ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Minimal clinically important difference of the 6-Minute walk test and daily step count at 3 months following surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.
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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- External validity and responsiveness of lumbar spinal stenosis-specific symptom and QOL scales: A multicenter prospective study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Objective physical performance and exercise tests of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic scoping review.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Preoperative step count as a predictor of early postoperative mobility and patient-reported outcomes following lumbar spine surgery.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to estimate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in two objective measures of walking: 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and mean daily step count in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, three months post-surgery. Both anchor-based and distribution-based approaches were used to support result robustness and comparability.
methods97 patients (mean age 70 ± 8.3 years; 50 female) were recruited from three UK hospitals. 6MWD (metres) and mean daily step count (measured over 7 days with an accelerometer), and self-rated clinical questionnaires were assessed pre- and 12-weeks post-surgery. The anchor-based method used the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the satisfaction subscale of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine the optimal cutoff points for MCIDs for changes in the 6MWD and step count. The distribution-based method used 0.3 SD of the change scores.
resultsAnchor-based MCIDs for the 6MWD were 26 m (ODI) and 35 m (walking satisfaction). The step count MCID could not be determined using the ODI but was 680 steps when anchored to satisfaction. The distribution-based method estimated MCIDs of 34 m for the 6MWD and 750 steps for step count.
conclusionEven modest improvements in walking capacity and daily step count may be meaningful to patients recovering from LSS surgery. Further research is needed to validate the MCID for daily step count however, the identified MCIDs for the 6MWD (26-35 m) and daily step count (680-750 steps) provide practical thresholds for assessing meaningful change and can be used to inform goal setting within rehabilitation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.