The impact of instrumented lumbar fusion surgery on psychiatric problems in elderly patients with degenerative spinal stenosis: The observational study.

This is a prospective cohort study to investigate the effects of instrumented lumbar fusion surgery on psychiatric problems, including anxiety, insomnia, and depression, in patients with degenerative spinal stenosis, as well as on pain and the activities of daily living. Surgery was performed in the patients with Schizas grade C or D spinal stenosis with; if a patient's quality of life was impaired for at least 3 months or if patient had neurologic deficits. Finally, 69 patients were reviewed. Beck anxiety inventory, insomnia severity index, geriatric depression scale short form-Korean, visual analog scale for back pain, visual analog scale for leg pain, and Oswestry disability index was measured on the day surgery was decided on (T1), the day before surgery (T2), the day before discharge (T3), and 6 months after surgery (T4). The patients had mild degrees of anxiety, insomnia, and depression at T1, and Beck anxiety inventory, insomnia severity index, visual analog scale for back pain, visual analog scale for leg pain, and Oswestry disability index improved significantly by T4. In elderly patients with degenerative spinal stenosis, instrumented lumbar fusion surgery improves not only pain and activities of daily living, but also anxiety and insomnia. However, there was no improvement in depression over the 6-month follow-up period.

How do information and physiotherapy affect health-related quality of life among patients with spinal stenosis undergoing decompression surgery: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of qualitative research on how patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) undergoing surgery perceive their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Research that increases our understanding in this area could facilitate a biopsychosocial approach to care. AIM: We aimed to investigate the experiences of patients with LSS undergoing decompression surgery regarding their pre- and post-surgery perceptions of HRQOL and the pre-and post-operative information and physiotherapy. METHOD: We used a qualitative design with semi-structured interviews to perform content analysis using an inductive approach. Twelve patients (7 female, 5 male) were included post-surgery and interviewed by phone. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. RESULTS: Four distinct categories with nine associated subcategories were identified: Patients' feelings of safety and empowerment are enhanced by healthcare professionals; Divided perceptions of information and physiotherapy in a group context; Health-related quality of life is associated with patients' perceived physical capacity; Patients' optimism and concerns influence health-related quality of life. CONCLUSION: Both physical and psychological factors pre- and post-surgery appear to influence patients' HRQOL. Inherent optimism and feelings of empowerment in the care process appear to be important factors, regardless of physical health status. A strong patient-provider relationship is important to promote self-efficacy, which may positively affect perceived HRQOL and is in line with the generally recommended biopsychosocial approach in the treatment of people with low back pain. As qualitative studies in this area are scarce, there is a need for further studies to validate our findings.

Preference Sensitive Care and Shared Decision-Making in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Scoping Review.

STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review exploring the extent to which preference sensitivity has been studied in treatment decisions for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), utilizing shared decision-making (SDM) as a proxy. BACKGROUND: Preference-sensitive care involves situations where multiple treatment options exist with significant tradeoffs in cost, outcome, recovery time, and quality of life. LSS has gained research focus as a preference-sensitive care scenario. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A scoping review protocol in accordance with "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews" regulations was registered with the Open Science Framework (ID: 9ewup) and conducted across multiple databases from January 2000 to October 2022. Study selection and characterization were performed by 3 independent reviewers and an unbiased moderator. RESULTS: The search resulted in the inclusion of 16 studies varying in design and sample size, with most published between 2016 and 2021. The studies examined variables related to SDM, patient preferences, surgeon preferences, and decision aids (DAs). The outcomes assessed included treatment choice, patient satisfaction, and patient understanding. Several studies reported that SDM influenced treatment choice and patient satisfaction, while the impact on patient understanding was less clear. DAs were used in some studies to facilitate SDM. CONCLUSION: The scoping review identified a gap in comprehensive studies analyzing the preference sensitivity of treatment for LSS and the role of DAs. Further research is needed to better understand the impact of patient preferences on treatment decisions and the effectiveness of DAs in LSS care. This review provides a foundation for future research in preference-sensitive care and SDM in the context of lumbar stenosis treatment.

Depression as a prognostic factor for lumbar spinal stenosis outcomes: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is associated with increased levels of psychological distress, including depression; however, the prognostic value of depression remains unclear. The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the evidence on the prognostic value of depression for a range of outcomes in patients with LSS. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were prospective cohort studies that investigated depression in patients diagnosed with LSS. Searches were conducted in 7 databases. Critical appraisal, data extraction, and judgement of cumulative evidence were conducted independently by two reviewers. A meta-analysis was not conducted due to a lack of unique cohorts for each outcome, varying follow-up times, and differences in measurements for both prognostic factors and outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-three articles were included. There was evidence for an association between preoperative depression and postoperative disability and symptom severity outcomes for patients with LSS. Odds ratios ranged from 1.15 to 2.94 for postoperative disability and 1.16-1.20 for symptom severity at various follow-up times. Using GRADE, evidence supporting depression as a prognostic factor for these LSS outcomes was deemed to be of moderate quality. Similarly strong evidence suggested depressive symptoms are of no prognostic value for postoperative walking capacity. CONCLUSION: Depression appears to have small to moderate prognostic value for LSS outcomes, with the strongest evidence for postoperative disability and symptom severity. The prognostic value of depression for LSS outcomes should be further explored using standardized measures in additional cohorts, including patients managing their condition conservatively, who have been neglected in related research.

Revision lumbar fusions have higher rates of reoperation and result in worse clinical outcomes compared to primary lumbar fusions.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Indications for revision lumbar fusion are variable, but include recurrent stenosis (RS), adjacent segment disease (ASD), and pseudarthrosis. The efficacy of revision lumbar fusion has been well established, but their outcomes compared to primary procedures is not well documented. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compares surgical and clinical outcomes between (1) revision and primary lumbar fusion, (2) revision lumbar fusion based on indication (ASD, pseudarthrosis, or RS), and (3) revision lumbar fusion based on whether the index procedure included an isolated decompression or decompression with fusion. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective single-institution cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Four thousand six hundred seventy-one consecutive lumbar fusions from 2011 to 2021, of which 892 (23.6%) were revision procedures. The indication for revision procedures included 502 (56.3%) for ASD, 153 (17.2%) for pseudarthrosis, and 237 (26.6%) for RS. Of the 892 revision procedures, 694 (77.8%) underwent an index fusion while 198 (22.2%) underwent an index decompression without fusion. OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital readmissions, all-cause reoperation, need for subsequent revision and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) at baseline, 3-months postoperatively, and 1-year postoperatively, including the Mental Health Component score (MCS-12) and Physical Health Component score (PCS-12) of the Short Form 12 survey, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Back and Leg pain. METHODS: Patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical characteristics, and outcomes were collected from electronic medical records. Twenty-eight percent of patients had preoperative and postoperative PROMs. A delta PROM score was calculated for the 3-month and 1-year postoperative timepoints, which was the change from the preoperative to postoperative value. Univariate comparisons were performed to compare revision fusions to primary fusions. Multivariate logistic regression was performed for all-cause reoperation and subsequent revision surgery, while multivariate linear regression was performed for ∆PROMs at 3-months and 1-year. Revision procedures were then separately regrouped based on indication for revision fusion and whether they underwent a fusion for their index procedure. Univariate comparisons and multivariate linear regressions for ∆PROMs were then repeated based on the new groupings. RESULTS: There was no difference in hospital readmission rate (5.38% vs. 4.60%, p=.372) or length of stay (4.10 days vs. 3.94 days, p=.129) between revision and primary lumbar fusion, but revision fusions had a higher rate of all-cause reoperation (16.1% vs. 11.2%, p<.001) and subsequent revision (13.7% vs. 9.71%, p=.001), which was confirmed on multivariate logistic regression (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.42, p=.001 and OR: 1.37, p=.007, respectively). On multivariate analysis, a revision procedure was an independent risk factor for worse improvement ∆ODI, ∆VAS Back, ∆VAS Leg, and ∆PCS-12 and 1-year postoperatively. Regardless of the indication for revision lumbar fusion, patients significantly improved in the 3-month and 1-year postoperative PCS-12, ODI, VAS Back, and VAS Leg, with the exception of the 3-month PCS-12 for pseudarthrosis (p=.620). Patients undergoing revision for ASD had significantly worse 1-year postoperative PCS-12 (32.3 vs. Pseudarthrosis: 35.6 and RS: 37.0, p=.026), but there were no differences in ∆PROMs. There was no difference in hospital readmission, all-cause reoperation, or subsequent revision based on whether a patient had an index lumbar fusion or isolated decompression. Multivariate linear regression analysis found that a surgical indication of pseudarthrosis was a significant predictor of decreased improvement in 3-month ∆VAS Leg (ref: ASD, ß=2.26, p=.036), but having an index fusion did not significantly predict worse improvement in ∆PROMs when compared to isolated decompressions. CONCLUSIONS: Revision lumbar fusions had a higher rate of reoperation and subsequent revision surgery when compared to primary lumbar fusions, but there were no difference in hospital readmission rates. Patients undergoing revision lumbar fusion experience improvements in all patient reported outcome measures, but their baseline, postoperative, and magnitude of improvement are worse than primary procedures. Regardless of whether the lumbar fusion is a primary or revision procedure, all patients have significant improvements in pain, disability and physical function. Further, the indication for the revision procedure is not correlated with the expected magnitude of improvement in patient reported outcomes. Finally, no differences in baseline, postoperative, and ∆PROMs for revision fusions were identified when stratifying by whether the patient had an index decompression or fusion.

Association between depression and anxiety on symptom and function after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Evidence on the role of depression and anxiety in patients undergoing surgical treatment for symptomatic degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) is conflicting. We aimed to assess the association between depression and anxiety with symptoms and function in patients undergoing surgery for DLSS. Included were patients with symptomatic DLSS participating in a prospective multicentre cohort study who underwent surgery and completed the 24-month follow-up. We used the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) to assess depression/anxiety. We used mixed-effects models to quantify the impact on the primary outcome change in the spinal stenosis measure (SSM) symptoms/function subscale from baseline to 12- and 24-months. Logistic regression analysis was used to quantify the odds of the SSM to reach a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 24 months follow-up. The robustness of the results in the presence of unmeasured confounding was quantified using a benchmarking method based on a multiple linear model. Out of 401 patients 72 (17.95%) were depressed and 80 anxious (19.05%). Depression was associated with more symptoms (ß = 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.51, p < 0.001) and worse function (ß = 0.37, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.50, p < 0.001) at 12- and 24-months. Only the association between baseline depression and SSM symptoms/function was robust at 12 and 24 months. There was no evidence for baseline depression/anxiety decreasing odds for a MCID in SSM symptoms and function over time. In patients undergoing surgery for symptomatic DLSS, preoperative depression but not anxiety was associated with more severe symptoms and disability at 12 and 24 months.

Association between preoperative low muscle mass and psychological factors after surgery among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: A longitudinal study.

It remains controversial whether preoperative low muscle mass affects clinical outcomes after lumbar surgery. Previous studies evaluated outcomes such as pain, quality of life, and disability, but none investigated preoperative low muscle mass and psychological factors. The purpose of this study was to clarify the association between preoperative low muscle mass and postoperative psychological factors in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). A longitudinal analysis was performed in 85 consecutive preoperative patients with LSS. Demographic data, leg pain, low back pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) score, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire on Physical Activity (FABQ-PA) score, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) score, walking velocity, grip strength, and appendicular lean mass were assessed. Muscle mass was measured using bioelectrical impedance analysis. Patients were divided into two groups based on skeletal muscle mass index. These clinical outcomes were evaluated preoperatively and 1 year after surgery. In the 73 patients who were analyzed 1 year after surgery, the prevalence of preoperative low muscle mass was 21.9%. The normal muscle mass group showed significantly improved PCS, FABQ-PA, HADS-anxiety, and HADS-depression scores 1 year after surgery. The low muscle mass group did not demonstrate significantly improved PCS, FABQ-PA, or HADS-depression scores, and had a significantly smaller increase in the FABQ-PA score than the normal muscle mass group. Multivariate analysis showed that low muscle mass was significantly related to change in FABQ-PA score. Our results suggest that preoperative low muscle mass hinders improvement in fear-avoidance beliefs 1 year after surgery.

Psychological and Functional Comparison between Minimally Invasive and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether treatment with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) causes patients suffering from lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) to experience less anxiety and better clinical efficacy than open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed 86 patients, including 46 male patients and 41 female patients, who suffered from single-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis in our department between January 2016 and January 2018. They were divided into two groups: a control group (n = 46), for patients who underwent open TLIF surgery, and an experimental group (n = 40), for patients who underwent Mis-TLIF surgery. All patients were evaluated based on operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), hospital anxiety depression scale (HADS), fusion rate, and complications (screw misplacement and loosening, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, infection, and delayed wound healing). Patient characteristics were compared within and between groups. RESULTS: The average incision length was 3.64 ± 0.476 cm in the experimental group, which was smaller than that (8.11 ± 2.406 cm) in the control group (P < 0.05). The operation time of the experimental group was a little longer than that of the control group. The intraoperative blood loss and hospital stay in the experimental group were less than those in the control group. The mean preoperative low back pain VAS score was 7.525 ± 1.432 in the experimental group and 7.087 ± 1.799 in the control group (P > 0.05). The low back pain VAS scores on postoperative day 3 and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively were 5.000 ± 0.987, 4.075 ± 0.997, 2.150 ± 0.834, and 1.450 ± 0.639 in the experimental group, respectively; these scores were lower than those in the control group (6.870 ± 1.572, P < 0.05; 4.630 ± 1.103, P < 0.05; 2.630 ± 1.103, P < 0.05; and 2.326 ± 1.034, P < 0.05, respectively). There was no obvious difference in the leg pain VAS scores between the two groups at all follow-up points. The mean preoperative ODI score was 58.700% ± 19.703% in the experimental group and 61.696% ± 17.583% in the control group (P > 0.05). The ODI scores at postoperative months 3, 6, and 12 were 25.225% ± 5.554%, 20.150% ± 7.698%, and 16.125% ± 9.565% in the experimental group; these scores were lower than those in the control group (49.130% ± 14.805%, P < 0.05; 34.044% ± 15.148%, P < 0.05; and 29.282% ± 132.567%, P < 0.05, respectively). The mean preoperative HADS score was 14.475 ± 3.113 in the experimental group and 13.391 ± 2.824 in the control group (P > 0.05). However, the mean HADS scores on postoperative day 3 in the experimental group was 8.500 ± 2.000, decreasing obviously compared to the preoperative scores (P < 0.05). The mean postoperative HADS score on postoperative day 3 in the control group was 12.734 ± 1.949, which had not decreased significantly compared to the preoperative score (P > 0.05). The HADS scores in the experimental group was lower than that in the control group on postoperative day 3 (P < 0.05). In the correlation analysis, the incision length was correlated to the HADS scores on postoperative day 3 (r = 0.527, P < 0.05). The HADS scores on postoperative day 3 were positively correlated with the low back pain VAS scores on the same day (r = 0.388, P < 0.05). The HADS scores on postoperative day 3were positively correlated with the ODI scores at 3-month (r = 0.460, P < 0.05), 6-month (r = 0.429, P < 0.05), and 12-month follow up (r = 0.349, P < 0.05). Fusion rates were not significantly different between the two groups. There was no screw misplacement and loosening, infection, or delayed wound healing in either group. The cerebrospinal fluid leakage rate in the control group was higher than that in the experimental group. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing Mis-TLIF experience less anxiety and have better outcomes than those who undergo open TLIF. The lower level of anxiety experienced by patients undergoing Mis-TLIF is positively correlated with postoperative VAS and ODI scores.

Effectiveness of Conservative Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Pain, Disability, Physical Capacity, and Physical Activity Behavior in Patients With Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of conservative nonpharmacologic therapies on pain, disability, physical capacity, and physical activity outcomes in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). DATA SOURCES: Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO from inception to November 4, 2019, without language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Pairs of review authors independently identified randomized controlled trials published in peer-reviewed scientific journals reporting on the effects of rehabilitation interventions on pain intensity (back or leg), disability, symptom severity, physical capacity, physical activity behavior, or adverse events (secondary outcome) in adults with LSS. The search identified 1718 records; data from 21 reports of 19 trials (1432 patients) were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Review author pairs independently extracted data and assessed included studies. We assessed risk of bias with the Cochrane tool, and overall study quality with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation classification. DATA SYNTHESIS: We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses; treatment effects were reported as mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Directed exercise and manual therapy was superior to self-directed or group exercise for improving short-term walking capacity (MD, 293.3 m; 95% CI, 61.7-524.9 m; low-quality evidence), back pain (MD, -1.1; 95% CI, -1.8 to -0.4; moderate quality evidence), leg pain (MD, -.9; 95% CI, -0.2 to -1.5; moderate-quality evidence), and symptom severity (MD, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.4 to -0.2; low quality evidence). There is very low quality evidence that rehabilitation is no better than surgery at improving intermediate- or long-term disability. Single trials provided conflicting evidence of effectiveness for a variety of therapies. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with LSS, there is low- to moderate-quality evidence that manual therapy with supervised exercises improves short-term walking capacity and results in small improvements in pain and symptom severity compared with self-directed or group exercise. The choice between rehabilitation and surgery for LSS is very uncertain owing to the very low quality of available evidence.

Sleep Disturbance in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Association With Disability and Quality of Life.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify the prevalence of sleep disturbance in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and to establish the relationship between sleep disturbance and both functional disability and health-related quality of life in patients with symptomatic LSS. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite the possible association between LSS and poor sleep quality, there has been no study regarding the relationship between LSS and sleep disturbance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 148 patients with LSS were divided into the poor sleeper and nonpoor sleeper groups according to Global Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score. Demographic data, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) were compared between both groups. Multiple regression analysis was performed with ODI or ODI without sleep component as the dependent variable and age, sex, PSQI, VAS for back pain, VAS for leg pain as independent variables. RESULTS: Of the 148 patients who participated in this study, 54 (36.5%) and 94 (63.5%) patients were classified into nonpoor sleeper and poor sleeper groups. Although there were no differences in demographic data or VAS for back or leg pain between the nonpoor sleeper and poor sleeper groups, poor sleepers demonstrated significantly higher ODI scores, and lower EQ-5D than nonpoor sleepers (P=0.003 and 0.004, respectively). There were significant correlations between the global PSQI score and both the ODI score and EQ-5D. Although the surgical treatment group showed significantly higher VAS for back pain, VAS for leg pain, ODI scores, and lower EQ-5D than the conservative treatment group, the ratio of poor to nonpoor sleepers was not different between both groups (P=0.733). In the surgical treatment group, the percent of poor sleeper decreased from 65.1% to 47.6% 6 months after surgery (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that 'poor sleep quality' is a prevalent condition (63.5%) in patients with symptomatic LSS. Poor sleep quality has an adverse effect on functional disability and health-related quality of life in symptomatic LSS patients.

Preoperative psychological factors affecting surgical satisfaction of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this observational study was to investigate the effects of preoperative psychological factors on short-term patient satisfaction with surgery in elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). METHODS: Surgery was performed on 90 elderly patients with clinically and radiologically defined LSS: mean age at surgery, 73 years; 46 men and 44 women. Patients completed questionnaires before surgery and 1 year postoperatively. They used a self-administered the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and satisfaction for surgery (VAS) were completed. At baseline, psychological factors were assessed using the Self-Rating Questionnaire for Depression (SRQ-D), Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale-20, and Brief Scale for Psychiatric Problems in Orthopaedic Patients (BS-POP). At follow-up, patient satisfaction was evaluated using 2 items: (1) satisfaction with surgery and (2) Would you undergo the same surgery again?. RESULTS: Satisfaction item 1 correlated negatively with the VAS for low back pain, leg pain, numbness, JOABPEQ social life disturbance score, SF-36 physical function score, and HADS anxiety score (p < 0.05). Satisfaction 2 correlated negatively with age at surgery, VAS of leg pain, PCS magnification score, and BS-POP score (p < 0.05). Multiple regression analysis showed significant associations between satisfaction 1 and SF-36 physical function and HADS anxiety scores, and between satisfaction 2 and PCS magnification score (p < 0.05). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The preoperative factors independently associated with surgical satisfaction were analyzed utilizing Speaman's rank correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Physical function and anxiety were identified as preoperative factors that affected patient satisfaction with surgery. Preoperative assessment of psychological factors and interventions for anxiety may help improve patient satisfaction after surgery for LSS.

Adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies in older adults with chronic pain after lumbar surgery.

This study investigated whether adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies mediate the association between chronic pain and health-related quality of life among older adults experiencing chronic pain after lumbar surgery. Participants were 103 older adults with either or both of chronic lower back pain and leg pain after lumbar surgery (median age = 75 years, men = 44, women = 59). Intensity of chronic lower back and leg pain (11-point numerical rating scale), physical activities (Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly) as an adaptive coping strategy, maladaptive coping strategies (e.g. guarding, resting; Chronic Pain Coping Inventory), and health-related quality of life (12-item Short-Form Health Survey) were measured. Hypothetical models with adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies as mediators of pain intensity and health-related quality of life were tested using structural equation modeling. Model fitness was acceptable (adjusted goodness of fit index: 0.94-0.98, comparative fit index: 1.00, root mean square error of approximation: 0.00). The results showed that (1) the adaptive coping strategy of physical activity positively mediated the association between lower back and leg pain, and physical health but not mental and social health; (2) maladaptive coping strategies negatively mediated the association between pain and physical, mental, and social health; (3) physical activities were negatively associated with maladaptive coping strategies. This study demonstrated that adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies serve as mediators of the relationship between chronic pain and health-related quality of life in older adults after lumbar surgery.

Quality of life of patients operated for lumbar stenosis at the Yaoundé Central Hospital.

Introduction: Several studies have been conducted in many African countries on lumbar stenosis but none on the quality of life of patients after surgery. We conducted this study to evaluate the quality of life of patients following surgery indicated for lumbar stenosis.Methods: A cross-sectional study from January 2010 to December 2015 in the neurosurgery department of the Yaoundé Central Hospital. We included all patients operated for lumbar stenosis, whose post-operative follow-up was at least of one year. Sampling was consecutive using operating room registries and archives of the neurosurgery department. We used the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) to evaluate patient's quality of life.Results: We recruited 52 patients. The mean age was 58.13 years. Pre-operatively, 67.3% of patients presented with severe pain (mean VAS of 8.9). At 3 months, 59.6% presented with moderate pain (mean VAS = 4.75). At six months following surgery, 92.3% of patients had mild pain (mean VAS = 2.92). At one year, all patients had only mild pain (mean VAS = 1.05). Pre-operatively, 67.30% of patients presented with severe walking disability; the mean ODI was 77.88% and a third were bedridden. Three months after surgery 61.50% presented with moderate disability and the mean ODI was 38.17%. Six months following surgery, 48.10% of patients presented with moderate disability and 42.30% presented with a mild disability (the mean ODI was 24.80%). At one year, 82% of patients presented with mild disability and the mean ODI was 12.67%.Conclusion: Surgery improved the physical condition of patients.

Psychological factors outmatched morphological markers in predicting limitations in activities of daily living and participation in patients with lumbar stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Recent demographic changes have led to a large population of older adults, many of whom experience degenerative disc diseases. Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) is associated with considerable discomfort and limitations in activities of daily living (ADL). Symptomatic DLSS is one of the most frequent indications for spinal surgery. The aim of this study was to identify sociodemographic variables, morphological markers, depression as well as fear of movement that predict ADL performance and participation in social life in patients with DLSS. METHODS: Sixty-seven patients with DLSS (mean age 62.5 years [11.7], 50.7% females) participated in the study. Predictor variables were age, gender, duration of disease, three morphological markers (severity of the lumbar stenosis, the number of affected segments and presence of spondylolisthesis) as well as self-reported depression and fear of movement. Dependent variables were pain interference with the performance of ADLs, ADLs and participation in social life. Correlations between predictor and dependent variables were calculated before stepwise, linear regression analyses. Only significant correlations were included in the linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Variance explained by the predictor variables ranged between 12% (R2 = .12; pain interference-physical) and 40% (R2 = .40; ADL requiring lower extremity functioning; participation). Depression and fear of movement were the most powerful predictors for all dependent variables. Among the morphological markers only stenosis severity contributed to the prediction of ADLs requiring lower extremity functioning. CONCLUSION: Depression and fear of movement were more important predictors of the execution of ADLs and participation in social life compared to morphological markers. Elevated depressive symptoms and fear of movement might indicate limited adaptation and coping regarding the disease and its consequences. Early monitoring of these predictors should therefore be conducted in every spine centre. Future studies should investigate whether psychological screening or a preoperative psychological consultation helps to avoid operations and enables better patient outcomes.

The influence of preoperative mental health on clinical outcomes after laminectomy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The influence of preoperative mental health on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the influence of preoperative mental health HRQOL after laminectomy in patients with LSS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 122 patients who had lumbar spinous process splitting laminectomy (LSPSL) for LSS. We assessed clinical information; Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score; numerical rating scale (NRS) for low back pain, for leg pain, and for leg numbness; Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ); JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ); Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ); and Short Form 8 (SF-8) as patient reported outcomes. Patients were divided into two groups (Group L ≤ 36.2 points and Group NL > 36.2 points) based on the results of the preoperative mental health (MH) score in SF-8 to examine the influence of MH in LSS. We compared the HRQOL between the two groups postoperatively. RESULTS: The JOA score, NRS, and ZCQ score significantly improved after surgery. HRQOL outcomes including JOABPEQ, RMDQ, and SF-8 showed that the LSPSL improved not only the physical but also the mental function in patients with LSS. All HRQOL outcomes in Group L exhibited significantly worse scores preoperatively; however, no significant differences between two groups were found postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: LSPSL greatly reduced low back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness. LSPSL resulted in a significant improvement based on HRQOL questionnaires even in patients with preoperative depressive mood. Not only the physical status but also the mental health may improve after LSPSL even in patients with LSS with a depressive mood preoperatively.

Factors Associated With Return-to-Work Following Cervical Spine Surgery in Non-Worker's Compensation Setting.

STUDY DESIGN: This study retrospectively analyzes prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: Here in this study we aim to determine the factors which impact a patient's ability to return to work (RTW) in the setting of cervical spine surgery in patients without worker's compensation status. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgical management of degenerative cervical disease has proven cost-effectiveness and shown significant improvement in quality of life. However, the ability to RTW is an important clinical outcome for preoperatively employed patients. METHODS: All adult patients undergoing elective surgery for cervical degenerative disease at our institution are enrolled in a prospective, web-based registry. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was built for time to RTW. The variables included in the model were age, sex, smoking status, occupation type, number of levels operated on, ASA grade, body mass index, history of diabetes, history of coronary artery disease (CAD), history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), anxiety, depression, myelopathy at presentation, duration of symptoms more than 12 months, diagnosis, type of surgery performed, and preoperative Neck Disability Index, EuroQol Five Dimensions, and Numeric Rating Scale pain scores for neck pain and arm pain scores. RESULTS: Of the total 324 patients with complete 3-month follow-up data 83% (n = 269) returned to work following surgery. The median time to RTW was 35 days (range, 2-90 d). Patients with a labor-intensive occupation, higher ASA grade, history of CAD, and history of COPD were less likely to RTW. The likelihood of RTW was lower in patients with a diagnosis of disc herniation compared with cervical stenosis, patients undergoing cervical corpectomy compared laminectomy and fusion and patient with longer operative time. CONCLUSION: Our study identifies the various factors associated with a lower likelihood of RTW at 3 months after cervical spine surgery in the non-worker's compensation setting. This information provides expectations for the patient and employer when undergoing cervical spine surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Development and delivery of the BOOST (Better Outcomes for Older adults with Spinal Trouble) intervention for older adults with neurogenic claudication.

Neurogenic claudication due to spinal stenosis is a common cause of disability in older adults. Conservative treatments are a favourable treatment option. This paper describes the development and delivery of the BOOST (Better Outcomes for Older adults with Spinal Trouble) intervention, a physiotherapist-delivered physical and psychological intervention for the management of neurogenic claudication in older adults. The BOOST intervention is being tested in a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial in UK National Health Service Trusts; delivered by physiotherapists registered with the Health and Care Professionals Council. Participants are aged 65 years or older, registered with a primary care practice, and report symptoms consistent with neurogenic claudication. Intervention content and delivery was initially informed by clinical and patient experts, research evidence, and behaviour change guidelines; and refined following an intervention development day attended by researchers, health professionals, and Patient and Public Involvement representatives. The BOOST intervention comprises 12 group sessions, promoting sustained adherence with a long term home and physical activity programme. Each session includes education and group discussion, individually tailored exercises, and walking. Initial exercise levels are set at a one-to-one assessment. Continued home exercise adherence and increased physical activity following completion of the sessions is facilitated through support telephone calls. Trial registration ISRCTN12698674.

[A retrospective investigation of the efficiency of transforaminal anterior epidural steroid injections in patients with low back pain and the effects of interventional pain therapy on quality of life]. / Bel agrili hastalarda transforaminal anterior epidural steroid enjeksiyonunun etkinliginin ve girisimsel tedavinin yasam kalitesine etkisinin retrospektif arastirilmasi.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of transforaminal anterior epidural steroid and local anesthetic injections (TAESE) and the effects on quality of life in patients with low back pain. METHODS: The study patients (n=191) were divided into 3 groups: disc herniation (DH), failed back surgery (FBS), and spinal stenosis (SS). A visual analog scale (VAS) and verbal pain scale (VPS) were used to assess patient pain. Scores were measured before treatment (VAS 0), in the first month of application (VAS 1), 3 months (VAS 3), and 6 months (VAS 6). Patient quality of life was examined using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: In all 3 groups, there was a statistically significant reduction in pain compared with the VAS 0 score at 1, 3, and 6 months (p<0.001). The reduction in VAS/VPS was greatest in the DH group, followed by the FBS and SS groups, respectively. All of the parameters of the SF-36 measurement were lower in the SS patients compared with the DH patients. The quality of life score was lowest in the SS patients, though the physical health and social functioning scores were lowest in the FBS group. CONCLUSION: TAESE is effective and can be safely performed in patients who have low back pain due to DH, FBS, or SS. The quality of life result was less successful in SS patients, particularly in the parameter of physical role limitations.

Preoperative sense of coherence associated with the 10-year outcomes of lumbar spinal stenosis surgery.

A prospective 10-year follow-up study was conducted to determine the significance of the preoperative sense of coherence, with respect to the preoperative and 10-year clinical characteristics, among lumbar spinal stenosis patients ( N = 99). In addition, the predictive value of the preoperative sense of coherence regarding the 10-year surgery outcome was also evaluated. In a logistic regression analysis, a weak preoperative sense of coherence and low functional ability predicted the patients' functional ability 10 years after the surgery. Moreover, those patients with weak sense of coherence before surgery showed poorer functional ability 10 years after the surgery, but not preoperatively. A weak preoperative sense of coherence seems to associate with poorer long-term outcome after surgery; therefore, various rehabilitation strategies are discussed.

Effect of Sagittal Spinal Balance on the Outcome of Decompression Surgery for Lumbar Canal Stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Although sagittal spinal balance is known to affect the outcome of spinal deformity surgery, its effect on simple decompression surgery is not well understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression for lumbar canal stenosis were prospectively enrolled in the study. Before surgery and 6 months after surgery, the following sagittal-alignment parameters were measured: lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). At the same time, short-form 36 (SF-36) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were estimated. The patients were divided into the poor postoperative physical score group (P_poor), good postoperative physical score group (P_good), poor postoperative VAS group (V_poor), or good postoperative VAS group (V_good). The postoperative spinopelvic parameters were compared between the physical score and VAS groups, respectively. Finally, we examined the correlation between the spinopelvic parameters and the outcome scores using scatter plots and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were enrolled into the study. Although the spinopelvic parameters (LL, PT, PI-LL) significantly improved after surgery, the absolute values of improvement were relatively small. The postoperative spinopelvic parameters were significantly worse in the P_poor and the V_poor groups compared with the P_good and the V_good groups, respectively. The correlation analyses also showed that worse postoperative spinopelvic parameters correlated to worse outcome in SF-36 and VAS. CONCLUSIONS: Sagittal spinal balance significantly affected the outcome of patients undergoing decompression surgery for lumbar canal stenosis, the knowledge of which may serve better patient management.