scholarly journals The value of patient global assessment in lumbar spine surgery: an evaluation based on more than 90,000 patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 554-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Parai ◽  
O. Hägg ◽  
B. Lind ◽  
H. Brisby
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (12) ◽  
pp. 3063-3073
Author(s):  
C. Parai ◽  
O. Hägg ◽  
C. Willers ◽  
B. Lind ◽  
H. Brisby

Abstract Purpose The relatively large number of participants lost to follow-up (attrition) in spinal registers calls for studies that investigate the features of these individuals and their possible outcome. The aim was to explore the effect of attrition on patient-reported outcome in patients undergoing degenerative lumbar spine surgery. Three groups were studied: spinal stenosis (LSS), disc herniation (LDH) and degenerative disc disorder (DDD). Methods Patients who underwent surgery for degenerative lumbar spine conditions during 2008–2012 according to registration in the Swespine national register were eligible for the study. Non-respondents were registered in Swespine prior to surgery, but not at follow-up. Swespine data were merged with hospital data from seven Swedish regions (65% of the population), Statistics Sweden, the National Patient Register and the Social Insurance Agency. Baseline characteristics of non-respondents were described and compared to those of the respondents. Coefficients from regression analyses on PROM values for respondents were used to estimate the levels of PROM values for non-respondents, assuming the same effects of baseline characteristics for the two subgroups. Regression analyses were then conducted to identify variables associated with non-response. The results from the regression analyses were used to predict outcomes for patients with the characteristics of a non-respondent. Primary outcome variable in LSS and LDH was Global Assessment for leg pain, and in DDD, Global Assessment for back pain. Results Age, sex, educational level, smoking, living alone, being born outside the EU, previous spine surgery and unexpected events before follow-up were factors that were significantly associated with non-response. Being born inside, the EU was important in all of the studied groups (LSS: OR 0.61 p =  < 0.000; LDH: OR 0.68 p = 0.001; DDD: OR 0.58 p = 0.04). For spinal stenosis patients, an unexpected event appeared particularly important (OR 3.40, p = 0.000). The predicted outcome of non-respondents was significantly worse than for respondents (LSS: 75.4% successful outcome vs. 78.7%; LDH: 53.9% vs. 58.2%; DDD: 62.7% vs. 67.5%. P-value in all groups =  < 0.000). Conclusion Attrition in Swespine cannot be ignored, as non-respondents were predicted to have worse outcome. The effect of attrition bias should always be considered when contemplating outcome recorded in a quality register with patients lost to follow-up.


2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Signe Elmose ◽  
Mikkel Ø. Andersen ◽  
Else Bay Andresen ◽  
Leah Yacat Carreon

OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of tranexamic acid (TXA) compared to placebo in low-risk adult patients undergoing elective minor lumbar spine surgery—specifically with respect to operative time, estimated blood loss, and complications. Studies have shown that TXA reduces blood loss during major spine surgery. There have been no previous studies on the effect of TXA in minor lumbar spine surgery in which these variables have been evaluated.METHODSThe authors enrolled patients with ASA grades 1 to 2 scheduled to undergo lumbar decompressive surgery at Middelfart Hospital into a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Patients with thromboembolic disease, coagulopathy, hypersensitivity to TXA, or a history of convulsion were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned, in blocks of 10, to one of 2 groups, TXA or placebo. Anticoagulation therapy was discontinued 2–7 days preoperatively. Prior to the incision, patients received either a bolus of TXA (10 mg/kg) or an equivalent volume of saline solution (placebo). Independent t-tests were used to compare differences between the 2 groups, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.RESULTSOf the 250 patients enrolled, 17 patients were excluded, leaving 233 cases for analysis (117 in the TXA group and 116 in the placebo group). The demographics of the 2 groups were similar, except for a higher proportion of women in the TXA group (TXA 50% vs placebo 32%, p = 0.017). There was no significant between-groups difference in operative time (49.53 ± 18.26 vs 54.74 ± 24.49 minutes for TXA and placebo, respectively; p = 0.108) or intraoperative blood loss (55.87 ± 48.48 vs 69.14 ± 83.47 ml for TXA and placebo, respectively; p = 0.702). Postoperative blood loss measured from drain output was 62% significantly lower in the TXA group (13.03 ± 21.82 ml) than in the placebo group (34.61 ± 44.38 ml) (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in number of dural lesions or postoperative spinal epidural hematomas, and there were no thromboembolic events.CONCLUSIONSTranexamic acid did not have a statistically significant effect on operative time, intraoperative blood loss, or complications. This study gives no evidence to support the routine use of TXA during minor lumbar decompressive surgery.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT03714360 (clinicaltrials.gov)


2015 ◽  
Vol 157 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christin Clajus ◽  
Florian Stockhammer ◽  
Veit Rohde

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 485
Author(s):  
Tsung-Cheng Yin ◽  
Adam M. Wegner ◽  
Meng-Ling Lu ◽  
Yao-Hsu Yang ◽  
Yao-Chin Wang ◽  
...  

Background: Disorders of the hip and lumbar spine can create similar patterns of pain and dysfunction. It is unknown whether all surgeons, regardless of orthopedic or neurosurgery training, investigate and diagnose concurrent hip and spine pathology at the same rate. Methods: Data were retrieved from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Enrolled patients were stratified into hip and spine surgery at the same admission (Both), hip surgery before spine surgery (HS), or spine surgery before hip surgery (SH). The SH group was further subdivided based on whether spine surgery was performed by an orthopedic surgeon (OS) or neurosurgeon (NS), and differences in preoperative radiographic examinations and diagnoses were collected and analyzed. Results: In total, 1824 patients received lumbar spine surgery within 1 year before or after hip replacement surgery. Of these, 103 patients had spine and hip surgery in the same admission (Both), 1290 patients had spine surgery before hip surgery (SH), and 431 patients had hip surgery before spine surgery (HS). In the SH group, patients were categorized into spine surgery by orthopedic surgeons (OS) (n = 679) or neurosurgeons (NS) (n = 522). In the SH group, orthopedic surgeons investigated hip pathology with X-rays more often (52.6% vs. 38.1%, p < 0.001) and diagnosed more cases of hip disease (43.6% vs. 28.9%, p < 0.001) than neurosurgeons. Conclusions: Of patients in Taiwan’s NHIRD who had concurrent surgical degenerative hip and lumbar spine disorders who had spine surgery before hip surgery, orthopedic surgeons obtained hip images and made hip-related diagnoses more frequently than did neurosurgeons.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document