The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Disability on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

被引:10
|
作者
Jacob, Kevin C. [1 ]
Patel, Madhav R. [1 ]
Collins, Andrew P. [1 ]
Ribot, Max A. [1 ]
Pawlowski, Hanna [1 ]
Prabhu, Michael C. [1 ]
Vanjani, Nisheka N. [1 ]
Singh, Kern [1 ]
机构
[1] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
关键词
Lumbar fusion; Patient-reported outcome measures; Patient satisfaction; LOW-BACK-PAIN; CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; SPINE SURGERY; LEG PAIN; CLINIMETRICS CORNER; DISEASE; SENSITIVITY; SCORES; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.wneu.2021.12.051
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), satisfaction, and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion stratified by preoperative disability. METHODS: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions were grouped by preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score: ODI <41 or ODI >= 41. PROMs administered pre/postoperatively included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF), visual analog scale (VAS) back/leg, ODI, and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Composite Score (SF-12 PCS)/12-Item Short-Form Mental Composite Score (SF-12 MCS). Satisfaction scores were collected for VAS back/leg and ODI. Coarsened exact match controlled for differences between cohorts. T tests compared mean PROMs and postoperative improvement/satisfaction between cohorts. Simple logistic regression compared MCID achievement. RESULTS: After coarsened exact matching, there were 118 patients in the ODI <= 41 and 377 patients in the ODI >41 cohort. The ODI >41 cohort saw greater postoperative inpatient VAS pain score and narcotic consumption on days 0/1 (P < 0.018, all). PROMs differed between cohorts: PROMIS-PF, SF-12 PCS, ODI, VAS back/leg at all postoperative time points and SF-12 MCS at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/1 year (P < 0.045, all). Patients in the ODI >41 cohort demonstrated greater proportion achieving MCID for ODI at all postoperative time points and for SF-12 MCS 6-week/12-week/6-month/1-year (P < 0.040, all). The ODI <= 41 cohort demonstrated greater MCID achievement for overall PROMIS-PF and SF-12 PCS 6 months (P < 0.047, all). Postoperative satisfaction was greater in the ODI <= 41 cohort for VAS leg 6 weeks/12 weeks, VAS back 6 weeks/12 weeks, and ODI all postoperative time points (P < 0.048, all). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative disability associated with worse postoperative PROMs and patient satisfaction for disability, back/leg pain at multiple time points. MCID achievement rates across cohorts were similar for most PROMs at most postoperative time points. Patients with severe disability may have unrealistic expectations for surgical benefits, influencing corresponding postoperative satisfaction.
引用
收藏
页码:E334 / E346
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Time Course Observation of Outcomes between Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Lin, Guang-Xun
    Park, Chun-Kun
    Hur, Jung-Woo
    Kim, Jin-Sung
    NEUROLOGIA MEDICO-CHIRURGICA, 2019, 59 (06) : 222 - 230
  • [42] Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technique Note and Comparison of Early Outcomes with Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
    Zhang, Hao
    Zhou, Chuanli
    Wang, Chao
    Zhu, Kai
    Tu, Qihao
    Kong, Meng
    Zhao, Chong
    Ma, Xuexiao
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GENERAL MEDICINE, 2021, 14 : 549 - 558
  • [43] Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Grades 1-2: Patient-Reported Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Utility Analysis
    Sulaiman, Wale A. R.
    Singh, Manish
    OCHSNER JOURNAL, 2014, 14 (01): : 32 - 37
  • [44] Reduced Acute Care Costs With the ERAS® Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared With Conventional Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Wang, Michael Y.
    Chang, Hsuan Kan
    Grossman, Jay
    NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 83 (04) : 827 - 834
  • [45] Is the use of minimally invasive fusion technologies associated with improved outcomes after elective interbody lumbar fusion? Analysis of a nationwide prospective patient-reported outcomes registry
    McGirt, Matthew J.
    Parker, Scott L.
    Mummaneni, Praveen
    Knightly, John
    Pfortmiller, Deborah
    Foley, Kevin
    Asher, Anthony L.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2017, 17 (07): : 922 - 932
  • [46] Measuring the performance of patient-specific solutions for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery
    Thayaparan, Ganesha K.
    Owbridge, Mark G.
    Linden, Matthew
    Thompson, Robert G.
    Lewis, Philip M.
    D'Urso, Paul S.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2020, 71 : 43 - 50
  • [47] Preoperative Leg Pain Score Predicts Patient Satisfaction After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery
    Lim, Jason Beng Teck
    Yeo, William
    Chen, John Li Tat
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2018, 8 (04) : 354 - 358
  • [48] Do preoperative clinical and radiographic characteristics impact patient outcomes following one-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion based upon presenting symptoms?
    Morse, Kyle W.
    Alluri, Ram K.
    Vaishnav, Avani S.
    Urakawa, Hikari
    Mok, Jung Kee
    Virk, Sohrab S.
    Sheha, Evan D.
    Qureshi, Sheeraz A.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2022, 22 (04): : 570 - 577
  • [49] Transforaminal Thoracic Interbody Fusion: patient-reported outcome at 12 months
    Puhakka, Jani
    Mannion, Anne F.
    Haschtmann, Daniel
    Fekete, Tamas
    Loibl, Markus
    Jeszenszky, Dezso
    SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, 2021, 151 : 16S - 17S
  • [50] MINIMALLY INVASIVE TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION WITH EXPANDABLE CAGES
    Buckland, Aaron J.
    Proctor, Dylan J.
    JBJS ESSENTIAL SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2023, 13 (02):