PROMIS Physical Function for prediction of postoperative pain, narcotics consumption, and patient-reported outcomes following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

被引:27
|
作者
Patel, Dil, V [1 ]
Bawa, Mundeep S. [1 ]
Haws, Brittany E. [1 ]
Khechen, Benjamin [1 ]
Block, Andrew M. [1 ]
Karmarkar, Sailee S. [1 ]
Lamoutte, Eric H. [1 ]
Singh, Kern [1 ]
机构
[1] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
关键词
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System; Physical Function; minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; patient-reported outcomes; pain scores; narcotics consumption; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; CAT INSTRUMENTS; SPINE SURGERY; SENSITIVITY;
D O I
10.3171/2018.9.SPINE18863
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to determine if the preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, Physical Function (PROMIS PF) score is predictive of immediate postoperative patient pain and narcotics consumption or long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF). METHODS A prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent primary, single-level MIS TLIF for degenerative pathology were identified and grouped by their preoperative PROMIS PF scores: mild disability (score 40-50), moderate disability (score 30-39.9), and severe disability (score 20-29.9). Postoperative pain was quantified using the visual analog scale (VAS), and narcotics consumption was quantified using Oral Morphine Equivalents. PROMIS PF, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), and VAS back and leg pain were collected preoperatively and at 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up. Preoperative PROMIS PF subgroups were tested for an association with demographic and perioperative characteristics using 1-way ANOVA or chi-square analysis. Preoperative PROMIS PF subgroups were tested for an association with immediate postoperative pain and narcotics consumption in addition to improvements in PROMIS PF, ODI, SF-12 PCS, and VAS back and leg pain by using linear regression controlling for statistically different demographic characteristics. RESULTS A total of 130 patients were included in this analysis. Patients were grouped by their preoperative PROMIS PF scores: 15.4% had mild disability, 63.8% had moderate disability, and 20.8% had severe disability. There were no significant differences among the subgroups in terms of age, sex, smoking status, and comorbidity burden. Patients with greater disability were more likely to be obese and to have workers' compensation insurance. There were no differences among subgroups in regard to operative levels, operative time, estimated blood loss, and hospital length of stay. Patients with greater disability reported higher VAS pain scores and narcotics consumption for postoperative day 0 and postoperative day 1. Patients with greater preoperative disability demonstrated lower PROMIS PF, ODI, SF-12 PCS, and worse VAS pain scores at each postoperative time point. CONCLUSIONS Patients with worse preoperative disability, as assessed by PROMIS PF, experienced increased pain and narcotics consumption, along with less improvement in long-term PROs. The authors conclude that PROMIS PF is an efficient and accurate instrument that can quickly assess patient disability in the preoperative period and predict both short-term and long-term surgical outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:476 / 482
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The Effect of Morbid Obesity on Complications, Readmission, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion An Inverse Propensity Score Weighted Analysis
    Claus, Chad F.
    Lawless, Michael
    Lytle, Evan
    Tong, Doris
    Bahoura, Matthew
    Garmo, Lucas
    Gabrail, Joseph
    Bono, Peter
    Kelkar, Prashant
    Richards, Boyd
    Carr, Daniel A.
    Houseman, Clifford
    Soo, Teck M.
    SPINE, 2021, 46 (20) : 1394 - 1401
  • [22] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion A Review of Techniques and Outcomes
    Karikari, Isaac O.
    Isaacs, Robert E.
    SPINE, 2010, 35 (26) : S294 - S301
  • [23] Postoperative Outcomes Based on American Society of Anesthesiologists Score After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Yoo, Joon S.
    Parrish, James M.
    Jenkins, Nathaniel W.
    Khechen, Benjamin
    Haws, Brittany E.
    Narain, Ankur S.
    Hrynewycz, Nadia M.
    Brundage, Thomas S.
    Singh, Kern
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2020, 33 (01): : E40 - E42
  • [24] Postoperative lordosis distribution index, patient reported outcome measures, and revision surgery following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Schack, Anders
    Bari, Tanvir Johanning
    Gehrchen, Martin
    Dahl, Benny
    Bech-Azeddine, Rachid
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY-X, 2024, 21
  • [25] The Effect of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Postoperative Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Yoo, Joon S.
    Patel, Dillon S.
    Hrynewycz, Nadia M.
    Brundage, Thomas S.
    Mogilevsky, Franchesca A.
    Singh, Kern
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2020, 33 (06): : E263 - E268
  • [26] Poor mental health scores correlate with inferior outcomes following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Hartman, Timothy J.
    Nie, James W.
    Zheng, Eileen
    Oyetayo, Omolabake O.
    MacGregor, Keith R.
    Singh, Kern
    ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 2023, 165 (07) : 1931 - 1942
  • [27] Impact of Iliac Crest Bone Grafting on Postoperative Outcomes and Complication Rates Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Haws, Brittany E.
    Khechen, Benjamin
    Patel, Dil V.
    Yoo, Joon S.
    Guntin, Jordan A.
    Cardinal, Kaitlyn L.
    Ahn, Junyoung
    Singh, Kern
    NEUROSPINE, 2019, 16 (04) : 772 - 779
  • [28] Radiographic and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Anteriorly Placed Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Instrumentation
    Lee, Yunsoo
    Heard, Jeremy C.
    McCurdy, Michael A.
    Lambrechts, Mark J.
    Fras, Sebastian I.
    Purtill, William
    Millar, Ben
    Kolowrat, Samantha
    Issa, Tariq Z.
    D'Antonio, Nicholas D.
    Rihn, Jeffrey A.
    Kurd, Mark F.
    Kaye, Ian David
    Canseco, Jose A.
    Vaccaro, Alexander R.
    Hilibrand, Alan S.
    Kepler, Christopher K.
    Schroeder, Gregory D.
    SPINE, 2024, 49 (15) : 1078 - 1084
  • [29] Comparison of perioperative outcomes following open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in obese patients
    Lau, Darryl
    Khan, Adam
    Terman, Samuel W.
    Yee, Timothy
    La Marca, Frank
    Park, Paul
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2013, 35 (02)
  • [30] Association of Preoperative Physical Function and Changes in Mental Health After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Jenkins, Nathaniel W.
    Parrish, James M.
    Lynch, Conor P.
    Cha, Elliot D. K.
    Jadczak, Caroline N.
    Mohan, Shruthi
    Geoghegan, Cara E.
    Singh, Kern
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY, 2021, 15 (06) : 1115 - 1122