Objective: To assess the impact of bilateral versus unilateral interbody cages on outcomes for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) procedures.Methods: A retrospective review for primary, elective, single-level MIS TLIF procedures with bilateral posterior instrumentation from 2008–2020 was performed. Patients were grouped according to unilateral or bilateral interbody cage use. Procedures performed without static interbody cages or indicated for trauma, infection, malignancy were excluded. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, 12-item Short Form health survey physical composite score (SF-12 PCS), PatientReported Outcome Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF). PROs were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Change in PROs (Δ) was calculated and compared between groups. Achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated using established values from the literature. Achievement rates were compared between groups using logistic regression.Results: The study included 151 patients, with 111 unilateral and 40 bilateral cage placements. Charlson Comorbidity Index, diabetes, and insurance status differed between groups (p < 0.050). Prevalence of degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis (both p ≤ 0.002), operative level (p = 0.003), and postoperative length of stay (p = 0.022) significantly differed between groups. The unilateral group had lower 1-year arthrodesis rates (p = 0.035). Preoperative VAS leg (p = 0.017) and SF-12 PCS (p = 0.045) were worse for the unilateral group. ΔPROMIS-PF was greater for the bilateral group at 2 years (p = 0.001). Majority of patients achieved an overall MCID for all PROs, except VAS leg (bilateral group).Conclusion: While preoperative status and postoperative arthrodesis rates differed, patients achieved an MCID at similar rates regardless of use of unilateral or bilateral cages.

Background: The use of telemedicine for postoperative visits is increasing, especially in rural areas. Few studies have investigated its use for arthroscopic shoulder patients. This study aims to evaluate patient satisfaction with telemedicine for postoperative clinic visits following arthroscopic shoulder procedures in a rural setting.Methods: Patients were prospectively enrolled using the following exclusion criteria: <18 years, open procedures, and non-compliance follow-up at 6 weeks postoperatively. All patients completed a 13-question satisfaction survey, while telemedicine patients completed an additional, separate seven-question survey. Patients who switched groups completed a four-question prompt to determine the reasons for switching. Differences between groups were evaluated by either Student t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test.Results: The study enrolled 32 patients, with five patients following up by telemedicine and 27 in-person. Age and distance from clinic were similar between patients who were assigned to the telemedicine group, completed the telemedicine visit, and opted for in-person visits (all p>0.05). Patient satisfaction did not vary significantly based on care by the surgeon, concerns being addressed, thoroughness of visit, overall clinical assessment at a prior visit, and improvements in pain and physical function (all p>0.05). Among patients who opted out of telemedicine visits, the most common reason was a preference to meet in-person but these patients agreed that telemedicine visits are a good idea.Conclusion: Regardless of type of follow-up, individuals reported similar levels of satisfaction with treatment during the visit and improvements in pain and physical function.

No abstract

Objective: Our study aims to evaluate the correlation of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS PF) with legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) among patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Methods: A prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed for ACDF surgeries performed between May 2015 and September 2017. Inclusion criteria were primary elective, single-or multilevel ACDFs for degenerative spinal pathology. Patients lacking preoperative or 2-year PROMIS PF surveys were excluded. Mean scores were calculated for visual analogue scale (VAS) neck, VAS arm, Neck Disability Index (NDI), 12-Item Short Form Physical Component Score (SF-12 PCS), and PROMIS PF at preoperative and 6-week, 12-week, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year postoperative timepoints. A t-test and Pearson correlation coefficient were utilized to evaluate score improvement and PROM relationships respectively. Results: The 50 subject cohort was 60.0% male, 50% obese (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ) and had an average age of 50.9 years. Significant improvements were demonstrated for VAS neck and NDI at all postoperative timepoints (p < 0.001) and for SF-12 and PROMIS PF at all timepoints except 6 weeks (p ≤ 0.025). VAS arm improvement was seen up to 1 year (p ≤ 0.016). PROMIS PF demonstrated strong correlations with NDI and SF-12 PCS at all evaluated timepoints and with VAS neck at all postoperative timepoints except 6 weeks (all p < 0.01). Conclusion: PROMIS PF was strongly correlated with pain, disability, and physical function up to 2 years for patients undergoing ACDF. Our results support the long-term validity of PROMIS PF for measurement of patient-reported physical function among ACDF cohorts.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a validated tool for assessing patient reported outcomes in spine surgery. However, PROMIS is vulnerable to non-response bias. The purpose of this study is to characterize differences in patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores between patients who do and do not complete PROMIS physical function (PF) surveys following lumbar spine surgery.Methods: A prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed for primary, elective lumbar spine procedures from 2015 to 2019. Outcome measures for Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Visual Analogue Score (VAS) back & leg, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and 12-Item Short Form Physical Composite Summary (SF-12 PCS) were recorded at both preoperative and postoperative (6-week, 12-week, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year) timepoints. Completion rates for PROMIS PF surveys were recorded and patients were categorized into groups based on completion. Differences in mean scores at each timepoint between groups was determined.Results: 809 patients were included with an average age of 48.1 years. No significant differences were observed for all outcome measures between PROMIS completion groups preoperatively. Postoperative PHQ-9, VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI scores differed significantly between groups through 1-year (all p<0.05). SF-12 PCS differed significantly only at 6-weeks (p=0.003). Conclusion:Patients who did not complete PROMIS PF surveys had significantly poorer outcomes than those that did in terms of postoperative depressive symptoms, pain, and disability. This suggests that patients completing PROMIS questionnaires may represent a healthier cohort than the overall lumbar spine population.

Objective:The clinical utility of anterior cervical plating for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures remains controversial. This study aims to compare the impact of cervical plating on achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) up to 2-years following ACDF.Methods: Patients undergoing primary, single-level ACDF procedures were grouped based on whether their procedure included application of an anterior cervical plate. Demographics, preoperative spinal diagnoses, operative characteristics, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) were compared between plating groups. Achievement of an MCID was assessed using the following previously established thresholds: SF-12 PCS 8.1, VAS neck 2.6, VAS arm 4.1, NDI 8.5. Rates of MCID achievement were compared between groups. Results:The cohort included 192 patients of whom 102 received plating and 90 received no plating. Plating status was significantly associated with Charlson Comorbidity Index and insurance status. Operative duration and estimated blood loss were significantly greater for the plating group. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements at the majority of postoperative timepoints. Significant intergroup differences in PROM improvement were demonstrated for VAS neck and NDI at 6-weeks. Rates of MCID achievement differed significantly between groups for NDI at 6-weeks, and 12-weeks, and SF-12 PCS overall. Conclusion:Patients improved significantly in terms of pain, disability and physical function, regardless of plating status, and with the exception of early neck pain and disability, these improvements were similar between groups. Patients that underwent plating as part of their ACDF procedure achieved an MCID for physical function at lower rates overall.