Determinants of Patient Satisfaction 2 Years After Spinal Deformity Surgery: A Latent Class Analysis.
Adult
Aged
Databases, Factual
/ trends
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Latent Class Analysis
Male
Middle Aged
Neurosurgical Procedures
/ adverse effects
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Patient Satisfaction
Prospective Studies
Quality of Life
/ psychology
Retrospective Studies
Scoliosis
/ psychology
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Journal
Spine
ISSN: 1528-1159
Titre abrégé: Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7610646
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jan 2019
01 Jan 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
23
6
2018
medline:
14
6
2019
entrez:
23
6
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Retrospective review of prospective multicenter database. To investigate the determinants of patient satisfaction with respect to changes in functional limitations 2 years after spinal deformity surgery. For operatively treated adult spine deformity (ASD), patient satisfaction has become an important component of evaluating quality of care. A total of 430 operative patients with ASD with 2-year follow-up were analyzed. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Scoliosis Research Society 22-item. Latent class analysis was performed to assign individuals to classes based on the changes in pre- and 2-year postoperative functions, assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). An ordered logistic regression was conducted to assess the association of class membership and satisfaction. Latent class analysis identified four classes. The worsened-condition class (WC: 1.4%) consisted of patients who were likely to experience worsened function, particularly in lifting and pain intensity. The remained-same class (RS: 13.0%) included patients who remained the same, because the majority reported approximately no change in walking, standing, and sitting. The mild-improved class (mild-I: 40.2%) included patients with mildly enhanced conditions, specifically, in standing, social life, and employment. The most-improved class (most-I: 45.3%) included patients with great improvement after surgery mainly in standing, followed by social life and employment. The odds of being satisfied were significantly increased by 3.91- (P < 0.001) and 16.99-fold (P < 0.001), comparing patients in mild-I and most-I to the RS/WC class, respectively, after controlling for confounders. Improvement in standing, social life, and employment are the most important determinants of patient satisfaction postsurgery. Reduced pain intensity and enhanced walking ability also help to elevate patient satisfaction. However, lifting, personal care, sitting, sleeping, and travelling may be of less importance. Examining the heterogeneity of patient-reported outcome in patients with ASD allows the identification of classes with different patient characteristics and satisfaction, and thus, help to guide tailored provision of care. 4.
Sections du résumé
STUDY DESIGN
METHODS
Retrospective review of prospective multicenter database.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the determinants of patient satisfaction with respect to changes in functional limitations 2 years after spinal deformity surgery.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
BACKGROUND
For operatively treated adult spine deformity (ASD), patient satisfaction has become an important component of evaluating quality of care.
METHODS
METHODS
A total of 430 operative patients with ASD with 2-year follow-up were analyzed. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Scoliosis Research Society 22-item. Latent class analysis was performed to assign individuals to classes based on the changes in pre- and 2-year postoperative functions, assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). An ordered logistic regression was conducted to assess the association of class membership and satisfaction.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Latent class analysis identified four classes. The worsened-condition class (WC: 1.4%) consisted of patients who were likely to experience worsened function, particularly in lifting and pain intensity. The remained-same class (RS: 13.0%) included patients who remained the same, because the majority reported approximately no change in walking, standing, and sitting. The mild-improved class (mild-I: 40.2%) included patients with mildly enhanced conditions, specifically, in standing, social life, and employment. The most-improved class (most-I: 45.3%) included patients with great improvement after surgery mainly in standing, followed by social life and employment. The odds of being satisfied were significantly increased by 3.91- (P < 0.001) and 16.99-fold (P < 0.001), comparing patients in mild-I and most-I to the RS/WC class, respectively, after controlling for confounders.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Improvement in standing, social life, and employment are the most important determinants of patient satisfaction postsurgery. Reduced pain intensity and enhanced walking ability also help to elevate patient satisfaction. However, lifting, personal care, sitting, sleeping, and travelling may be of less importance. Examining the heterogeneity of patient-reported outcome in patients with ASD allows the identification of classes with different patient characteristics and satisfaction, and thus, help to guide tailored provision of care.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
METHODS
4.
Identifiants
pubmed: 29933336
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002753
pii: 00007632-201901010-00017
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
E45-E52Références
Dykes PC, Samal L, Donahue M, et al. A patient-centered longitudinal care plan: vision versus reality. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014; 21:1082–1090.
VanLare JM, Conway PH. Value-based purchasing—national programs to move from volume to value. N Engl J Med 2012; 367:292–295.
Rosenbaum S, Margulies R. Tax-exempt hospitals and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: implications for public health policy and practice. Public Health Rep 2011; 126:283–286.
Glassman SD, Hamill CL, Bridwell KH, et al. The impact of perioperative complications on clinical outcome in adult deformity surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007; 32:2764–2770.
Lonstein JE. Scoliosis: surgical versus nonsurgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 443:248–259.
Ames CP, Scheer JK, Lafage V, et al. Adult spinal deformity: epidemiology, health impact, evaluation, and management. Spine Deform 2016; 4:310–322.
Bess S, Boachie-Adjei O, Burton D, et al. Pain and disability determine treatment modality for older patients with adult scoliosis, while deformity guides treatment for younger patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34:2186–2190.
Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Berven S, et al. Improvement of back pain with operative and nonoperative treatment in adults with scoliosis. Neurosurgery 2009; 65:86–93.
Atlas SJ, Deyo RA, Keller RB, et al. The Maine Lumbar Spine Study, Part II. 1-Year outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of sciatica. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996; 21:1777–1786.
Abenhaim L, Suissa S. Importance and economic burden of occupational back pain: a study of 2,500 cases representative of Quebec. J Occup Med 1987; 29:670–674.
Cassisi JE, Sypert GW, Lagana L, et al. Pain, disability, and psychological functioning in chronic low back pain subgroups: myofascial versus herniated disc syndrome. Neurosurgery 1993; 33:379–385.
Schade V, Semmer N, Main CJ, et al. The impact of clinical, morphological, psychosocial and work-related factors on the outcome of lumbar discectomy. Pain 1999; 80:239–249.
Dvorak J, Gauchat MH, Valach L. The outcome of surgery for lumbar disc herniation. I. A 4-17 years’ follow-up with emphasis on somatic aspects. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1988; 13:1418–1422.
McCormick JD, Werner BC, Shimer AL. Patient-reported outcome measures in spine surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2013; 21:99–107.
Champain S, Benchikh K, Nogier A, et al. Validation of new clinical quantitative analysis software applicable in spine orthopaedic studies. Eur Spine J 2006; 15:982–991.
Rillardon L, Levassor N, Guigui P, et al. Validation of a tool to measure pelvic and spinal parameters of sagittal balance [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 2003; 89:218–227.
Asher MA, Lai SM, Glattes RC, et al. Refinement of the SRS-22 Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaire function domain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31:593–597.
Bridwell KH, Cats-Baril W, Harrast J, et al. The validity of the SRS-22 instrument in an adult spinal deformity population compared with the Oswestry and SF-12: a study of response distribution, concurrent validity, internal consistency, and reliability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30:455–461.
SRS-30 Patient Questionnaire [Scoliosis Research Society website]], 2010. Available at: http://srs.org/professionals/outcomes/srs-22.pdf. Accessed January 4, 2010.
Collins LMLS. Latent Class and Latent Transition Analysis: With Applications in the Social Behavioral, and Health Science ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2010.
Roesch SC, Villodas M, Villodas F. Latent class/profile analysis in maltreatment research: a commentary on Nooner et al., Pears et al., and looking beyond. Child Abuse Negl 2010; 34:155–160.
Celeux G, Soromenho G. An entropy criterion for assessing the number of clusters in a mixture model.
Laxton AW, Perrin RG. The relations between social support, life stress, and quality of life following spinal decompression surgery. Spinal Cord 2003; 41:553–558.
Sorensen LV, Mors O, Skovlund O. A prospective study of the importance of psychological and social factors for the outcome after surgery in patients with slipped lumbar disk operated upon for the first time. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1987; 88:119–125.
Hurme M, Alaranta H. Factors predicting the result of surgery for lumbar intervertebral disc herniation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1987; 12:933–938.
Lidal IB, Huynh TK, Biering-Sorensen F. Return to work following spinal cord injury: a review. Disabil Rehabil 2007; 29:1341–1375.
Burnham RS, Warren SA, Saboe LA, et al. Factors predicting employment 1 year after traumatic spine fracture. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996; 21:1066–1071.
Sorensen LV, Mors O. A two-year prospective follow-up study of the outcome after surgery in patients with slipped lumbar disk operated upon for the first time. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1989; 96:94–99.
McCarthy IM, Hostin RA, Ames CP, et al. Total hospital costs of surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity: an extended follow-up study. Spine J 2014; 14:2326–2333.
Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Berven S, et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment of leg pain in adults with scoliosis: a retrospective review of a prospective multicenter database with two-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34:1693–1698.
Bridwell KH, Glassman S, Horton W, et al. Does treatment (nonoperative and operative) improve the two-year quality of life in patients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis: a prospective multicenter evidence-based medicine study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34:2171–2178.
Chotai S, Sivaganesan A, Parker SL, et al. Patient-specific factors associated with dissatisfaction after elective surgery for degenerative spine diseases. Neurosurgery 2015; 77:157–163.
Scheer JK, Smith JS, Clark AJ, et al. Comprehensive study of back and leg pain improvements after adult spinal deformity surgery: analysis of 421 patients with 2-year follow-up and of the impact of the surgery on treatment satisfaction. J Neurosurg Spine 2015; 22:540–553.
Nakahara H, Okazaki K, Mizu-Uchi H, et al. Correlations between patient satisfaction and ability to perform daily activities after total knee arthroplasty: why aren’t patients satisfied? J Orthop Sci 2015; 20:87–92.
Yamashita K, Hayashi J, Ohzono K, et al. Correlation of patient satisfaction with symptom severity and walking ability after surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003; 28:2477–2481.
Moal B, Lafage V, Smith JS, et al. Clinical improvement through surgery for adult spinal deformity: what can be expected and who is likely to benefit most? Spine Deform 2015; 3:566–574.
Fu KM, Bess S, Shaffrey CI, et al. Patients with adult spinal deformity treated operatively report greater baseline pain and disability than patients treated nonoperatively; however, deformities differ between age groups. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014; 39:1401–1407.
Drazin D, Shirzadi A, Rosner J, et al. Complications and outcomes after spinal deformity surgery in the elderly: review of the existing literature and future directions. Neurosurg Focus 2011; 31:E3.
Hassanzadeh H, Jain A, El Dafrawy MH, et al. Clinical results and functional outcomes in adult patients after revision surgery for spinal deformity correction: patients younger than 65 years versus 65 years and older. Spine Deform 2013; 1:371–376.
O’Neill KR, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Extension of spine fusion to the sacrum following long fusions for deformity correction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014; 39:953–962.
Crawford CH 3rd, Carreon LY, Bridwell KH, et al. Long fusions to the sacrum in elderly patients with spinal deformity. Eur Spine J 2012; 21:2165–2169.
Edwards CC 2nd, Bridwell KH, Patel A, et al. Long adult deformity fusions to L5 and the sacrum. A matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004; 29:1996–2005.
O'Shaughnessy BA, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Does a long-fusion “T3-sacrum” portend a worse outcome than a short-fusion “T10-sacrum” in primary surgery for adult scoliosis? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012; 37:884–890.