Outcome Of Lumbar Spine Surgery Research Articles

Comparison of sleep improvement in patients undergoing lumbar spine decompression.

Degenerative spine conditions affect many people each year. These conditions have been shown to negatively impact pain, function, and patient quality of life (QOL), which often require surgical intervention. It is understood that sleep plays an important role in all of these factors. However, the relationship between sleep disruption and lumbar surgery is not well understood. The objective of this study was to use a large database to understand the relationship between sleep quality and lumbar spine surgery outcomes. The surgical database of the authors' institute was used to identify all patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery for degenerative spine disease from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2021. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) sleep disturbance scores were collected, and only patients with both pre- and postoperative scores were included. Additional measures related to disability, pain, and depression were also obtained. Chart review was performed to collect patient demographics, health risk factors, and information related to sleep disturbances such as sleep medication usage and prior sleep condition diagnosis. The study had 674 patients who met the criteria. At 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, there was a significant decrease in sleep disruption scores (i.e., sleep improvement), although these decreases were not greater than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). When stratified based on preoperative sleep quality, patients with poor preoperative scores (PROMIS sleep disruption > 63.04) showed a significant decrease in sleep disruption by 8.17 at 3 months, 7.99 at 6 months, and 7.21 at 12 months. All of these decreases were greater than the sleep disruption MCID of 6.5. Multivariate analysis showed high preoperative sleep disruption and improvement in PROMIS physical health were most associated with decreased postoperative sleep disruption at all postoperative time points. In patients with degenerative spine conditions, lumbar spine surgery offers improvement in sleep disruption for all patients. Those with poor preoperative sleep quality are more likely to see clinical improvement in their sleep disruption.

Implications of Preoperative Depression for Lumbar Spine Surgery Outcomes

Comorbid depression is common among patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease. Although a well-researched topic, the evidence of the role of depression in spine surgery outcomes remains inconclusive. To investigate the association between preoperative depression and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after lumbar spine surgery. A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Scopus, PsychInfo, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed from database inception to September 14, 2023. Included studies involved adults undergoing lumbar spine surgery and compared PROMs in patients with vs those without depression. Studies evaluating the correlation between preoperative depression and disease severity were also included. All data were independently extracted by 2 authors and independently verified by a third author. Study quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize data, and I2 was used to assess heterogeneity. Metaregression was performed to identify factors explaining the heterogeneity. The primary outcome was the standardized mean difference (SMD) of change from preoperative baseline to postoperative follow-up in PROMs of disability, pain, and physical function for patients with vs without depression. Secondary outcomes were preoperative and postoperative differences in absolute disease severity for these 2 patient populations. Of the 8459 articles identified, 44 were included in the analysis. These studies involved 21 452 patients with a mean (SD) age of 57 (8) years and included 11 747 females (55%). Among these studies, the median (range) follow-up duration was 12 (6-120) months. The pooled estimates of disability, pain, and physical function showed that patients with depression experienced a greater magnitude of improvement compared with patients without depression, but this difference was not significant (SMD, 0.04 [95% CI, -0.02 to 0.10]; I2 = 75%; P = .21). Nonetheless, patients with depression presented with worse preoperative disease severity in disability, pain, and physical function (SMD, -0.52 [95% CI, -0.62 to -0.41]; I2 = 89%; P < .001), which remained worse postoperatively (SMD, -0.52 [95% CI, -0.75 to -0.28]; I2 = 98%; P < .001). There was no significant correlation between depression severity and the primary outcome. A multivariable metaregression analysis suggested that age, sex (male to female ratio), percentage of comorbidities, and follow-up attrition were significant sources of variance. Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that, although patients with depression had worse disease severity both before and after surgery compared with patients without depression, they had significant potential for recovery in disability, pain, and physical function. Further investigations are needed to examine the association between spine-related disability and depression as well as the role of perioperative mental health treatments.

Association of prolonged symptom duration with poor outcomes in lumbar spine surgery: a Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative study.

There is a scarcity of large multicenter data on how preoperative lumbar symptom duration relates to postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The objective of this study was to determine the effect of preoperative and baseline symptom duration on PROs at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years after lumbar spine surgery. The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry was queried for all lumbar spine operations between January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021, with a follow-up of 2 years. Patients were stratified into three subgroups based on symptom duration: < 3 months, 3 months to < 1 year, and ≥ 1 year. The primary outcomes were reaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the PROs (i.e., leg pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF), EQ-5D, North American Spine Society satisfaction, and return to work). The EQ-5D score was also analyzed as a continuous variable to calculate quality-adjusted life years. Multivariable Poisson generalized estimating equation models were used to report adjusted risk ratios, with the < 3-month cohort used as the reference. There were 37,223 patients (4670 with < 3-month duration, 9356 with 3-month to < 1-year duration, and 23,197 with ≥ 1-year duration) available for analysis. Compared with patients with a symptom duration of < 1 year, patients with a symptom duration of ≥ 1 year were significantly less likely to achieve an MCID in PROMIS PF, EQ-5D, back pain relief, and leg pain relief at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Similar trends were observed for patient satisfaction and return to work. With the EQ-5D score as a continuous variable, a symptom duration of ≥ 1 year was associated with 0.04, 0.05, and 0.03 (p < 0.001) decreases in EQ-5D score at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery, respectively. A symptom duration of ≥ 1 year was associated with poorer outcomes on several outcome metrics. This suggests that timely referral and surgery for degenerative lumbar pathology may optimize patient outcome.

Assessment of the External Validity of Dialogue Support for Predicting Lumbar Spine Surgery Outcomes in a US Cohort.

External validation using prospectively collected data. To determine the model performance of "Dialogue Support" (DS) in predicting outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. To help clinicians discuss risk versus benefit with patients considering lumbar fusion surgery, DS has been made available online. As DS was created using a Swedish sample, there is a need to study how well DS performs in alternative populations. Preoperative data from patients enrolled in the Quality Outcomes Database were entered into DS. The probability for each patient to report satisfaction, achieve success (leg pain improvement ≥3), or have no leg pain 12 months after surgery was extracted and compared with their actual 12-month postoperative data. The ability of DS to identify patients in the Quality Outcomes Database who report satisfaction, achieve success, or have no leg pain 12 months after surgery was determined using Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, goodness-of-fit tests, and calibration plots. There was a significant improvement in all outcomes in 23,928 cases included in the analysis from baseline to 12 months postoperative. Most (84%) reported satisfaction, 67% achieved success, and 44% were pain-free 12 months postoperative. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that DS had a low ability to predict satisfaction [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.606], success (AUC = 0.546), and being pain-free (AUC = 0.578) at 12 months postoperative; poor fit for satisfaction (<0.001) and being pain-free ( P = 0.004), but acceptable fit for success ( P = 0.052). Calibration plots showed underestimation for satisfaction and success, but acceptable estimates for being pain-free. DS is not directly transferable to predict satisfaction and success after lumbar surgery in a US population. This may be due to differences in patient characteristics, weights of the variables included, or the exclusion of unknown variables associated with outcomes. Future studies to better understand and improve the transferability of these models are needed.

Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block for postoperative short-term outcomes in lumbar spine surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery usually suffer from moderate to severe acute pain. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has been applied to relieve acute pain in various surgeries and improve postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to further identify the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. This study also evaluates the outcomes of the erector spinae plane block compared with other regional blocks. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Embase, and CINAHL databases to identify all randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of ESPB on postoperative pain after lumbar spine surgery. The primary outcome is postoperative total opioid consumption in 24 hours. The secondary outcomes are postoperative pain scores, intraoperative opioid consumption, time to first rescue analgesia, number of patients requiring rescue analgesia, first time to ambulation after surgery, length of hospital stay, patients' satisfaction score, and postoperative side effects such as postoperative nausea and vomiting, itching. A total of 19 randomized controlled trials are included in the final analysis. Compared with no/sham block, ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block can decrease perioperative opioid consumption including intraoperative opioid consumption: standardized mean difference (SMD) = -3.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-3.99, -2.09), P < .01, and opioid consumption postoperatively: (SMD = -2.80, 95% CI [-3.61, -2.00], P < .01); reduce postoperative pain at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours both at rest and movement; meanwhile shorten time to hospital length of stay: (SMD = -1.01, 95% CI [-1.72, 0.30], P = .006), decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR = 0.35, 95% CI [0.27, 0.46], P < .00001), and improve patient satisfaction (SMD = -2.03, 95% CI [-0.96, 3.11], P = .0002). But ultrasound-guided ESPB doesn't shorten the time to ambulation after surgery (SMD = -0.56, 95% CI [-1.21, 0.08], P = .09). Additionally, ESPB is not superior to other regional blocks (e.g., thoracolumbar interfascial plane/midtransverse process to pleura block). This meta-analysis demonstrates that ultrasound-guided ESPB can provide effective postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery and improve postoperative outcomes, and it deserves to be recommended as an analgesic adjunct in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgeries.

Soreness or sng: a common symptom with differential clinical impact from pain in degenerative lumbar spine diseases

IntroductionSoreness is a common complaint in patients who receive lumbar spine surgery (LSS) for degenerative lumbar spine diseases (DLSD). However, soreness is not assessed independently and its impacts on outcomes...

A Conceptual Model for Spine Surgery Recovery: A Qualitative Study of Patients' Expectations, Experiences, and Satisfaction.

Qualitative interview study. The aim was to develop a conceptual model for Spine Surgery Recovery in order to better understand why patients undergo lumbar spine surgery and what factors influence patient satisfaction. Quantitative studies have assessed patients' expectations for lumbar spine surgery outcomes, with greater expectation fulfillment leading to higher satisfaction. However, there is limited literature using qualitative methods to understand the patient perspective from the decision to undergo lumbar spine surgery through long-term recovery. Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 20 participants (nine females, mean age ±SD=61.2±11.1yr) and three focus groups with 12 participants (nine females, mean age ±SD=62.0±10.9yr). Sessions were audio recorded and transcribed. Two independent researchers coded the transcripts using a hierarchical coding system. Major themes were identified and a conceptual model was developed. A total of 1355 coded quotes were analyzed. The decision to have lumbar spine surgery was influenced by chronic pain impact on daily function, pain coping, and patient expectations. Results demonstrated that fulfilled expectations and setting realistic expectations are key factors for patient satisfaction after surgery, while less known constructs of accepting limitations, adjusting expectations, and optimism were found by many patients to be essential for a successful recovery. Emotional factors of fear, anxiety, and depression were important aspects of presurgical and postsurgical experiences. Our Spine Surgery Recovery conceptual model provides guidance for future research and clinical practice to optimize treatment and improve overall patient satisfaction. Recommendations based on this model include the assessment of patient expectations and mental well-being throughout postoperative recovery as well as preoperatively to help set realistic expectations and improve satisfaction. Educational, acceptance-based or positive psychological interventions may be potentially beneficial for addressing key factors identified in this model.

Commentary: Association Between Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Commentary: Association Between Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Association Between Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Despite an increased understanding of the impact of socioeconomic status on neurosurgical outcomes, the impact of neighborhood-level social determinants on lumbar spine surgery patient-reported outcomes remains unknown. To evaluate the impact of geographic social deprivation on physical and mental health of lumbar surgery patients. A single-center retrospective cohort study analyzing patients undergoing lumbar surgery for degenerative disease from 2015 to 2018 was performed. Surgeries were categorized as decompression only or decompression with fusion. The area deprivation index was used to define social deprivation. Study outcomes included preoperative and change in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement (PROMIS) physical function (PF), pain interference (PI), depression, and anxiety (mean follow-up: 43.3 weeks). Multivariable imputation was performed for missing data. One-way analysis of variance and multivariable linear regression were used to evaluate the association between area deprivation index and PROMIS scores. In our cohort of 2010 patients, those with the greatest social deprivation had significantly worse mean preoperative PROMIS scores compared with the least-deprived cohort (mean difference [95% CI]-PF: -2.5 [-3.7 to -1.4]; PI: 3.0 [2.0-4.1]; depression: 5.5 [3.4-7.5]; anxiety: 6.0 [3.8-8.2], all P < .001), without significant differences in change in these domains at latest follow-up (PF: +0.5 [-1.2 to 2.2]; PI: -0.2 [-1.7 to 2.1]; depression: -2 [-4.0 to 0.1]; anxiety: -2.6 [-4.9 to 0.4], all P > .05). Lumbar spine surgery patients with greater social deprivation present with worse preoperative physical and mental health but experience comparable benefit from surgery than patients with less deprivation, emphasizing the need to further understand social and health factors that may affect both disease severity and access to care.

Postoperative outcomes after degenerative lumbar spine surgery in rheumatoid arthritis patients -a propensity score-matched analysis

BackgroundAlthough treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have evolved significantly since the introduction of biologic agents, degenerative lumbar disease in RA patients remains a major challenge. Well-controlled comparisons between RA patients and their non-RA counterparts have not yet been reported. The objective of the present study was to compare postoperative outcomes of lumbar spine surgery between RA and non-RA patients by a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.MethodsPatients who underwent primary posterior spine surgery for degenerative lumbar disease in our prospective multicenter study group between 2017 and 2020 were enrolled. Demographic data including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, diabetes mellitus, smoking, steroid usage, number of spinal levels involved, and preoperative patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores (numerical rating scale [NRS] for back pain and leg pain, Short Form-12 physical component summary [PCS], EuroQOL 5-dimension [EQ-5D], and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) were used to calculate a propensity score for RA diagnosis. One-to-one matching was performed and 1-year postoperative outcomes were compared between groups.ResultsAmong the 4567 patients included, 90 had RA (2.0%). RA patients in our cohort were more likely to be female, with lower BMI, higher ASA grade and lower current smoking rate than non-RA patients. Preoperative NRS scores for leg pain, PCS, EQ-5D, and ODI were worse in RA patients. Propensity score matching generated 61 pairs of RA and non-RA patients who underwent posterior lumbar surgery. After background adjustment, RA patients reported worse postoperative PCS (28.4 vs. 37.2, p = 0.008) and EQ-5D (0.640 vs. 0.738, p = 0.03), although these differences were not significant between RA and non-RA patients not on steroids.ConclusionsRA patients showed worse postoperative quality of life outcomes after posterior surgery for degenerative lumbar disease, while steroid-independent RA cases showed equivalent outcomes to non-RA patients.

Expandable vs Static Interbody Devices for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) has paved a way for minimally invasive surgical treatment of a wide variety of spine pathologies. Interbody devices are used to stabilize painful disc levels, provide indirect decompression of neural elements, correct deformity, restore lordosis, and provide a sound durable fusion. Through the years, new static and expandable interbody devices have been developed in an attempt to improve radiographic and clinical outcomes in lumbar spine surgery. The purpose of this article is to explore the advantages and disadvantages between static and expandable interbody devices when used in LLIF. Specifically, this article addresses the differences in subsidence, indirect decompression, restoration of lumbar lordosis, complications, patient-reported outcomes, and cost between static and expandable interbody devices.

Social Determinants of Health Influence Early Outcomes Following Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Background: Disparities among social determinants of health (SDoH) can impact overall well-being and surgical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to identify SDoH for patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery and evaluate their relationship to the postoperative outcomes of length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and readmissions. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery from July 2017 to January 2021. We used a self-reported SDoH survey in conjunction with the electronic medical record to gather patient information. Multivariate analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between patient demographics, SDoH, and postoperative outcomes. Results: A total of 951 patients underwent lumbar spine surgery: 484 (50.9%) had decompressive laminectomy alone without fusion, and 467 (49.1%) had decompressive laminectomy with instrumented posterolateral fusion. When controlling for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, and surgery type, the SDoH of being currently married or having a life partner was associated with shorter LOS and decreased likelihood of discharge to a skilled nursing facility. Financial strain was associated with longer LOS, while attending church was associated with a decreased likelihood of 30-day emergency department (ED) return. Conclusion: This study identified various SDoH that may influence postoperative lumbar spine surgery outcomes of LOS, discharge disposition, 30-day ED return, and 30-day readmission. Patients at risk for suboptimal outcomes appear to be those with lower financial resources, less in-home support, and lower social connectivity. Routine screening of SDoH may enable care teams to effectively allocate resources for at-risk patients.

Preoperative HbA1c>8% Is Associated With Poor Outcomes in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative Study.

Preoperative hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is a useful screening tool since a significant portion of diabetic patients in the United States are undiagnosed and the prevalence of diabetes continues to increase. However, there is a paucity of literature analyzing comprehensive association between HbA1c and postoperative outcome in lumbar spine surgery. To assess the prognostic value of preoperative HbA1c>8% in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery. The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) database was queried to track all elective lumbar spine surgeries between January 2018 and December 2019. Cases were divided into 2 cohorts based on preoperative HbA1c level (≤8% and>8%). Measured outcomes include any complication, surgical site infection (SSI), readmission (RA) within 30 d (30RA) and 90 d (90RA) of index operation, patient satisfaction, and the percentage of patients who achieved minimum clinically important difference (MCID) using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. We captured 4778 patients in this study. Our multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with HbA1c>8% were more likely to experience postoperative complication (odds ratio [OR] 1.81, 95% CI 1.20-2.73; P=.005) and be readmitted within 90 d of index surgery (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.08-2.54; P=.021). They also had longer hospital stay (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.23; P=.009) and were less likely to achieve functional improvement after surgery (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.92; P=.016). HbA1c>8% is a reliable predictor of poor outcome in elective lumbar spine surgery. Clinicians should consider specialty consultation to optimize patients' glycemic control prior to surgery.

P69. The influence of cognitive behavioral therapy on lumbar spine surgery outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

P69. The influence of cognitive behavioral therapy on lumbar spine surgery outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Low Back Pain Versus Back-Related Leg Pain: How Do Patient Expectations and Outcomes of Lumbar Spine Surgery Compare?

Background: An increasing number of lumbar spine conditions are treated surgically. Such intervention, however, is commonly thought to be more effective in addressing leg pain than low back pain. Patient expectations may also contribute to self-reported surgical outcomes. Questions/Purposes: We sought to compare the expectations of patients in 2 groups undergoing lumbar spine surgery: those with predominantly low back pain and those with predominantly leg pain. We also sought to evaluate how these expectations were fulfilled for each group. Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a prior study in which patients scheduled for lumbar spine surgery at a single institution completed validated surveys preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively, including a 20-item survey on expectations for lumbar spine surgery. The patients were enrolled in the study between February 2010 and August 2012, and were divided into 2 cohorts: a "Back > Leg" group that consisted of patients with back pain that was isolated or greater than leg pain, and a "Leg ≥ Back" group that consisted of patients with leg pain that equaled or exceeded back pain. The primary analysis compared composite expectation scores (range, 0-100) between groups. Results: A total of 366 patients were deemed eligible for the study; of these, 162 patients were allocated to the Back > Leg group and 204 patients were allocated to the Leg ≥ Back group. Patients in the Leg ≥ Back group had a greater mean preoperative expectation score compared with those in the Back > Leg group. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that higher preoperative expectations were associated with leg pain symptoms after controlling for disease diagnosis. Both groups reported similar proportions of fulfilled expectations. Conclusion: Patients with predominantly leg pain hold greater preoperative expectations for lumbar spine surgery than do patients with predominantly back pain. That these patient groups reported similar fulfillment of their expectations at 2 years postoperatively illustrates the greater clinical outcomes achieved among patients who presented with predominantly leg pain.

The influence of cognitive behavioral therapy on lumbar spine surgery outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

As more patients undergo lumbar spine surgery, novel interventions may improve physical and mental health outcomes. Few studies summarize the benefit of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) among lumbar spine surgery patients. This study collects randomized control trial data to investigate the influence of CBT on patient reported outcomes among lumbar spine surgery patients. Our study used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and a medical library expert assisted in searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar. We calculated standardized mean differences (SMD) to evaluate the effect size of CBT versus control groups with a sensitivity analysis. Our meta-analysis included seven studies with a total of 531 patients. The majority of included studies evaluated lumbar fusion, with preoperative CBT performed by physiotherapists. The largest effects were observed for overall quality of life (SMD = 0.55 [95% CI 0.05, 1.05], p < 0.001, I2 = 86.7%) and psychological outcomes (SMD = 0.61 [95% CI 0.28, 0.94], p < 0.001, I2 = 89.7%) though disability and pain outcomes also favored CBT intervention. Included studies demonstrated low overall bias but large heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated negligible study design differences and revealed moderators including CBT session frequency and final follow-up duration (p < 0.001). Compared to usual care or alternative therapy control arms, CBT delivered the most improvement with overall quality of life and psychological outcomes. Among appropriately selected patients, CBT could improve perioperative disability, pain, quality of life, and psychological health following lumbar spine surgery.

Patient-reported outcomes in lumbar spine surgery

Introduction: Lumbar spine spondylosis is a significant cause of morbidity worldwide. Surgical treatment is increasingly being used in patients who do not respond to conservative treatment. Although the outcome of these surgeries is subjective, patient-oriented questionnaires are considered to give a less biased assessment of surgical outcomes. The aim of this study was to use the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) to assess the early outcome of lumbar spine surgery in patients with lumbar degenerative spine disease. Methodology: This was a retrospective study carried out over a period of one year, recruiting twenty patients who had lumbar spine surgeries (both instrumented and non-instrumented surgeries) for degenerative lumbar spine disease. Results: The age range of the subjects was 40–80 years, with a mean age of 55.9 ± 9.2 years. A majority of the patients had lumbar disc prolapse (70%). There was a statistically significant correlation between preoperative ODI and postoperative ODI, with postoperative patients having a lower ODI score (which signifies improved outcome). Conclusion: Lumbar surgeries for degenerative lumbosacral spine disease lead to a high level of patient satisfaction.

Quantifying the collective influence of social determinants of health using conditional and cluster modeling.

ObjectivesOur objective was to analyze the collective effect of social determinants of health (SDoH) on lumbar spine surgery outcomes utilizing two different statistical methods of combining variables.MethodsThis observational study analyzed data from the Quality Outcomes Database, a nationwide United States spine registry. Race/ethnicity, educational attainment, employment status, insurance payer, and gender were predictors of interest. We built two models to assess the collective influence of SDoH on outcomes following lumbar spine surgery—a stepwise model using each number of SDoH conditions present (0 of 5, 1 of 5, 2 of 5, etc) and a clustered subgroup model. Logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, multimorbidity, surgical indication, type of lumbar spine surgery, and surgical approach were performed to identify the odds of failing to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvements in disability, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction at 3- and 12-months following lumbar spine surgery.ResultsStepwise modeling outperformed individual SDoH when 4 of 5 SDoH were present. Cluster modeling revealed 4 distinct subgroups. Disparities between the younger, minority, lower socioeconomic status and the younger, white, higher socioeconomic status subgroups were substantially wider compared to individual SDoH.DiscussionCollective and cluster modeling of SDoH better predicted failure to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvements than individual SDoH in this cohort. Viewing social factors in aggregate rather than individually may offer more precise estimates of the impact of SDoH on outcomes.

Does a Multidisciplinary Triage Pathway Facilitate Better Outcomes After Spine Surgery?

Single-center prospective non-randomized matched cohort comparison. To compare elective lumbar spine surgery outcomes for cases triaged through a multidisciplinary spine pathway versus conventional referral processes. Many health care systems have facilitated low back pain (LBP) guidelines into primary care practice by creating local or regional "pathways" with the goal of enhanced quality of care, improved patient satisfaction and optimal resource utilization, particularly for imaging and surgery. Few comparative outcomes exist for LBP pathways, particularly for surgical outcomes. One-hundred-fifty patients (SSP group n = 75; conventional group n = 75) undergoing elective lumbar surgery for degenerative conditions between 2011 and 2016 were analyzed with 1-year follow-up. Patient self-reported outcomes included the Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analogue pain scores (VAS) for back and leg, and EuroQol Group 5-Dimension self-report (EQ-5D). We also assessed baseline clinical features, indications for surgery, therapies received prior to surgery, type of surgery, wait times, and overall patient satisfaction. The groups had equivalent baseline demographics, body mass index, Saskatchewan Spine Pathway (SSP) classification of pain pattern, pain scores, functional scores, quality of life scores, indication for surgery, and type of surgery (instrumented or non-instrumented). There was no difference with respect to wait times to see the surgeon or for surgery. Wait time for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was significantly shorter for the SSP group (16.8 vs. 63.0 days, P < 0.001). Patients triaged through the SSP were significantly more likely to utilize multiple nonoperative treatment strategies prior to seeing the surgeon (P < 0.04). Patient satisfaction was significantly higher for SSP patients prior to surgical assessment (P = 0.03) but did not differ between groups after surgery. The SSP facilitates significantly shorter wait times for MRI and promotes nonoperative treatment strategies. Preoperative patient satisfaction is significantly higher among SSP patients, but there were no significant differences in surgical outcomes.Level of Evidence: 3.

Effect of Multimodal Drugs Infiltration on Postoperative Pain in Split Laminectomy of Lumbar Spine: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

A randomized, double-blinded controlled trial. This study tested the effect of single-dose wound infiltration with multiple drugs for pain management after lumbar spine surgery. Patients undergoing spine surgery often experience severe pain especially in early postoperative period. We hypothesized that intraoperative wound infiltration with multiple drugs would improve outcomes in lumbar spine surgery. Fifty-two patients who underwent one to two levels of spinous process splitting laminectomy of lumbar spine, were randomized into two groups. Infiltration group received intraoperative wound infiltration of local anesthetics, morphine sulfate, epinephrine, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs at the end of surgery, and received patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) postoperatively. The control group received only PCA postoperatively. The primary outcome measures were amount of morphine consumption and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain. The secondary outcome measures were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland-Morris Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, and side effects. A total of 49 patients (23 patients for local infiltration group, and 26 patients for control group) were analyzed. There were statistically significant [P < 0.001, the effect size -5.0, 95% CI (-6.1, -3.9)] less morphine consumptions in the local infiltration group than the control group during the first 12 hours, 12 to 24 hours, and 24 to 48 hours after surgery. The VAS of postoperative pain reported by patients at rest and during motion was significantly lower in the local infiltration group than the control group at all assessment times (P < 0.001). The effect size of VAS of postoperative pain at rest and during motion were -2.0, 95% CI (-2.5, -1.4) and -2.0, 95% CI (-2.6, -1.4) respectively. ODI and RMDQ at 2 week and 3 month follow-ups in both groups had significant improvement from baseline (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between groups (P = 0.262 for ODI and P = 0.296 for RMDQ). There were no significant differences of patient satisfaction, length of stay, and side effects between both groups (P = 0.256, P = 0.262, P = 0.145 respectively). Intraoperative wound infiltration with multimodal drugs reduced postoperative morphine consumption, decreased pain score with no increased side effects. 1.