Literature DB >> 22882708

Spine surgery outcomes in a workers' compensation cohort.

Ian A Harris1, Nandu Dantanarayana, Justine M Naylor.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Lumbar spine surgery (fusion, disc replacement or decompression) is common, yet indications are unclear and outcomes, particularly in a workers' compensation setting, are not consistently favourable. This study aimed to determine the outcomes of spine surgery in an Australian workers' compensation cohort.
METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from WorkCover NSW and insurer agents was performed. Subjects were included if they had lumbar spine decompression, fusion or disc replacement procedures performed between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2006 (inclusive). Main outcome measures were as follows: need for further lumbar spine surgery, return to work (RTW), return to pre-injury duties (PID) and need for ongoing physical treatment or prescription opioids. All outcomes were measured at 24 months post-surgery.
RESULTS: A total of 476 patients had undergone lumbar spine surgery within the workers' compensation system. The revision surgery rate was 9.2%. The RTW rate and return to PID rate were 50.3% and 14.2%, respectively. The proportion of patients still undergoing treatment was 77.7%. The rates of RTW (or PID) and need for ongoing treatment were significantly worse in patients undergoing fusion and disc replacement, compared with patients undergoing decompressive procedures (laminectomy, discectomy). DISCUSSION: The findings do not support the use of lumbar spine fusion or disc replacement surgery as a method of achieving RTW and relief of pain in patients treated under workers' compensation.
© 2012 The Authors. ANZ Journal of Surgery © 2012 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22882708     DOI: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2012.06152.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  ANZ J Surg        ISSN: 1445-1433            Impact factor:   1.872


  8 in total

Review 1.  The role of stem cell therapies in degenerative lumbar spine disease: a review.

Authors:  David Oehme; Tony Goldschlager; Jeffrey V Rosenfeld; Peter Ghosh; Graham Jenkin
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 3.042

2.  Risk Factors for Failing to Reach a Minimal Clinically Important Difference Following Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression.

Authors:  Elliot D K Cha; Conor P Lynch; Cara E Geoghegan; Caroline N Jadczak; Shruthi Mohan; Kern Singh
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2022-02-17

3.  ISASS Policy Statement - Lumbar Artificial Disc.

Authors:  Jack Zigler; Rolando Garcia
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-03-12

4.  Spine surgery outcome in patients who sought compensation after a motor vehicle accident: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Pooria Sarrami; Rafael Ekmejian; Justine M Naylor; Joseph Descallar; Robindro Chatterji; Ian A Harris
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: One Year Clinical and Radiographic Results Following Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Surgery.

Authors:  Richard A Kube; Jeffrey M Muir
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2016-11-30

6.  Factors Associated With Clinical Outcomes After Lumbar Interbody Fusion With a Porous Nitinol Implant.

Authors:  Fahad H Abduljabbar; Asim M Makhdom; Mona Rajeh; Alisson R Tales; Jacob Mathew; Jean Ouellet; Michael Weber; Peter Jarzem
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-04-07

7.  Is clinician refusal to treat an emerging problem in injury compensation systems?

Authors:  Bianca Brijnath; Danielle Mazza; Agnieszka Kosny; Samantha Bunzli; Nabita Singh; Rasa Ruseckaite; Alex Collie
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Impact of acupuncture treatment on the lumbar surgery rate for low back pain in Korea: A nationwide matched retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Wonil Koh; Kyungwon Kang; Yoon Jae Lee; Me-Riong Kim; Joon-Shik Shin; Jinho Lee; Jun-Hwan Lee; Kyung-Min Shin; In-Hyuk Ha
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.