Determinants of quality of life in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review

References

• Davies BM, Mowforth OD, Smith EK, Kotter MRN. Degenerative cervical myelopathy. BMJ (Online) 2018;360:k186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nouri A, Tetreault L, Singh A, Karadimas SK, Fehlings MG. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: epidemiology, genetics, and pathogenesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015;40:E675–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fehlings MG, Tetreault LA, Riew KD, et al. A clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: recommendations for patients with mild, moderate, and severe disease and nonmyelopathic patients with evidence of cord compression. Global Spine J 2017;7:70S–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies BM, Munro CF, Kotter MRN. A novel insight into the challenges of diagnosing degenerative cervical myelopathy using web-based symptom checkers. J Med Internet Res 2019;21:e10868.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mowforth OD, Davies BM, Kotter MR. ‘I am not delusional!’ Sensory dysaesthesia secondary to degenerative cervical myelopathy. BMJ Case Rep 2019;12:e229033.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tracy JA, Bartleson BJ. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurologist 2010;16:176–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fehlings MG, Ibrahim A, Tetreault L, et al. A global perspective on the outcomes of surgical decompression in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: results from the prospective multicenter aospine international study on 479 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015;40:1322–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pope DH, Mowforth OD, Davies BM, Kotter MRN. Diagnostic delays lead to greater disability in degenerative cervical myelopathy and represent a health inequality. Spine 2020;45:368–77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karimi M, Brazier J. Health, health-related quality of life, and quality of life: what is the difference? PharmacoEconomics 2016;34:645–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies BM, McHugh M, Elgheriani A, et al. Reported outcome measures in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review. PLoS One 2016;11:e0157263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies BM, McHugh M, Elgheriani A, et al. The reporting of study and population characteristics in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review. PLoS One 2017;12:e0172564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oh T, Lafage R, Lafage V, et al. Comparing quality of life in cervical spondylotic myelopathy with other chronic debilitating diseases using the short form survey 36-health survey. World Neurosurg 2017;106:699–706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mowforth OD, Davies BM, Kotter MR. Poor quality of life in degenerative cervical myelopathy carers (Preprint). Interact J Med Res 2019;8:e12381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badhiwala JH, Witiw CD, Nassiri F, et al. Patient phenotypes associated with outcome following surgery for mild degenerative cervical myelopathy: a principal component regression analysis. Spine J 2018;18:2220–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies BM, Khan DZ, Mowforth OD, et al. RE-CODE DCM (REsearch Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy): a consensus process to improve research efficiency in DCM, through establishment of a standardized dataset for clinical research and the definition of the research priorities. Global Spine J 2019;9:65S–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoffman MR, Roberts MS, King JT. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy, depression, and anxiety: a cohort analysis of 89 patients. Neurosurgery 2005;57:307–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies B, Mowforth O, Sadler I, et al. Recovery priorities in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a cross-sectional survey of an international, online community of patients. BMJ Open 2019;9:e031486.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine – Levels of Evidence (March 2009) – CEBM. https://www.cebm.net/2009/06/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/.
   Google Scholar
• Wells GA. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessingthe quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses; 2015, available: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp [accessed 10.11.19].
   Google Scholar
• Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Cochrane Statistical Methods Group, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM, et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 1992;305:160–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst NP, Ruta DA, Kind P. Comparison of the MOS short form-12 (SF12) health status questionnaire with the SF36 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1998;37:862–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21:271–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira LN, Ferreira PL, Pereira LN, Rowen D, Brazier JE. Exploring the consistency of the SF-6D. Value Health 2013;16:1023–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balestroni G, Bertolotti G. EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D): an instrument for measuring quality of life. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis 2015;78:155–9.
   Google Scholar
• Skevington SM, Carse MS, Williams AC. Validation of the WHOQOL-100: pain management improves quality of life for chronic pain patients. Clin J Pain 2001;17:264–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fukui M, Chiba K, Kawakami M, Subcommittee on Low Back Pain and Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation of the Clinical Outcome Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association, et al. Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ): Part 2. Endorsement of the alternative item. J Orthop Sci 2007;12:241–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh A, Crockard HA. Comparison of seven different scales used to quantify severity of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and post-operative improvement. J Outcome Meas 2001;5:798–818.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Singh A, Gnanalingham K, Casey A, Crockard A. Quality of life assessment using the Short Form-12 (SF-12) questionnaire in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: comparison with SF-36. Spine 2006;31:639–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heffez DS, Ross RE, Shade-Zeldow Y, et al. Treatment of cervical myelopathy in patients with the fibromyalgia syndrome: outcomes and implications. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1423–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikaido T, Kikuchi SI, Yabuki S, Otani K, Konno SI. Surgical treatment assessment using the Japanese orthopedic association cervical myelopathy evaluation questionnaire in patients with cervical myelopathy: a new outcome measure for cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:2568–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fehlings MG, Jha NK, Hewson SM, et al. Is surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy cost-effective? A cost-utility analysis based on data from the AOSpine North America prospective CSM study. SPI 2012;17:89–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Tamimi YZ, Guilfoyle M, Seeley H, Laing RJ. Measurement of long-term outcome in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy treated surgically. Eur Spine J 2013;22:2552–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fehlings MG, Wilson JR, Kopjar B, et al. Efficacy and safety of surgical decompression in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy results of the Aospine North America prospective multi-center study. J Bone Joint Surg – Ser A 2013;95:1651–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou FF, Zhang Y, Sun Y, et al. Profiles of and correlation between objective and subjective outcome assessments following open-door laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Chinese Med J 2014;127:2659–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou F, Zhang Y, Sun Y, et al. Assessment of the minimum clinically important difference in neurological function and quality of life after surgery in cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients: a prospective cohort study. Eur Spine J 2015;24:2918–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witiw CD, Tetreault LA, Smieliauskas F, et al. Surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a patient-centered quality of life and health economic evaluation. Spine J 2017;17:15–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakashima H, Tetreault L, Nagoshi N, et al. Comparison of outcomes of surgical treatment for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament versus other forms of degenerative cervical myelopathy: results from the prospective, Multicenter AOSpine CSM-International Study of 479 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2016;98:370–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimura A, Endo T, Inoue H, Seichi A, Takeshita K. Impact of axial neck pain on quality of life after laminoplasty. Spine 2015;40:E1292–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King JT, Al ET. Quality of life assessment with the medical with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery 2003;52:113–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King JT, Moossy JJ, Tsevat J, Roberts MS. Multimodal assessment after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg. Spine 2005;2:526–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roguski M, Benzel EC, Curran JN, et al. Postoperative cervical sagittal imbalance negatively affects outcomes after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014;39:2070–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu B, Ma W, Zhu F, et al. Comparison between anterior and posterior decompression for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: subjective evaluation and cost analysis. Orthop Surg 2012;4:47–54.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ghogawala Z, Martin B, Benzel EC, et al. Comparative effectiveness of ventral vs dorsal surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery 2011;68:622–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okada M, Minamide A, Endo T, et al. A prospective randomized study of clinical outcomes in patients with cervical compressive myelopathy treated with open-door or French-door laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:1119–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hitchon PW, Woodroffe RW, Noeller JA, et al. Anterior and posterior approaches for cervical myelopathy: clinical and radiographic outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2019;44:615–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng L, Nie L, Li M, Huo Y, Pan X. Superiority of the Bryan(®) disc prosthesis for cervical myelopathy: a randomized study with 3-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:3408–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayerl SH, Pöhlmann F, Finger T, Prinz V, Vajkoczy P. Two-level cervical corpectomy-long-term follow-up reveals the high rate of material failure in patients, who received an anterior approach only. Neurosurg Rev 2019;42:511–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asher AL, Devin CJ, Kerezoudis P, et al. Comparison of outcomes following anterior vs posterior fusion surgery for patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: an analysis from quality outcomes database. Clin Neurosurg 2019;84:919–26.
   Google Scholar
• Fehlings MG, Santaguida C, Tetreault L, et al. Laminectomy and fusion versus laminoplasty for the treatment of degenerative cervical myelopathy: results from the AOSpine North America and International prospective multicenter studies. Spine J 2017;17:102–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens BF, Rhee JM, Neustein TM, Arceo R. Laminoplasty does not lead to worsening axial neck pain in the properly selected patient with cervical myelopathy. Spine 2017;42:1844–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minamide A, Yoshida M, Simpson AK, et al. Microendoscopic laminotomy versus conventional laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: 5-year follow-up study. J Neurosurg: Spine 2017;27:403–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirota R, Miyakoshi N, Yoshimoto M, et al. Comparison of health-related quality of life between double-door laminoplasty and selective laminoplasty for degenerative cervical myelopathy, with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2019;44:E211–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minamide A, Yoshida M, Yamada H, et al. Efficacy of posterior segmental decompression surgery for pincer mechanism in cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective case-controlled study using propensity score matching. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015;40:1807–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakamoto H, Oshima Y, Takeshita K, et al. Usefulness of QuickDASH in patients with cervical laminoplasty. J Orthop Sci 2014;19:218–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King JT, Tsevat J, Moossy JJ, Roberts MS. Preference-based quality of life measurement in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 2004;29:1271–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubelski D, Alvin MD, Nesterenko S, et al. Correlation of quality of life and functional outcome measures for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 2016;24:483–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimura A, Shiraishi Y, Inoue H, Endo T, Takeshita K. Predictors of persistent axial neck pain after cervical laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018;43:10–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oshima Y, Matsubayashi Y, Taniguchi Y, et al. Mental state can influence the degree of postoperative axial neck pain following cervical laminoplasty. Global Spine J 2019;9:292–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujiwara H, Oda T, Makino T, et al. Impact of cervical sagittal alignment on axial neck pain and health-related quality of life after cervical laminoplasty in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy or ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Clin Spine Surg 2018;31:E245–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu S, Lafage R, Smith JS, et al. Impact of dynamic alignment, motion, and center of rotation on myelopathy grade and regional disability in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 2015;23:690–700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sielatycki JA, Armaghani S, Silverberg A, et al. Is more lordosis associated with improved outcomes in cervical laminectomy and fusion when baseline alignment is lordotic? Spine J 2016;16:982–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oshima Y, Takeshita K, Taniguchi Y, et al. Effect of preoperative sagittal balance on cervical laminoplasty outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016;41:E1265–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kato M, Namikawa T, Matsumura A, Konishi S, Nakamura H. Effect of cervical sagittal balance on laminoplasty in patients with cervical myelopathy. Global Spine J 2017;7:154–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhong J, Pan Z, Chen Y, et al. Postoperative cervical sagittal realignment improves patient-reported outcomes in chronic atlantoaxial anterior dislocation. Oper Neurosurg 2018;15:643–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kato S, Nouri A, Wu D, et al. Impact of cervical spine deformity on preoperative disease severity and postoperative outcomes following fusion surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy: sub-analysis of AOSpine North America and International Studies. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018;43:248–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones JGA, Cen SY, Lebel RM, Hsieh PC, Law M. Diffusion tensor imaging correlates with the clinical assessment of disease severity in cervical spondylotic myelopathy and predicts outcome following surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:471–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King JT, Roberts MS. Validity and reliability of the Short Form-36 in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg 2002;97:180–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kato S, Oshima Y, Oka H, et al. Comparison of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and modified JOA (mJOA) score for the assessment of Cervical Myelopathy: a multicenter observational study. PLoS One 2015;10:e0123022–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohm PE, Fehlings MG, Kopjar B, et al. Psychometric properties of the 30-m walking test in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: results from two prospective multicenter cohort studies. Spine J 2017;17:211–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetreault L, Kopjar B, Nouri A, et al. The modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale: establishing criteria for mild, moderate and severe impairment in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2017;26:78–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimura A, Seichi A, Endo T, et al. Tally counter test as a simple and objective assessment of cervical myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2013;22:183–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kopjar B, Bohm PE, Arnold JH, et al. Outcomes of surgical decompression in patients with very severe degenerative cervical myelopathy. Spine 2018;43:1102–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isogai N, Nagoshi N, Iwanami A, et al. Surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy in the elderly. Spine 2018;43:E1430–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetreault L, Nagoshi N, Nakashima H, et al. Impact of depression and bipolar disorders on functional and quality of life outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy. Spine 2017;42:372–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvin MD, Miller JA, Sundar S, et al. The impact of preoperative depression on quality of life outcomes after posterior cervical fusion. Spine J 2015;15:79–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold PM, Fehlings MG, Kopjar B, et al. Mild diabetes is not a contraindication for surgical decompression in cervical spondylotic myelopathy: results of the AOSpine North America multicenter prospective study (CSM). Spine J 2014;14:65–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oichi T, Oshima Y, Takeshita K, Chikuda H, Tanaka S. Evaluation of comorbidity indices for a study of patient outcomes following cervical decompression surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015;40:1941–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao R, Miller JA, Lubelski D, et al. Quality of life outcomes following cervical decompression for coexisting Parkinson’s disease and cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine J 2016;16:1358–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson JR, Tetreault LA, Schroeder G, et al. Impact of elevated body mass index and obesity on long-term surgical outcomes for patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: analysis of a combined prospective dataset. Spine 2017;42:195–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, Zheng Q, Guo X, et al. Anterior surgical options for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy in a long-term follow-up study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2013;133:745–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blizzard DJ, Caputo AM, Sheets CZ, et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy with fusion for the treatment of spondylotic cervical myelopathy: short-term follow-up. Eur Spine J 2017;26:85–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stamates MM, Cui MX, Roitberg BZ. Clinical outcomes of cervical laminoplasty: results at two years. Clin Neurosurg 2017;80:934–41.
   Google Scholar
• Hitchon PW, Moritani T, Woodroffe RW, et al. C5 palsy following posterior decompression and instrumentation in cervical stenosis: single center experience and review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2018;174:29–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kato S, Oshima Y, Matsubayashi Y, et al. Minimum clinically important difference in outcome scores among patients undergoing cervical laminoplasty. Eur Spine J 2019;28:1234–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerling MC, Radcliff K, Isaacs R, et al. Trends in nonoperative treatment modalities prior to cervical surgery and impact on patient-derived outcomes: two-year analysis of 1522 patients from the prospective spine treatment outcome study. Int J Spine Surg 2018;12:250–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hida T, Sakai Y, Ito K, et al. Collar fixation is not mandatory after cervical laminoplasty. Spine 2017;42:E253–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeyamohan SB, Kenning TJ, Petronis KA, et al. Effect of steroid use in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg Spine 2015;23:137–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimura A, Endo T, Inoue H, Seichi A. Preoperative predictors of patient satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty. Global Spine J 2014;4:77–082.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fujimori T, Iwasaki M, Okuda S, et al. Patient satisfaction with surgery for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2011;14:726–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thakar S, Rajshekhar V. Evaluation of pain as a preference-based health status measure in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy undergoing central corpectomy. Acta Neurochir 2012;154:335–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerling MC, Radcliff K, Isaacs R, et al. Two-year results of the prospective spine treatment outcomes study: an analysis of complication rates, predictors of their development, and effect on patient derived outcomes at 2 years for surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. World Neurosurg 2017;106:247–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Passias PG, Horn SR, Bortz CA, et al. The relationship between improvements in myelopathy and sagittal realignment in cervical deformity surgery outcomes. Spine 2018;43:1117–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpova A, Arun R, Kalsi-Ryan S, et al. Do quantitative magnetic resonance imaging parameters correlate with the clinical presentation and functional outcomes after surgery in cervical spondylotic myelopathy? A prospective multicenter study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014;39:1488–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arvin B, Kalsi-Ryan S, Mercier D, et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging is associated with baseline neurological status and can predict postoperative recovery in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:1170–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longo UG, Berton A, Denaro L, Salvatore G, Denaro V. Development of the Italian version of the modified Japanese orthopaedic association score (mJOA-IT): cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, validity and responsiveness. Eur Spine J 2016;25:2952–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakashima H, Tetreault LA, Nagoshi N, et al. Does age affect surgical outcomes in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy? Results from the prospective multicenter AOSpine International study on 479 patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:734–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagoshi N, Tetreault LA, Nakashima H, et al. Do Caucasians and East Asians have different outcomes following surgery for the treatment of degenerative cervical myelopathy? Spine 2016;41:1428–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fehlings MG, Kopjar B, Ibrahim A, et al. Geographic variations in clinical presentation and outcomes of decompressive surgery in patients with symptomatic degenerative cervical myelopathy: analysis of a prospective, international multicenter cohort study of 757 patients. Spine J 2018;18:593–605.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liow MHL, Lee M, Goh GS-H, et al. Poorer fusion outcomes in diabetic cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients undergoing single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion does not compromise functional outcomes and quality of life. Spine 2018;43:477–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abode-Iyamah KO, Stoner KE, Grossbach AJ, et al. Effects of brain derived neurotrophic factor Val66Met polymorphism in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Clin Neurosci 2016;24:117–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Level of Evidence and Recommendations. https://www.ebmconsult.com/articles/levels-of-evidence-and-recommendations.
   Google Scholar
• Guyatt GH, Andrew DO, Regina K, et al. GRADE: What is ‘Quality of evidence’ and why is it important to clinicians? Chinese J Evidence-Based Med 2009;336(7651):995–8.
   Google Scholar