Diagnostic accuracy of patient interview items and clinical tests for cervical radiculopathy.

ObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of patient interview items and clinical tests to diagnose cervical radiculopathy.DesignA prospective diagnostic accuracy study.ParticipantsConsecutive patients (N=134) with a suspicion of cervical radiculopathy were included. A medical specialist made the diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy based on the patient's clinical presentation and corresponding Magnetic Resonance Imaging findings. Participants completed a list of patient interview items and the clinical tests were performed by a physiotherapist.Main outcome measuresDiagnostic accuracy was determined in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive (+LR) and negative likelihood ratios (-LR). Sensitivity and specificity values ≥0.80 were considered high. We considered +LR≥5 and -LR≤0.20 moderate, and +LR≥10 and -LR≤0.10 high.ResultsThe history items 'arm pain worse than neck pain', 'provocation of symptoms when ironing', 'reduction of symptoms by walking with your hand in your pocket', the Spurling test and the presence of reduced reflexes showed high specificity and are therefore useful to increase the probability of cervical radiculopathy when positive. The presence of 'paraesthesia' and 'paraesthesia and/or numbness' showed high sensitivity, indicating that the absence of these patient interview items decreases the probability of cervical radiculopathy. Although most of these items had potentially relevant likelihood ratios, none showed moderate or high likelihood ratios.ConclusionsSeveral patient interview items, the Spurling test and reduced reflexes are useful to assist in the diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy. Because there is no gold standard for cervical radiculopathy, caution is required to not over-interpret diagnostic accuracy values

Clinical course and prognostic models for the conservative management of cervical radiculopathy: a prospective cohort study

© 2018, The Author(s). Purpose: To describe the clinical course and develop prognostic models for poor recovery in patients with cervical radiculopathy who are managed conservatively. Methods: Sixty-one consecutive adults with cervical radiculopathy who were referred for conservative management were included in a prospective cohort study, with 6- and 12-month follow-up assessments. Exclusion criteria were the presence of known serious pathology or spinal surgery in the past. Outcome measures were perceived recovery, neck pain intensity and disability level. Multiple imputation analyses were performed for missing values. Prognostic models were developed using multivariable logistic regression analyses, with bootstrapping techniques for internal validation. Results: About 55% of participants reported to be recovered at 6 and 12 months. All multivariable models contained 2 baseline predictors. Longer symptoms duration increased the risk of poor perceived recovery, whereas the presence of paresthesia decreased this risk. A higher neck pain intensity and a longer duration of symptoms increased the risk of poor relief of neck pain. A higher disability score increased the risk of poor relief of disability, and larger active range of rotation toward the affected side decreased this risk. Following bootstrapping, the explained variance of the models varied between 0.22 and 0.30, and the median area under the curve varied between 0.75 and 0.79. Conclusions: The clinical course of cervical radiculopathy appears to be long, with most of the reduction in symptoms occurring within the first 6 months. All prognostic models showed an adequate predictive performance with modest diagnostic accuracy and explained variance. Graphical abstract: These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.[Figure not available: see fulltext.]