Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20186442›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2010

Step activity monitoring in lumbar stenosis patients undergoing decompressive surgery.

Tobias L Schulte, Tim Schubert, Corinna Winter, Mirko Brandes, Lars Hackenberg, Hansdetlef Wassmann, Dennis Liem, Dieter Rosenbaum, Viola Bullmann

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02154191 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2014, after this paper: background citation

Level of Activity in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients Pre- and Post-surgery: a Non-randomized Controlled Before-after Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ManitobaRan2014Enrolled24ConditionsSpinal StenosisArmsSurgical Intervention
NCT06057428 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Activity Levels Amongst Elderly Patients With Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Before and After Decompressive Surgery

TypeobservationalSponsorRegion ZealandRan2023 to 2028Enrolled80ConditionsLumbar Spinal StenosisArmsDecompressive surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Correlation between the Oswestry Disability Index and objective measurements of walking capacity and performance in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic literature review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. The clinical course of pain and disability following surgery for spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Prospective evaluation of physical activity in patients with idiopathic scoliosis or kyphosis receiving brace treatment.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2011
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Minimal clinically important difference of the 6-Minute walk test and daily step count at 3 months following surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Prediction of walking ability following posterior decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2021
    Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tobias L SchulteDepartment of Orthopaedics, Münster University Hospital, Albert-Schweitzer-Strasse 33, 48149, Münster, Germany. dr.tobias.schulte@web.de
Tim Schubert
Corinna Winter
Mirko Brandes
Lars Hackenberg
Hansdetlef Wassmann
Dennis Liem
Dieter Rosenbaum
Viola Bullmann
University Hospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Symptomatic degenerative central lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a frequent indication for decompressive spinal surgery, to reduce spinal claudication. No data are as yet available on the effect of surgery on the level of activity measured with objective long-term monitoring. The aim of this prospective, controlled study was to objectively quantify the level of activity in central LSS patients before and after surgery, using a continuous measurement device. The objective data were correlated with subjective clinical results and the radiographic degree of stenosis. Forty-seven patients with central LSS and typical spinal claudication scheduled for surgery were included. The level of activity (number of gait cycles) was quantified for 7 consecutive days using the StepWatch Activity Monitor (SAM). Visual analogue scales (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index and Roland-Morris score were used to assess the patients' clinical status. The patients were investigated before surgery and 3 and 12 months after surgery. In addition, the radiographic extent of central LSS was measured digitally on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography. The following results were found preoperatively: 3,578 gait cycles/day, VAS for back pain 5.7 and for leg pain 6.5. Three months after surgery, the patients showed improvement: 4,145 gait cycles/day, VAS for back pain 4.0 and for leg pain 3.0. Twelve months after surgery, the improvement continued: 4,335 gait cycles/day, VAS for back pain 4.1 and for leg pain 3.3. The clinical results and SAM results showed significant improvement when preoperative data were compared with data 3 and 12 months after surgery. The results 12 months after surgery did not differ significantly from those 3 months after surgery. The level of activity correlated significantly with the degree of leg pain. The mean cross-sectional area of the spinal canal at the central LSS was 94 mm(2). The radiographic results did not correlate either with objective SAM results or with clinical outcome parameters. In conclusion, this study is the first to present objective data on continuous activity monitoring/measurements in patients with central LSS. The SAM could be an adequate tool for performing these measurements in spine patients. Except for leg pain, the objective SAM results did not correlate with the clinical results or with the radiographic extent of central LSS.

Indexed as

AgedDecompression, SurgicalDisability EvaluationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGaitHumansLumbar VertebraeMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSpinal StenosisTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID20186442
PMCPMC2989265
OpenAlexW1972174525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.