Effects of self-quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: A case-control study.

ABSTRACT: Prospective case-control studyThis study aimed to investigate the effect of self-quarantine on the changes in low back symptoms and activities of daily living (ADL) due to low physical activity because of the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).The frequency and intensity of low back and leg pain have reportedly increased in healthy subjects because of self-quarantine.Patients with LSS who self-quarantined from baseline (SQ group) were matched to controls who did not self-quarantine (non-SQ group), based on age, sex, medication, ADL, and the numeric rating scale score for low back symptoms. The change in low back symptoms, ADL, and health-related quality of life between baseline and follow-up were compared between the groups.The SQ and non-SQ group included 80 and 60 patients, respectively. Compared with the baseline, the numeric rating scale score for low back pain at follow-up in the SQ group significantly improved (P = .004, median; 1 point), but not in the non-SQ group. No significant difference was found regarding changes in leg pain or numbness. Low back pain improvement did not lead to ADL improvement. The short form 12 evaluation revealed the role/social component score in the SQ group to be significantly lower than that in the non-SQ group; no difference was found for the physical or mental components at follow-up.Self-quarantine with conservative treatment effected short-term low back pain improvement in patients with LSS. However, no improvement in ADL was found. Self-quarantine had an unfavorable impact for health-related quality of life. The effect of self-quarantine can influence the treatment results of LSS.

Accelerometry Data Delineate Phases of Recovery and Supplement Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Following Lumbar Laminectomy.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are traditionally used to track recovery of patients after spine surgery. Wearable accelerometers have adjunctive value because of the continuous, granular, and objective data they provide. We conducted a prospective study of lumbar laminectomy patients to determine if time-series data from wearable accelerometers could delineate phases of recovery and compare accelerometry data to PROMs during recovery tracking. METHODS: Patients with lumbar stenosis for whom lumbar laminectomy was indicated were prospectively recruited. Subjects wore accelerometers that recorded their daily step counts from at least 1 week preoperatively to 6 months postoperatively. Subjects completed the Oswestry Disability Index and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey preoperatively and at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Daily aggregate median steps and individual visit-specific median steps were calculated. The Pruned Linear Exact Time method was used to segment aggregate median steps into distinct phases. Associations between visit-specific median steps and PROMs were identified using Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: Segmentation analysis revealed 3 distinct postoperative phases: step counts rapidly increased for the first 40 days postoperatively (acute healing), then gained more slowly for the next 90 days (recovery), and finally plateaued at preoperative levels (stabilization). Visit-specific median steps were significantly correlated with PROMs throughout the postoperative period. PROMs significantly exceeded baseline at 6 months postoperatively, while step counts did not (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous data from accelerometers allowed for identification of 3 distinct stages of postoperative recovery after lumbar laminectomy. PROMs remain necessary to capture subjective elements of recovery.

Cauda equina compression in metastatic prostate cancer.

A 67-year-old man presented to his general practitioner with intermittent episodes of unilateral sciatica over a 2-month period for which he was referred for an outpatient MRI of his spine. This evidenced a significant lumbar vertebral mass that showed tight canal stenosis and compression of the cauda equina. The patient was sent to the emergency department for management by orthopaedic surgeons. He was mobilising independently, pain free on arrival and without neurological deficit on assessment. Clinically, this patient presented with no red flag symptoms of cauda equina syndrome or reason to suspect malignancy. In these circumstances, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines do not support radiological investigation of the spine outside of specialist services. However, in this case, investigation helped deliver urgent care for cancer that otherwise may have been delayed. This leads to the question, do the current guidelines meet clinical requirements?