OBJECTIVEDigital transformation enables new possibilities to assess objective functional impairment (OFI) in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). This study examines the psychometric properties of an app-based 6-minute walking test (6WT) and determines OFI in patients with lumbar DDD.METHODSThe maximum 6-minute walking distance (6WD) was determined in patients with lumbar DDD. The results were expressed as raw 6WDs (in meters), as well as in standardized z-scores referenced to age- and sex-specific values of spine-healthy volunteers. The 6WT results were assessed for reliability and content validity using established disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures.RESULTSSeventy consecutive patients and 330 volunteers were enrolled. The mean 6WD was 370 m (SD 137 m) in patients with lumbar DDD. Significant correlations between 6WD and the Core Outcome Measures Index for the back (r = −0.31), Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) symptom severity (r = −0.32), ZCQ physical function (r = −0.33), visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain (r = −0.42), and VAS for leg pain (r = −0.32) were observed (all p < 0.05). The 6WT revealed good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.82), and the standard error of measurement was 58.3 m. A 4-tier severity stratification classified patients with z-scores > −1 (no OFI), −1 to −1.9 (mild OFI), −2 to −2.9 (moderate OFI), and ≤ −3 (severe OFI).CONCLUSIONSThe smartphone app-based self-measurement of the 6WT is a convenient, reliable, and valid way to determine OFI in patients with lumbar DDD. The 6WT app facilitates the digital evaluation and monitoring of patients with lumbar DDD.

No abstract

BACKGROUND The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test is the most commonly applied objective measure of functional impairment in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). OBJECTIVE To demonstrate external content validity of the TUG test. METHODS Consecutive adult patients, scheduled for elective lumbar spine surgery, were screened for enrollment into a prospective observational study. Disease severity was estimated by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; Visual Analog Scales [VAS], Core Outcome Measures Index [COMI] back, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire [ZCQ]) and the TUG test. Pearson correlation coefficients (PCCs) were used to describe the relationship between logarithmic TUG test raw values and PROMs RESULTS A total of 70 patients (mean age 55.9 ± 15.4 yr; 38.6% female; 27.1% previous spine surgery; 28.6% lower extremity motor deficits) with lumbar disc herniation (50%), lumbar spinal stenosis (34.3%), or instability requiring spinal fusion (15.7%) were included. The mean TUG test time was 10.8 ± 4.4 s; age- and sex-adjusted objective functional impairment (OFI) T-score was 134.2 ± 36.9. A total of 12 (17.1%) patients had mild, 14 (20%) moderate, and 9 (12.9%) severe OFI, while 35 (50%) had TUG test results within the normal population range (no OFI). PCCs between TUG test time and VAS back pain were r = 0.37 (P = .002), VAS leg pain r = 0.37 (P = .002), COMI back r = 0.50 (P &lt; .001), ZCQ symptom severity r = 0.41 (P &lt; .001), and ZCQ physical function r = 0.36 (P = .002). CONCLUSION This external validation demonstrated similar OFI rates and PCCs between logarithmic TUG test results and PROMs compared to the original article from 2016. These findings support the TUG test being a quick, easy-to-use objective test, which provides the physician with a robust estimate of pain and functional impairment.

Objective. The aim of this study was to provide external validation of the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of the Timed-up-and-go (TUG) test. Summary of Background Data. The TUG test is one of the best explored and most frequently applied objective task-based functional outcome measure in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). The increased use of the TUG test is based on its solid psychometric properties; however, an external validation of the originally determined MCID is lacking. Methods. Forty-nine patients with lumbar DDD, scheduled for elective spine surgery, were assessed pre-and 6-weeks (W6) postoperative. MCID values were calculate for raw TUG test times (seconds) and standardized TUG z scores using three different computation methods and the following established patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as anchors: Visual Analog Scales (VAS), Core Outcome Measures Index Back, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ).Results. The three computation methods generated a range of MCID values, depending on the PROM used as anchor, from 0.9 s (z score of 0.3) based on the VAS leg pain to 3.0 seconds (z score of 2.7) based on the ZCQ physical function scale. The average MCID of the TUG test across all anchors and computation methods was 2.1 s (z score of 1.5). According to the average MCID of raw TUG test values or TUG z scores, 41% and 43% of patients classified as W6 responders to surgery, respectively. Conclusion. This study confirms the ordinally reported TUG MCID values in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar. A TUG test time change of 2.1 seconds (or TUG z score change of 1.5) indicates an objective and clinically meaningful change in functional status. This report facilitates the interpretation of TUG test results in clinical routine as well as in research.

Epidural steroid injection (ESI) represents a popular treatment option in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). The main objective of the article was to determine whether the 6-minute walking test (6WT) could assist in the discrimination between ESI responders and nonresponders. We used a validated 6WT smartphone application to assess self-measured objective functional impairment (OFI) in 3 patients with DDD undergoing ESI. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Core Outcome Measures Index and the Oswestry Disability Index, were obtained at baseline and at the 3-, 7-, and 28-day follow-up. Descriptive analyses were used to compare PROMs with OFI over time. Two patients responded well to the ESI, illustrated by clinically meaningful improvements in PROMs. This improvement was accompanied by a substantial increase in the 6WT distance (case I: 358 m vs. 517 m and case II: 296 m vs. 625 m). One patient reported only moderate improvement in leg pain and conflicting results in the other PROMs. The 6WT demonstrated a persistent OFI (487 m vs. 488 m). This patient was considered a nonresponder and underwent surgical treatment. This case series illustrates the feasibility of the smartphone-based 6WT as a tool to assess OFI in patients undergoing ESI for lumbar DDD.