STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, consecutive study of patients' outcome at three subsequent follow-up times after lumbar disc surgery. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how consistent outcome remained in a group of patients after lumbar disc surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite similar results concerning the overall outcome, results in most studies show different prognostic factors for lumbar disc surgery at different follow-up times. A reason for this observation could be that patients shift to a different outcome group during the observation period. METHODS: Before surgery and at the three follow-ups (3, 12, and 28 months after surgery) the Low Back Outcome Score was calculated. Groups with favorable and unfavorable outcome were determined after each follow-up according to the scores. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were studied. Forty percent showed an unstable outcome at different follow-up times. For each follow-up, three prognostic factors were determined. No prognostic factor showed significance at all follow-up examinations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients whose outcome after lumbar disc surgery does not remain stable present a major problem in the calculation of prognostic factors.
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, consecutive study of patients' outcome at three subsequent follow-up times after lumbar disc surgery. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how consistent outcome remained in a group of patients after lumbar disc surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite similar results concerning the overall outcome, results in most studies show different prognostic factors for lumbar disc surgery at different follow-up times. A reason for this observation could be that patients shift to a different outcome group during the observation period. METHODS: Before surgery and at the three follow-ups (3, 12, and 28 months after surgery) the Low Back Outcome Score was calculated. Groups with favorable and unfavorable outcome were determined after each follow-up according to the scores. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were studied. Forty percent showed an unstable outcome at different follow-up times. For each follow-up, three prognostic factors were determined. No prognostic factor showed significance at all follow-up examinations. CONCLUSIONS:Patients whose outcome after lumbar disc surgery does not remain stable present a major problem in the calculation of prognostic factors.
Authors: Jasper J den Boer; Rob A B Oostendorp; Tjemme Beems; Marten Munneke; Margreet Oerlemans; Andrea W M Evers Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2005-05-25 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Asdrubal Falavigna; Orlando Righesso; Alisson Roberto Teles; Lucas Piccoli Conzati; Julia Bertholdo Bossardi; Pedro Guarise da Silva; Joseph S Cheng Journal: Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol Date: 2015-05-22
Authors: A F Mannion; A Elfering; R Staerkle; A Junge; D Grob; J Dvorak; N Jacobshagen; N K Semmer; N Boos Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2006-11-14 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Shuaijin Wang; Jeffrey J Hebert; Edward Abraham; Amanda Vandewint; Erin Bigney; Eden Richardson; Dana El-Mughayyar; Najmedden Attabib; Niels Wedderkopp; Stephen Kingwell; Alex Soroceanu; M H Weber; Hamilton Hall; Joel Finkelstein; Christopher S Bailey; Kenneth Thomas; Andrew Nataraj; Jerome Paquet; Michael G Johnson; Charles Fisher; Y Raja Rampersaud; Nicolas Dea; Chris Small; Neil Manson Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 4.996