These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

298 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27662270)

  • 1. Correlations Between the SF-36, the Oswestry-Disability Index and Rolland-Morris Disability Questionnaire in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Decompression According to Types of Spine Origin Pain.
    Ko S; Chae S
    Clin Spine Surg; 2017 Jul; 30(6):E804-E808. PubMed ID: 27662270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Usefulness of preoperative Short Form-36 Mental Component Score as a prognostic factor in patients who underwent decompression surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.
    Ko S; Choi W
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Sep; 101(39):e30231. PubMed ID: 36181126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Prospective analysis of clinical evaluation and self-assessment by patients after decompression surgery for degenerative lumbar canal stenosis.
    Haro H; Maekawa S; Hamada Y
    Spine J; 2008; 8(2):380-4. PubMed ID: 17433781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Construct validity and responsiveness of commonly used patient reported outcome instruments in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.
    Vishwanathan K; Braithwaite I
    J Clin Orthop Trauma; 2021 May; 16():125-131. PubMed ID: 33717946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Are the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index interchangeable in patients after lumbar spinal fusion?
    Kersten RFMR; Fikkers J; Wolterbeek N; Öner FC; van Gaalen SM
    J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil; 2021; 34(4):605-611. PubMed ID: 33646141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Changes in the Oswestry Disability Index that predict improvement after lumbar fusion.
    Djurasovic M; Glassman SD; Dimar JR; Crawford CH; Bratcher KR; Carreon LY
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 Nov; 17(5):486-90. PubMed ID: 22998402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bilateral versus unilateral interlaminar approach for bilateral decompression in patients with single-level degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a multicenter retrospective study of 175 patients on postoperative pain, functional disability, and patient satisfaction.
    den Boogert HF; Keers JC; Marinus Oterdoom DL; Kuijlen JM
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2015 Sep; 23(3):326-35. PubMed ID: 26091439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. The sagittal spinal profile type: a principal precondition for surgical decision making in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.
    Bayerl SH; Pöhlmann F; Finger T; Franke J; Woitzik J; Vajkoczy P
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2017 Nov; 27(5):552-559. PubMed ID: 28862573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Predicting SF-6D utility scores from the Oswestry disability index and numeric rating scales for back and leg pain.
    Carreon LY; Glassman SD; McDonough CM; Rampersaud R; Berven S; Shainline M
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Sep; 34(19):2085-9. PubMed ID: 19730215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluating the correlation and responsiveness of patient-reported pain with function and quality-of-life outcomes after spine surgery.
    DeVine J; Norvell DC; Ecker E; Fourney DR; Vaccaro A; Wang J; Andersson G
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Oct; 36(21 Suppl):S69-74. PubMed ID: 21897347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Minimum clinically important difference of major patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.
    Ogura Y; Ogura K; Kobayashi Y; Kitagawa T; Yonezawa Y; Takahashi Y; Yoshida K; Yasuda A; Shinozaki Y; Ogawa J
    Clin Neurol Neurosurg; 2020 Sep; 196():105966. PubMed ID: 32485521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Can the anxiety domain of EQ-5D and mental health items from SF-36 help predict outcomes after surgery for lumbar degenerative disorders?
    Carreon LY; Djurasovic M; Dimar JR; Owens RK; Crawford CH; Puno RM; Bratcher KR; McGraw KE; Glassman SD
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Sep; 25(3):352-6. PubMed ID: 27153141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Direction and Severity of Root Compression Affects the Clinical Outcome After Decompression?: Correlation Between Radiologic Grading and Postoperative Prognosis in Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis.
    Ko S; Lee H; Chae S; Choi W; Lee S
    Clin Spine Surg; 2020 Oct; 33(8):E415-E419. PubMed ID: 32310831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Validation of the baseline severity stratification of objective functional impairment in lumbar degenerative disc disease.
    Stienen MN; Smoll NR; Joswig H; Corniola MV; Schaller K; Hildebrandt G; Gautschi OP
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2017 May; 26(5):598-604. PubMed ID: 28291406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Association of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score with the Oswestry Disability Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and short-form 36.
    Fujiwara A; Kobayashi N; Saiki K; Kitagawa T; Tamai K; Saotome K
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Jul; 28(14):1601-7. PubMed ID: 12865852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Responsiveness of Commonly Used Patient- Reported Outcome Instruments in Lumbar Microdiscectomy.
    Vishwanathan K; Braithwaite I
    Asian Spine J; 2019 Oct; 13(5):753-762. PubMed ID: 31154699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.