Abstract
Introduction
The Odom's criteria are, since 1958, a widely used 4-point rating scale for assessing the clinical outcome after cervical spine surgery. Surprisingly, the Odom's criteria have never been validated. The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and validity of the Odom's criteria for the evaluation of surgical procedures of the cervical spine.
Methods
Patients with degenerative cervical spine disease were included and divided into two groups, based on their most predominant symptom: myelopathy or radiculopathy. Reliability was assessed with inter-rater and test-retest design using a quadratic weighted Kappa coefficient. Construct validity was assessed by means of hypothesis testing with related constructs. To evaluate if the Odom's criteria could act as a global perceived effect (GPE) scale, we assessed concurrent validity by comparing the areas under the curves (AUCs) of the receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs) with both the Odom's criteria, as the GPE as an anchor.
Results
A total of 110 patients were included in the study. Overall inter-rater reliability was k=0.77 and the test-retest reliability k=0.93. Inter-rater reliability for the radiculopathy patients was κ=0.81 and for myelopathy patients κ=0.68. More than 75% of the hypotheses were met. The AUCs showed similar characteristics between the Odom's criteria and GPE.
Conclusion
The Odom's criteria meet the predefined criteria for reliability and validity. Therefore, the Odom's criteria may be used to measure surgical outcome after a cervical spine procedure. Results of previous studies that have been deemed less trustworthy, because of the use of the Odom's criteria, should be reconsidered.
No conflicts of interests
No funding obtained
