Investigation of Functional Disability, Pain, And Quality of Life in Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy by Gender

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to compare pain, functional limitation, disability, and quality of life in females and males with cervical radiculopathy and to evaluate their relationship. Material and Method: A total of 111 patients of both genders, 81 (72.98%) females and 30 (27.02%) males, were included in the study. Pain and numbness of the patients were evaluated with the Numeric rating scale (NRS), neck disabilities with the Neck disability index (NDI), and quality of life with the EuroQol Five-Dimensions– 3-Level (EQ-5D-3L). Functional limitation caused by cervical radiculopathy was assessed with the Cervical radiculopathy impact scale (CRIS). Results: The average age of the patients was 45.59±11.00. While the severity of neck and arm pain was similar between genders (p>0.05), numbness radiating to the arm and hand was more severe in females (p=0.027). Also, female's quality of life outcomes was worse than males (p<0.05). However, there was no difference between genders in CRIS subheading scores (p>0.05). This study determined a moderate negative correlation between CRIS symptoms and quality of life parameters and a moderate-weak correlation between CRIS symptoms with pain and numbness (p<0.01). Conclusion: This study determined that female's disability and quality of life were worse. In addition, the severity of numbness females feel in the upper extremities is higher. Additionally, functional limitation is associated with pain and quality of life in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

Keywords

• Cervical radiculopathy
• functional disability
• pain
• quality of life

Kaynakça

1. Magnus W, Viswanath O, Viswanathan VK, Mesfin FB. Cervical radiculopathy. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.
2. Fakhoury J, Dowling TJ. Cervical degenerative disc disease. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.
3. Almasi A, Jafari S, Solouki L, Darvishi N. The best surgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Adv Biomed Res. 2023;12:191.
4. Luyao H, Xiaoxiao Y, Tianxiao F, et al. Management of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: a systematic review. Global Spine J. 2022;12:1912-24.
5. Rafiq S, Zafar H, Gillani SA, et al. Effects of neurodynamic mobilization on health-related quality of life and cervical deep flexors endurance in patients of cervical radiculopathy: a randomized trial. Biomed Res Int. 2022;2022:9385459.
6. Rafiq S, Zafar H, Gillani SA, et al. Comparison of neural mobilization and conservative treatment on pain, range of motion, and disability in cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2022;17:e0278177.
7. Kang KC, Jang TS, Jung CH. Cervical radiculopathy: focus on factors for better surgical outcomes and operative techniques. Asian Spine J. 2022;16:995-1012.
8. Peene L, Cohen SP, Brouwer B, et al. 2. Cervical radicular pain. Pain Pract. 2023;23(7):800-17.

9. Prablek M, Gadot R, Xu DS, Ropper AE. Neck pain: differential diagnosis and management. Neurol Clin. 2023;41:77-85.
10. Gärtner FR, Marinus J, van den Hout WB, et al. The Cervical Radiculopathy Impact Scale: development and evaluation of a new functional outcome measure for cervical radicular syndrome. Disabil Rehabil. 2020;42:1894-905.
11. Çelenlioğlu AE, Şencan S, Saçaklıdır R, et al. Cervical Radiculopathy Impact Scale: translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version. Arch Rheumatol. 2022;37:574-83.
12. Singh S, Sathe PK, Sathe A, Kumar DV. Evaluation of functional disability in cervical radiculopathy patients. Indian J Health Sci Biomed Res. 2023;16:103-10.
13. Telci EA, Karaduman A, Yakut Y, et al. The cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of neck disability index in patients with neck pain: a Turkish version study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:1732-5.
14. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ. 1996;5:141-54.
15. Kahyaoğlu Süt H, Ünsar S. Is EQ-5D a valid quality of life instrument in patients with acute coronary syndrome? Anadolu Kardiyol Derg. 2011;11:156-62.
16. Schober P, Boer C, Schwarte LA. Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation. Anesth Analg. 2018;126:1763-8.
17. Kuo DT, Tadi P. Cervical Spondylosis. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.
18. Williams J, D'Amore P, Redlich N, et al. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: evaluation and management. Orthop Clin North Am. 2022;53:509-21.
19. Paraskevopoulos E, Koumantakis G, Papandreou M. The effectiveness of neuromobilization in patients with cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Sport Rehabil. 2022;32:325-34.
20. Alagingi NK. Chronic neck pain and postural rehabilitation: A literature review. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2022;32:201-6.
21. Keith RA. Functional status and health status. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:478-83.
22. Wang WT, Olson SL, Campbell AH, et al. Effectiveness of physical therapy for patients with neck pain: an individualized approach using a clinical decision-making algorithm. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;82:203-21.
23. Plener J, Csiernik B, To D, et al. Conservative management of cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review. Clin J Pain. 2023;39:138-46.
24. Zaina F, Côté P, Cancelliere C, et al. A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for persons with non-specific low back pain with and without radiculopathy: identification of best evidence for rehabilitation to develop the who's package of interventions for rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2023;104:1913-27.
25. Oe S, Togawa D, Yoshida G, et al. Cut-off values of and factors associated with a negative influence on Neck Disability Index. Eur Spine J. 2018;27:1423-31.