1441 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21332281)
1. Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
Parker SL; Adogwa O; Paul AR; Anderson WN; Aaronson O; Cheng JS; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 May; 14(5):598-604. PubMed ID: 21332281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after extension of fusion for adjacent-segment disease.
Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau D; Adogwa O; Cheng JS; Anderson WN; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 Jan; 16(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 21962034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Defining the minimum clinically important difference for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: insights from the Quality Outcomes Database.
Asher AL; Kerezoudis P; Mummaneni PV; Bisson EF; Glassman SD; Foley KT; Slotkin JR; Potts EA; Shaffrey ME; Shaffrey CI; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Park P; Fu KM; Devin CJ; Archer KR; Chotai S; Chan AK; Virk MS; Bydon M
Neurosurg Focus; 2018 Jan; 44(1):E2. PubMed ID: 29290132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: understanding clinical versus statistical significance.
Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau DN; Adogwa O; Anderson WN; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 May; 16(5):471-8. PubMed ID: 22324801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Assessment of the minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical article.
Parker SL; Godil SS; Shau DN; Mendenhall SK; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Feb; 18(2):154-60. PubMed ID: 23176164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Determination of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in pain, disability, and quality of life after revision fusion for symptomatic pseudoarthrosis.
Parker SL; Adogwa O; Mendenhall SK; Shau DN; Anderson WN; Cheng JS; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
Spine J; 2012 Dec; 12(12):1122-8. PubMed ID: 23158968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Determination of the minimum improvement in pain, disability, and health state associated with cost-effectiveness: introduction of the concept of minimum cost-effective difference.
Parker SL; McGirt MJ
Neurosurgery; 2012 Dec; 71(6):1149-55. PubMed ID: 22986596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales.
Copay AG; Glassman SD; Subach BR; Berven S; Schuler TC; Carreon LY
Spine J; 2008; 8(6):968-74. PubMed ID: 18201937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Do measures of surgical effectiveness at 1 year after lumbar spine surgery accurately predict 2-year outcomes?
Adogwa O; Elsamadicy AA; Han JL; Cheng J; Karikari I; Bagley CA
J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Dec; 25(6):689-696. PubMed ID: 26722957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Modeled cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion compared with posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis using N(2)QOD data.
Carreon LY; Glassman SD; Ghogawala Z; Mummaneni PV; McGirt MJ; Asher AL
J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Jun; 24(6):916-21. PubMed ID: 26895529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effect of complications within 90 days on patient-reported outcomes 3 months and 12 months following elective surgery for lumbar degenerative disease.
Chotai S; Parker SL; Sivaganesan A; Sielatycki JA; Asher AL; McGirt MJ; Devin CJ
Neurosurg Focus; 2015 Dec; 39(6):E8. PubMed ID: 26621422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A prospective, multi-institutional comparative effectiveness study of lumbar spine surgery in morbidly obese patients: does minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion result in superior outcomes?
Adogwa O; Carr K; Thompson P; Hoang K; Darlington T; Perez E; Fatemi P; Gottfried O; Cheng J; Isaacs RE
World Neurosurg; 2015 May; 83(5):860-6. PubMed ID: 25535070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Revisions for screw malposition and clinical outcomes after robot-guided lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis.
Schröder ML; Staartjes VE
Neurosurg Focus; 2017 May; 42(5):E12. PubMed ID: 28463610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Determination of the minimum improvement in pain, disability, and health state associated with cost-effectiveness: introduction of the concept of minimum cost-effective difference.
Parker SL; McGirt MJ
Neurosurgery; 2015 Mar; 76 Suppl 1():S64-70. PubMed ID: 25692370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prediction model for outcome after low-back surgery: individualized likelihood of complication, hospital readmission, return to work, and 12-month improvement in functional disability.
McGirt MJ; Sivaganesan A; Asher AL; Devin CJ
Neurosurg Focus; 2015 Dec; 39(6):E13. PubMed ID: 26621411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis: 5-year follow-up from the prospective multicenter Quality Outcomes Database registry.
Chan AK; Bydon M; Bisson EF; Glassman SD; Foley KT; Shaffrey CI; Potts EA; Shaffrey ME; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Park P; Wang MY; Fu KM; Slotkin JR; Asher AL; Virk MS; Michalopoulos GD; Guan J; Haid RW; Agarwal N; Park C; Chou D; Mummaneni PV
Neurosurg Focus; 2023 Jan; 54(1):E2. PubMed ID: 36587409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Usefulness of minimum clinically important difference for assessing patients with subaxial degenerative cervical spine disease: statistical versus substantial clinical benefit.
Auffinger B; Lam S; Shen J; Thaci B; Roitberg BZ
Acta Neurochir (Wien); 2013 Dec; 155(12):2345-54; discussion 2355. PubMed ID: 24136679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Is the Oswestry Disability Index a valid measure of response to sacroiliac joint treatment?
Copay AG; Cher DJ
Qual Life Res; 2016 Feb; 25(2):283-292. PubMed ID: 26245709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinically important deterioration in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery: a choice of evaluation methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and pain scales: clinical article.
Gum JL; Glassman SD; Carreon LY
J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Nov; 19(5):564-8. PubMed ID: 24010900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Minimally invasive versus open fusion for Grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database.
Mummaneni PV; Bisson EF; Kerezoudis P; Glassman S; Foley K; Slotkin JR; Potts E; Shaffrey M; Shaffrey CI; Coric D; Knightly J; Park P; Fu KM; Devin CJ; Chotai S; Chan AK; Virk M; Asher AL; Bydon M
Neurosurg Focus; 2017 Aug; 43(2):E11. PubMed ID: 28760035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
