评分未显示出显著关系。
除UE感觉功能(中度)外,mJOA总分及其子分数的评分者间信度良好。然而,绝大多数评估结果在观察者之间存在差异,这表明该指标应谨慎解读,特别是在接近严重程度类别阈值时,或在对患者进行病情恶化重新评估时。进一步努力对临床医生进行评分管理方面的培训并完善UE感觉子分数,可能会提高该工具的信度。证据级别:1级。