Patient-reported outcome measure clustering after surgery for adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis.

adult lumbar patient-reported outcomes scoliosis spine deformity surgery

Journal

Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
ISSN: 1547-5646
Titre abrégé: J Neurosurg Spine
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101223545

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 Jan 2022
Historique:
received: 13 08 2021
accepted: 09 11 2021
entrez: 16 2 2022
pubmed: 17 2 2022
medline: 17 2 2022
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) is a widespread and debilitating subset of adult spinal deformity. Although many patients benefit from operative treatment, surgery entails substantial cost and risk for adverse events. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are patient-centered tools used to evaluate the appropriateness of surgery and to assist in the shared decision-making process. Framing realistic patient expectations should include the possible functional limitation to improvement inherent in surgical intervention, such as multilevel fusion to the sacrum. The authors' objective was to predict postoperative ASLS PROMs by using clustering analysis, generalized longitudinal regression models, percentile analysis, and clinical improvement analysis of preoperative health-related quality-of-life scores for use in surgical counseling. Operative results from the combined ASLS cohorts were examined. PROM score clustering after surgery investigated limits of surgical improvement. Patients were categorized by baseline disability (mild, moderate, moderate to severe, or severe) according to preoperative Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Responder analysis for patients achieving improvement meeting the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) standards was performed using both fixed-threshold and patient-specific values (MCID = 30% of remaining scale, SCB = 50%). Best (top 5%), worst (bottom 5%), and median scores were calculated across disability categories. A total of 171/187 (91%) of patients with ASLS achieved 2-year follow-up. Patients rarely achieved a PROM ceiling for any measure, with 33%-43% of individuals clustering near 4.0 for SRS domains. Patients with severe baseline disability (< 2.0) SRS-pain and SRS-function scores were often left with moderate to severe disability (2.0-2.9), unlike patients with higher (≥ 3.0) initial PROM values. Patients with mild disability according to baseline SRS-function score were unlikely to improve. Crippling baseline ODI disability (> 60) commonly left patients with moderate disability (median ODI = 32). As baseline ODI disability increased, patients were more likely to achieve MCID and SCB (p < 0.001). Compared to fixed threshold values for MCID and SCB, patient-specific values were more sensitive to change for patients with minimal ODI baseline disability (p = 0.008) and less sensitive to change for patients with moderate to severe SRS subscore disability (p = 0.01). These findings suggest that ASLS surgeries have a limit to possible improvement, probably due to both baseline disability and the effects of surgery. The most disabled patients often had moderate to severe disability (SRS < 3, ODI > 30) at 2 years, emphasizing the importance of patient counseling and expectation management.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35171837
doi: 10.3171/2021.11.SPINE21949
pii: 2021.11.SPINE21949
pmc: PMC10193483
doi:
pii:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1-12

Références

Spine Deform. 2016 Sep;4(5):373-377
pubmed: 27927495
Am J Med Qual. 2009 Nov-Dec;24(6 Suppl):25S-31S
pubmed: 19890182
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Sep 15;34(20):2171-8
pubmed: 19752703
Eur Spine J. 2016 Aug;25(8):2390-400
pubmed: 26821143
Neurosurg Focus. 2015 Dec;39(6):E13
pubmed: 26621411
Spine J. 2007 Sep-Oct;7(5):541-6
pubmed: 17448732
Spine J. 2014 Oct 1;14(10):2326-33
pubmed: 24469004
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994 Oct 1;19(19):2139-43
pubmed: 7809744
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Apr 20;36(9):731-6
pubmed: 20881515
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 Feb;41(3):224-33
pubmed: 26571174
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Sep;90(9):1839-47
pubmed: 18762642
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 Mar 15;40(6):377-81
pubmed: 25774463
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Jan 1;33(1):90-4
pubmed: 18165753
Neurosurgery. 2016 Jun;78(6):851-61
pubmed: 26579966
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 Feb;474(2):321-9
pubmed: 26201420
J Neurosurg Spine. 2019 Jun 28;:1-13
pubmed: 31252385
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1996 Jul-Aug;20(4):583-7
pubmed: 8708060
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Sep;89:125-135
pubmed: 28433671
J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2020 Apr 27;7(2):157-164
pubmed: 32377549
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Jul 15;42(14):1096-1105
pubmed: 27870805
Ochsner J. 2014 Spring;14(1):67-77
pubmed: 24688336
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019 Jan 18;20(1):31
pubmed: 30658613
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Aug 15;45(16):1118-1127
pubmed: 32706564
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013 Jul;21(7):419-26
pubmed: 23818029
Pain. 2005 Jan;113(1-2):9-19
pubmed: 15621359
Spine Deform. 2016 Jul;4(4):310-322
pubmed: 27927522
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Aug 15;44(16):1144-1153
pubmed: 30896589
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 Nov 15;41(22):1701-1708
pubmed: 27831984
N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 1;366(9):780-1
pubmed: 22375967
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Jan;475(1):149-157
pubmed: 26956248
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Nov 15;25(22):2940-52; discussion 2952
pubmed: 11074683
JAMA Surg. 2018 Jul 1;153(7):634-642
pubmed: 29516096
Spine J. 2013 Dec;13(12):1843-8
pubmed: 24315558
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Nov 1;44(21):1499-1506
pubmed: 31205182
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Feb 20;101(4):338-352
pubmed: 30801373
N Engl J Med. 2010 Dec 23;363(26):2477-81
pubmed: 21142528
Eur Spine J. 2015 Jan;24(1):3-11
pubmed: 25218732
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Jul 15;34(16):1722-31
pubmed: 19561562
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Sep 1;44(17):1211-1219
pubmed: 30921297
Spine Deform. 2017 Sep;5(5):342-350
pubmed: 28882352
Global Spine J. 2018 Apr;8(2):156-163
pubmed: 29662746
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Apr 1;42(7):479-489
pubmed: 28351071
Spine Deform. 2015 Nov;3(6):566-574
pubmed: 27927560
Eur Spine J. 2003 Feb;12(1):12-20
pubmed: 12592542

Auteurs

James P Wondra (JP)

1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

Michael P Kelly (MP)

1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

Elizabeth L Yanik (EL)

1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

Jacob K Greenberg (JK)

1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

Justin S Smith (JS)

2Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia.

Shay Bess (S)

3Denver International Spine Center, Denver, Colorado.

Christopher I Shaffrey (CI)

4Department of Neurological Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; and.

Lawrence G Lenke (LG)

5Och Spine Hospital, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York.

Keith Bridwell (K)

1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

Classifications MeSH