To explore the association between preoperative physical performance with short-and long-term postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion (LSF). Design: Retrospective cohort. Setting: University hospital. Participants: Seventy-seven patients (N=77) undergoing elective LSF were preoperatively screened on patient demographics, patient-reported outcome measures, and physical performance measures (movement control, back muscle endurance strength and extensor strength, aerobic capacity, flexibility). Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Associations between preoperative variables and inpatient functional recovery, hospital length of stay (LOS), and 1-to 2-year postoperative pain reduction were explored using random forest analyses assessing the relative influence of the variable on the outcome. Results: Aerobic capacity was associated with fast functional recovery <4 days and prolonged functional recovery >5 days (median z scores=7.1 and 12.0). Flexibility (median z score=4.3) and back muscle endurance strength (median z score=7.8) were associated with fast functional recovery <4 days. Maximum back extensor strength was associated with prolonged functional recovery >5 days (median z score=8.6). Flexibility (median z score=5.1) and back muscle endurance strength (median z score=13.5) were associated with short LOS <5 days. Aerobic capacity (median z score=8.7) was associated with prolonged LOS >7 days. Maximum back extensor strength (median z score=3.8) was associated with 1-to 2-year postoperative pain reduction and aerobic capacity (median z score=2.8) was tentative. Conclusions: Physical performance measures were associated with both short-and long-term outcomes after LSF. Adding these measures to prediction models predicting outcomes after LSF may increase their accuracy.
Purpose
On average, 56% of patients report a clinically relevant reduction in pain after lumbar spinal fusion (LSF). Preoperatively identifying which patient will benefit from LSF is paramount to improve clinical decision making, expectation management and treatment selection. Therefore, this multicentre study aimed to develop and validate a clinical prediction tool for a clinically relevant reduction in pain 1 to 2 years after elective LSF.
Methods
The outcomes were defined as a clinically relevant reduction in predominant (worst reported pain in back or legs) pain 1 to 2 years after LSF. Patient-reported outcome measures and patient characteristics from 202 patients were used to develop a prediction model by logistic regression. Data from 251 patients were used to validate the model.
Results
Nonsmokers (odds ratio = 0.41 [95% confidence interval = 0.19–0.87]), with lower Body Mass Index (0.93 [0.85–1.01]), shorter pain duration (0.49 [0.20–1.19]), lower American Society of Anaesthesiologists score (4.82 [1.35–17.25]), higher Visual Analogue Scale score for predominant pain (1.05 [1.02–1.08]), lower Oswestry Disability Index (0.96 [0.93–1.00]) and higher RAND-36 mental component score (1.03 [0.10–1.06]) preoperatively had a higher chance of a clinically relevant reduction in predominant pain. The area under the curve of the externally validated model yielded 0.68. A nomogram was developed to aid clinical decision making.
Conclusions
Using the developed nomogram surgeons can estimate the probability of achieving a clinically relevant pain reduction 1 to 2 years after LSF and consequently inform patients on expected outcomes when considering treatment.
Purpose To determine the content of current Dutch expert hospital physiotherapy practice for patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion (LSF), to gain insight into expert-based clinical practice. Methods At each hospital where LSF is performed, one expert physiotherapist received an e-mailed questionnaire, about pre-and postoperative physiotherapy and discharge after LSF. The level of uniformity in goals and interventions was graded on a scale from no uniformity (50-60 %) to very strong uniformity (91-100 %).Results LSF was performed at 34 of the 67 contacted hospitals. From those 34 hospitals, 28 (82 %) expert physiotherapists completed the survey. Twenty-one percent of the respondents saw patients preoperatively, generally to provide information. Stated postoperative goals and administered interventions focused mainly on performing transfers safely and keeping the patient informed. Outcome measures were scarcely used. There was no uniformity regarding advice on the activities of daily living. Conclusion Dutch perioperative expert physiotherapy for patients undergoing LSF is variable and lacks structural outcome assessment. Studies evaluating the effectiveness of best-practice physiotherapy are warranted.
IntroductionPatients with osteoporosis may suffer from a fracture after minimal trauma. Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are among the most common fractures, often leading to substantial pain. There is a need for evidence-based conservative treatment to aid in the management of OVCFs. The objective of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dynamic bracing in addition to standard care for improving quality of life (QoL) in patients suffering from an OVCF.Methods and analysisNinety-eight postmenopausal women from two academic and four community hospitals with a recent symptomatic thoracolumbar OVCF will be randomised into either the standard care or dynamic bracing group. In the dynamic bracing group, the Spinova Osteo orthosis will be used in addition to standard care. Standard care comprises pain control with analgesics, physical therapy and osteoporosis medication. The primary outcome parameter is QoL 1 year after inclusion, as measured by the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41). Secondary outcome parameters are pain, pain medication used, functional disability, sagittal spinal alignment, recurrence rate of OVCFs and physical activity in daily life. A trial-based economic evaluation consisting of both cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis will be performed based on empirical data obtained in the RCT. A process evaluation will assess the feasibility of dynamic bracing. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months and 12 months.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted by the Medical Ethics Committee, University Hospital Maastricht and Maastricht University (METC azM/UM) (NL74552.068.20/METC 20-055). Patients will be included only after verification of eligibility and obtaining written informed consent. Results will be disseminated via the Dutch National Osteoporosis Patient Society and via publications and conferences.Trial registration numberNL8746.
Purpose
To explore risk profiles of patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) and their association with short-term recovery of patient after surgery.
Methods
Forty-nine patients scheduled for elective 1–3 level LSF between March 2019 and June 2020 were included. Patients underwent a preoperative risk screening, consisting of an anamnesis, questionnaires and physical performance tests. A latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify possible risk profiles within this population.
Results
Two risk profiles could be established: a fit and deconditioned risk profile. A significant between-profile difference was found in smoking status (p = 0.007), RAND36-PCS (p < 0.001), Timed Up and Go (TUG) (p < 0.001), de Morton Morbidity Index (DEMMI) (p < 0.001), finger floor distance (p = 0.050), motor control (p = 0.020) and steep ramp test (p = 0.005). Moreover, the fit risk profile had a significant shorter time to functional recovery (3.65 days versus 4.89 days, p = 0.013) and length of hospital stay (5.06 days versus 6.00 days, p = 0.008) compared to the deconditioned risk profile. No differences in complication rates between both risk profiles could be established. Allocation to a risk profile was associated with the functional recovery rate (p = 0.042), but not with LOS or complications.
Conclusion
This study found a fit and deconditioned risk profile. The patients with a fit risk profile perceived a better quality of life, performed better in mobility, motor control, cardiopulmonary tests and showed also a significant shorter stay in the hospital and a shorter time to functional recovery. Preoperatively establishing a patient’s risk profile could aid in perioperative care planning and preoperative decision-making.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.