Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41988005›Full record

ArticleSpine surgery and related research2026

Geriatric Locomotive Function Scale Assessment of Surgical Treatment Outcomes in Older Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients with Locomotive Syndrome Stage Three: Comparing Stage-Based and Minimal Clinically Important Difference-Based Improvements.

Yuki Akaike, Takehiro Michikawa, Soya Kawabata, Takaya Imai, Sota Nagai, Hiroki Takeda, Shinjiro Kaneko, Nobuyuki Fujita

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Yuki AkaikeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan.
Takehiro MichikawaDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, School of Medicine, Toho University, Tokyo, Japan.
Soya KawabataDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan.
Takaya ImaiDepartment of Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery, School of Medicine, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan.
Sota NagaiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan.
Hiroki TakedaDepartment of Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery, School of Medicine, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan.
Shinjiro KanekoDepartment of Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery, School of Medicine, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan.
Nobuyuki FujitaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The 25-item Geriatric Locomotive Function Scale (GLFS-25) is often used to assess locomotive syndrome stage in older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). However, locomotive syndrome stage three encompasses a wide score range, potentially masking clinically meaningful improvements. This study aimed to establish the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the GLFS-25 and determine whether MCID-based assessment better reflects surgical outcomes than stage-based evaluation. Methods: This study included 314 patients aged 65 years and older with LSS who were preoperatively classified as having locomotive syndrome stage three. Patient-reported outcome measures, including the GLFS-25, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), were administered before and at six months and 1 year after surgery. The MCID for the GLFS-25 was calculated using an anchor-based method, with the satisfaction item from the ZCQ at 1 year after surgery serving as the anchor. Patients were then categorized into four groups based on whether they achieved improvements in locomotive syndrome stage and/or the GLFS-25 MCID. Results: A 19-point improvement in the GLFS-25 was determined to be the MCID, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.80, 65.8%, and 90.2%, respectively. Based on postoperative changes, 129, 49, 33, and 103 patients achieved both stage and MCID improvement (group C), improvement in MCID alone (group M), improvement in stage alone (group S), and no improvement, respectively. Group C showed significantly better surgical effectiveness across all JOABPEQ domains. Group M showed significant improvements in four domains, whereas group S showed significant improvement in only one domain. Conclusions: The newly established 19-point MCID for the GLFS-25 more accurately represented clinically meaningful improvement than stage-based evaluation. The combined use of MCID and stage classification may enhance outcome assessment after LSS surgery in older adults.

Indexed as

GLFS-25JOABPEQlocomotive syndromelumbar spinal stenosisminimal clinically important differenceolder patient

Identifiers

PMID41988005
PMCPMC13077758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.