ReviewBrain & spine2026
The effect of postoperative rehabilitation on outcomes in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM): A systematic review.
Review in Brain & spine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond Decompression: Successes and Failures in the Modern Care of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy.Neurology international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the leading cause of adult spinal cord dysfunction, often requiring surgery. However, the role of postoperative rehabilitation in optimizing patient outcomes remains unclear. Research question: What are the effects of postoperative rehabilitation on clinical outcomes following DCM surgery? Material and methods: This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024582484). PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through September 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and other research on rehabilitation interventions for postoperative outcomes (e.g., function, pain, neurological recovery) in patients undergoing DCM surgery. Studies without confirmed DCM, non-peer-reviewed articles, or lacking a rehabilitation protocol were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I. Descriptive summaries were conducted, categorizing studies into active, passive, and mixed interventions. The evidence quality was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: Ten studies with a total of 766 patients were included, made up of 5 RCTs and 5 cohort studies. Seven studies had high risk of bias, and three had moderate risk of bias. Mixed rehabilitation interventions combining physical, behavioral, and psychosocial strategies yielded the most consistent improvements in neurological function, quality of life, and self-efficacy. Intervention timing ranged from a few days postoperatively to 6 months. A meta-analysis was not performed due to study heterogeneity. Discussion and Conclusion: Postoperative rehabilitation for DCM shows promise, particularly with multimodal, goal-oriented, and patient-centered approaches. However, evidence is limited by the high risk of bias, poor methodological detail and lack of standardization.
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.