STUDY DESIGN: A multicenter randomized clinical trial including 82 patients. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of early initiation of rehabilitation after instrumented lumbar spinal fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar spinal fusion has been performed for more than 70 years. Yet, few studies have examined patients' subsequent rehabilitation. Group-based rehabilitation is both efficient and cost-effective in rehabilitation of lumbar spinal fusion patients. METHODS:Patients with degenerative disc diseases undergoing instrumented lumbar spinal fusion were randomly assigned to initiate their rehabilitation 6 weeks (6-wk group) or 12 weeks after lumbar spinal fusion (12-wk group). Both groups received the same group-based rehabilitation. Primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index. Secondary outcome was the Dallas Pain Questionnaire, the Low Back Pain Rating Scale, and absence from work. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the groups in terms of differences from baseline to 6 months and 1-year follow-up. Results are presented in median with 25th and 75th percentiles. RESULTS: According to the Oswestry Disability Index, at 1-year follow-up, the 6-week-group had a median reduction of -6 (-19; 4) compared with -20 (-30;-7) in the 12-week group (P, 0.05). The Dallas Pain Questionnaire showed overall the same tendency, and within daily activities were significantly reduced in favor of the 12-week group (P, 0.05). For back pain, the 6-week group had a median reduction of -2.2 (-3.0; -0.7) similar with -3.3 (-4.7; -1.7) in the 12-week group (P, 0.05). The results at 6 months of follow-up were similar. No difference was found according to return to work 1 year postsurgery. CONCLUSION: Early start of rehabilitation (6 wk vs. 12 wk) after lumbar spinal fusion resulted in inferior outcomes. The improvements in the 12-week group were 4 times better than that in the 6-week group, indicating that the start-up time of rehabilitation is an important contributing factor for the overall outcome.
RCT Entities:
STUDY DESIGN: A multicenter randomized clinical trial including 82 patients. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of early initiation of rehabilitation after instrumented lumbar spinal fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar spinal fusion has been performed for more than 70 years. Yet, few studies have examined patients' subsequent rehabilitation. Group-based rehabilitation is both efficient and cost-effective in rehabilitation of lumbar spinal fusion patients. METHODS:Patients with degenerative disc diseases undergoing instrumented lumbar spinal fusion were randomly assigned to initiate their rehabilitation 6 weeks (6-wk group) or 12 weeks after lumbar spinal fusion (12-wk group). Both groups received the same group-based rehabilitation. Primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index. Secondary outcome was the Dallas Pain Questionnaire, the Low Back Pain Rating Scale, and absence from work. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the groups in terms of differences from baseline to 6 months and 1-year follow-up. Results are presented in median with 25th and 75th percentiles. RESULTS: According to the Oswestry Disability Index, at 1-year follow-up, the 6-week-group had a median reduction of -6 (-19; 4) compared with -20 (-30;-7) in the 12-week group (P, 0.05). The Dallas Pain Questionnaire showed overall the same tendency, and within daily activities were significantly reduced in favor of the 12-week group (P, 0.05). For back pain, the 6-week group had a median reduction of -2.2 (-3.0; -0.7) similar with -3.3 (-4.7; -1.7) in the 12-week group (P, 0.05). The results at 6 months of follow-up were similar. No difference was found according to return to work 1 year postsurgery. CONCLUSION: Early start of rehabilitation (6 wk vs. 12 wk) after lumbar spinal fusion resulted in inferior outcomes. The improvements in the 12-week group were 4 times better than that in the 6-week group, indicating that the start-up time of rehabilitation is an important contributing factor for the overall outcome.
Authors: Kristin R Archer; Clinton J Devin; Susan W Vanston; Tatsuki Koyama; Sharon E Phillips; Shannon L Mathis; Steven Z George; Matthew J McGirt; Dan M Spengler; Oran S Aaronson; Joseph S Cheng; Stephen T Wegener Journal: J Pain Date: 2015-10-23 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Esther R C Janssen; Elle E M Scheijen; Nico L U van Meeteren; Rob A de Bie; Anton F Lenssen; Paul C Willems; Thomas J Hoogeboom Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2016-03-10 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Owoicho Adogwa; Aladine A Elsamadicy; Jared Fialkoff; Victoria D Vuong; Ankit I Mehta; Raul A Vasquez; Joseph Cheng; Isaac O Karikari; Carlos A Bagley Journal: J Spine Surg Date: 2017-06
Authors: Lisa G Oestergaard; Claus V Nielsen; Cody E Bünger; Karen Svidt; Finn B Christensen Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2013-04-06 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Carol McFarland; Sharon Wang-Price; Charles R Gordon; Guy Otis Danielson; J Stuart Crutchfield; Ann Medley; Toni Roddey Journal: Rehabil Res Pract Date: 2020-04-24