Literature DB >> 29367905

Influence of anxiety and depression symptoms on the quality of life in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery.

Martins Back Netto1, Ana Beatriz Sanches Barranco2, Karen Waleska Kniphoff de Oliveira2, Fabrícia Petronilho1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Comparative analysis of the quality of life and functionality of patients undergoing lumbar spine arthrodesis due to degenerative lumbar spine disease. The authors sought to correlate the influence of anxious and depressive symptoms before and after surgery.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed, with 32 patients submitted to arthrodesis due to degenerative lumbar spine disease and the visual analogue pain scale pain questionnaire, the Oswestry Disability Index questionnaire, the Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form questionnaire - 36 items (SF-36), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, applied in the preoperative period and four months after the procedure.
RESULTS: There was improvement in the mean scores of the visual analogue pain scale (p < 0.001) and the Oswestry Disability Index (p < 0.001). In the preoperative period, the variables that presented a difference between patients with and without anxiety symptoms were the SF-36 domains of general health (p = 0.031), social aspects (p = 0.008), and mental health (p = 0.035). In the postoperative period, patients without anxiety symptoms showed better results in the vitality (p = 0.004), social aspects (p = 0.001), mental health (p < 0.001), and pain (p = 0.011) domains. In the preoperative period, the variable that presented a difference between patients with and without depression was the SF-36 domain of emotional aspects (p = 0.022). In the post-operative period, patients without depression presented better vitality (p < 0.001), social aspects (p < 0.001), emotional aspects (p = 0.004), and mental health results (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Lumbar spine arthrodesis was effective in improving pain, low back pain, functional capacity, limitation due to physical aspects, vitality, and social and emotional aspects. Patients without anxiety and depression symptoms had better results on the scales compared to those with such symptoms.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anxiety; Arthrodesis; Depression; Low back pain; Quality of life

Year:  2017        PMID: 29367905      PMCID: PMC5771797          DOI: 10.1016/j.rboe.2017.01.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop        ISSN: 2255-4971


Introduction

Low back pain is defined as pain, muscle tension, or stiffness, which is established below the rib cage and above the lower gluteal fold, and which may be associated with pain radiating to the lower limbs.1, 2 Lumbar pain accounts for 50% of all chronic musculoskeletal diseases and affects 70% of the population in developed countries.3, 4 Responsible for most orthopedic medical appointments, admissions to hospital, and surgery, it is observed mainly in men over 40 years and women over 50 years. Of the patients affected by this disease, 16.4–73.3% have depression, which is usually associated with worse postoperative results.6, 7 Lumbar spine arthrodesis is a surgical procedure used for the treatment of low back pain and sciatica due to advanced degenerative disease that has failed clinical treatment.8, 9 There is no good correlation between the clinical findings and the severity of the disease perceived by patients in relation to painful symptoms and functional disability. Several instruments have been proposed to assess quality of life, psychological aspects, and functional capacity in patients with vertebral disease.11, 12, 13, 14, 15 Studies have evaluated the repercussion of the surgical procedure for lumbar spine diseases on patients’ quality of life and functionality; these data still need to be complemented, correlating them with the pre-existing depressive or anxious state and the postoperative evolution.10, 16 This study is aimed at evaluating the health-related quality of life and functional status of patients before and after posterolateral arthrodesis of the spine with instrumentation, as well as to correlate the influence of anxiety and depression symptoms before and after surgery.

Material and methods

The present study was approved by the Ethics Committee in Research Involving Human Beings of this institution, under opinion No. 1,248,210.

Study design, sample, and inclusion and exclusion criteria

This was a prospective cohort observational study conducted from October 2015 to April 2016. A total of 32 patients with indication of spinal arthrodesis due to degenerative lumbar spine disease awaiting surgery through the Brazilian National Health System were interviewed to assess whether they met the inclusion criteria. Then, a convenience sample was established. The surgeries were performed by the orthopedic department of Hospital Nossa Senhora da Conceição (HNSC). Patients older than 18 years with surgery indication due to degenerative spine disease who had complaints of axial pain and/or root pain refractory to clinical treatment were included. Those who underwent the procedure due to trauma, tumor, or revision of lumbar spine arthrodesis were excluded, as well as those who did not agree to participate and the illiterate. After signing the Informed Consent Form, all patients answered the questionnaires. Patient information regarding age, gender, marital status, duration of symptoms, and treatment, as well as the desire of returning to work and receiving sick leave, were collected at the time of recruitment for preoperative evaluation. All questionnaires were applied in the preoperative period and four months after surgery.

Tools

The first questionnaire included the visual analog scale (VAS) of pain, which ranges from 0 to 10, in which 0 means no pain, 5 indicates moderate pain, and 10, unbearable pain; the respondents were instructed to indicate the maximum intensity of their pain at the time of the interview. Functional limitation for low back pain was evaluated by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), which has been validated for the Brazilian Portuguese language. The scale consists of ten questions with six options to choose from, ranging from 0 to 5. The first question assesses the intensity of pain, while the other nine analyze the effect of the patient's pain on daily activities, such as caring for oneself (dressing, bathing, for example), weight-lifting, walking, sitting, walking, sleeping, getting around, and having a sexual and social life. The total scale score is divided by 50 if the patient answered all the items or by 45 if the patient did not answer an item (sex life, for example); the result is then multiplied by 100. The result is expressed as a percentage and ranges from 0% for patients without disability to 100% for patients with maximum disability. Values are classified as minimum disability (0–20%), moderate disability (21–40%), severe disability (41–60%), full disability (61–80%), and bed-ridden or exaggerated symptoms (81–100%). Quality of life was evaluated by the Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 items (SF-36), in its Brazilian Portuguese version, which comprises 36 items, grouped into eight scales or domains. These include: functional capacity, physical aspects, pain, general health, vitality, social aspects, emotional aspects, mental health, and one question that allows comparative evaluation between the assessment of the individual's current health condition and the condition one year previously. In the second step, it is necessary to calculate the raw score (term used since the value does not represent a unit of measurement). The values of the questions have to be transformed into grades for each of the eight domains of the questionnaire. These domains range from 0 to 100, where 0 is worse and 100 is better. The closer to 100, the better the person's quality of life in that domain, and the closer to 0, the worse. Therefore, each of the domains is standardized on a scale from zero to 100. Low numerical values reflect a poorer health-related quality of life. Finally, the presence of anxiety and depression symptoms was assessed through the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), consisting of 14 items: seven for anxiety assessment (HAD-A) and seven for depression assessment (HAD-D). Anxiety is assessed through questions about feelings of tension, fear, worry, relaxation, restlessness, and panic. Depression is assessed by questions about feelings of joy, slowness in thinking and to perform activities, humor, motivation, personal care, hope, and pleasure in common activities. Each of the items can be scored from 0 to 3, with a maximum of 21 points for each scale; for anxiety, values from 0 to 8 are categorized as “no symptoms” and 9 or above, as “with symptoms.” For depression, values from 0 to 9 are categorized as “no symptoms” and 10 or above, as “with symptoms.”

Surgical technique

The same surgical team performed the procedure in all patients. After general anesthesia, the patients were placed in a prone recumbent position on a radiolucent table. A midline lumbar incision and dissection to bone were performed. Instrumentation with pedicular screws. Neurological decompression with laminectomy, foraminotomy, and/or discectomy. Longitudinal rods to connect the screws. An autologous bone graft placed posterolaterally. Suture by layers, suction drain, and dressing.

Data processing and statistical analysis

The data was organized on Microsoft Excel and analyzed on SPSS, version 15.0. The quantitative variables were described as measures of central tendency and dispersion. The qualitative variables were described as absolute frequencies and percentages. The differences in proportions regarding anxiety and depression symptoms were tested by the chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test; differences in mean pain score and SF-36 (quality of life) score in the preoperative and postoperative periods were assessed using the paired Student's t-test, according to the adequacy of the data. The level of statistical significance was 5% (p value 0.05).

Results

The mean age was 50.97 ± 7.46 years, ranging from 35 to 64. Most patients were female (65.6%), and the predominant marital status was married (78.1%). The majority of patients had presented clinical symptoms for more than two years (75%), and used medication and physical therapy treatment prior to the procedure (87.5%) for a period longer than two years (18.8%; Table 1).
Table 1

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients.

Variablen%
Gender
 Male1134.4
 Female2165.6



Ethnicity
 White3196.9
 Non white13.1



Marital status
 Single13.1
 Married2578.1
 Widower26.3
 Separated412.5



Education
 Incomplete elementary school2481.2
 Complete elementary school515.6
 Incomplete high school00
 Complete high school26.3
 Incomplete College or University education13.1
 College or University Degree00



Symptom presentation
 <2 years825.0
 >2 years2475.0



Associated orthopedic comorbidities
 No2268.8
 Yes1031.3



Associated clinical comorbidities
 No1340.6
 Yes1959.4



Treatment
 Physical therapy13.1
 Medication39.4
  Both2887.5



Duration of previous treatments
 <2years1340.6
 >2 years1959.4



Intention of returning to work
 No721.9
 Yes – desire1443.8
 Yes – as an obligation1134.4



Sick leave
 No1237.5
 Yes2062.5
Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients. Table 2 presents the mean differences in the VAS and ODI scales, as well as in the SF-36 domains in the preoperative and postoperative periods. In the first two scales, the mean scores were significantly lower in the postoperative period. These associations were statistically significant (p = 0.000). In SF-36, the domains that showed a significant improvement with statistical significance were those of functional capacity (p = 0.001), limitation by physical aspects (p = 0.006), pain (p = 0.000), vitality (p = 0.034), social aspects (p = 0.005), and emotional aspects (p = 0.002).
Table 2

Comparison and mean difference of the VAS, Oswestry and SF-36 domains scores.

VariableMean (± SD) beforeMean (± SD) afterDifference of means95% CIpa
VAS8.47 ± 1.414.84 ± 3.263.624.90–2.34<0.001
Oswestry67.75 ± 14.0345.44 ± 19.6222.3132.27–12.34<0.001



SF-36
 Functional capacity20.78 ± 14.5441.25 ± 28.4820.4631.22–9.710.001
 Limitation due to physical aspects3.91 ± 18.0829.69 ± 43.2725.7843.58–7.970.006
 Pain17.19 ± 13.6540.19 ± 19.9323.0032.73–13.26<0.001
 General health44.66 ± 22.3552.57 ± 29.557.8119.29–3.670.175
 Vitality31.72 ± 21.8345.63 ± 29.2313.9026.66–1.140.034
 Social aspects33.38 ± 26.6651.34 ± 31.8517.9630.07–5.850.005
 Emotional aspects12.50 ± 33.6037.5 ± 47.7125.0040.26–9.730.002
 Mental health40.00 ± 24.2946.63 ± 27.766.6216.70–3.450.190

VAS, visual analogue scale; SF-36, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 items.

Paired t-test.

Comparison and mean difference of the VAS, Oswestry and SF-36 domains scores. VAS, visual analogue scale; SF-36, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 items. Paired t-test. Table 3 shows that, in the preoperative period, the variables that presented a difference between patients with and without anxiety symptoms were the SF-36 domains of general health, social aspects, and mental health. Then, in the postoperative period, patients without anxiety symptoms demonstrated better results in the areas of vitality, social aspects, mental health, and pain.
Table 3

Mean difference in quality of life scores and clinical aspects between patients with and without anxiety symptoms.

VariableNo symptoms of anxietyWith symptoms of anxietyp
Preoperative
 VAS7.75 ± 0.958.57 ± 1.410.284
 Oswestry62.75 ± 13.7968.46 ± 14.160.455



 SF-36
  Functional capacity24.09 ± 15.7819.05 ± 13.930.360
  Limitation due to physical aspects0.005.95 ± 22.270.385
  Pain15.73 ± 13.1917.95 ± 14.140.669
  General health56.27 ± 16.6438.57 ± 22.860.031a
  Vitality39.55 ± 17.9527.62 ± 22.940.145
  Social aspects50.18 ± 29.5324.57 ± 20.710.008a
  Emotional aspects27.27 ± 46.714.76 ± 21.820.071
  Mental health52.36 ± 27.5633.52 ± 20.170.035a



Postoperative
 VAS6.25 ± 0.954.64 ± 3.430.365
 Oswestry61.75 ± 16.6043.11 ± 19.470.075



 SF-36
  Functional capacity51.36 ± 33.3935.95 ± 24.780.149
  Limitation due to physical aspects36.36 ± 43.8226.19 ± 43.640.536
  Pain52.27 ± 21.4533.86 ± 43.640.011a
  General health65.27 ± 26.5945.76 ± 29.370.076
  Vitality65.45 ± 24.4335.24 ± 26.380.004a
  Social aspects76.18 ± 23.9838.33 ± 27.710.001a
  Emotional aspects48.45 ± 50.2631.76 ± 46.530.356
  Mental health69.82 ± 26.0034.48 ± 20.13<0.001a

VAS, visual analogue scale; SF-36, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 items.

Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test.

Mean difference in quality of life scores and clinical aspects between patients with and without anxiety symptoms. VAS, visual analogue scale; SF-36, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 items. Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test. Finally, Table 4 indicates that, in the preoperative period, the only variable that presented differences between patients with and without depression was the SF-36 domain of emotional aspects; in turn, in the postoperative period, patients without depression presented better results in the areas of pain, general health, vitality, social aspects, emotional aspects, and mental health.
Table 4

Mean difference in quality of life scores and clinical aspects between patients with and without symptoms of depression.

VariableNo symptoms of depressionWith symptoms of depressionp
Mean ± SDMean ± SD
Preoperative
 VAS8.15 ± 1.348.68 ± 1.450.305
 Oswestry63.69 ± 14.3070.53 ± 13.510.180



 SF-36
  Functional capacity21.00 ± 14.1620.59 ± 15.290.938
  Limitation due to physical aspects6.67 ± 25.821.47 ± 6.060.426
  Pain16.27 ± 12.6918.00 ± 14.780.726
  General health51.73 ± 17.8438.41 ± 24.510.093
  Vitality35.00 ± 25.7728.82 ± 17.980.434
  Social aspects41.87 ± 29.6625.88 ± 21.910.091
  Emotional aspects26.67 ± 45.770.00 ± 0.0000.022a
  Mental health45.07 ± 27.6535.53 ± 20.730.275



Postoperative
 VAS6.00 ± 3.104.05 ± 3.200.098
 Oswestry50.15 ± 17.1742.21 ± 20.960.268



 SF-36
  Functional capacity51.33 ± 29.8432.35 ± 24.750.059
  Limitation due to physical aspects41.67 ± 47.8719.12 ± 37.000.144
  Pain49.67 ± 18.3231.82 ± 17.800.009a
  General health69.27 ± 27.4037.65 ± 23.170.001a
  Vitality64.67 ± 27.6728.82 ± 18.58<0.001a
  Social aspects75.93 ± 23.7829.65 ± 20.09<0.001a
  Emotional aspects62.20 ± 48.5915.71 ± 35.610.004a
  Mental health62.93 ± 25.7232.24 ± 21.090.001a

VAS, visual analogue scale; SF-36, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 items.

Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test.

Mean difference in quality of life scores and clinical aspects between patients with and without symptoms of depression. VAS, visual analogue scale; SF-36, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 items. Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test. No association was observed between the variables intention to return to work and sick leave with the scores of the questionnaires applied; the results were statistically non significant (p > 0.05).

Discussion

Low back pain is one of the major causes of sick leaves and work disability in Brazil, culminating in excessive spending by the healthcare and welfare systems. In the present study, 62.5% of the patients received sick leave and 21.9% of them did not intend to return to work, while 34.4% reported returning to economic activities due to financial need. In this study, VAS presented a pain decrease from 8.47 ± 1.41 to 4.84 ± 3.26, once a two-point improvement is considered to be satisfactory. Milani et al. reported a similar improvement, from 8.3 ± 1.28 to 4.55 ± 2.25, corroborating the consequent improvement in functionality, as the pain picture is disabling. Robleda et al. reported an association between preoperative anxiety and postoperative pain; nonetheless, in the present study no statistically significant relationship was observed between pain improvement and the presence or absence of anxiety symptoms in the preoperative period. Questionnaires that assess quality of life help evaluate the efficacy of surgical treatment and the functional capacity of patients. Routinely used for this purpose, the SF-36 allows the assessment of various aspects of an individual's well-being. In the postoperative period, an improvement was observed in all areas of the SF-36; however, only functional capacity, limitation by physical aspects, pain, vitality, social, and emotional aspects were statistically significant. These results were similar to those by Milani et al., who reassessed their patients after 60 days of the procedure and observed statistically significant improvement in the domains of functional capacity, physical aspects, pain, and mental health. As it is a disease-specific questionnaire, the ODI is useful in the adequate assessment of lower back diseases and their evolution after treatment. It is often used in studies, whether or not in comparison with other scores. In the present study, the mean ODI score in the preoperative period was 67.75%, which corresponded to intense disability, vs. 45.44% in the postoperative period; these results are similar to those obtained by Ghizoni et al., who observed a mean of 72.3% in the preoperative period and 51% with one month of follow-up. Regarding anxiety symptoms and their comparison with the SF-36 domains, worse scores were observed in six out eight domains in the patients with preoperative anxiety symptoms, particularly in the general health status, social aspects, and mental health domains. Pacola et al. observed similar results in patients awaiting surgical treatment for lumbar stenosis. Patients with preoperative depression symptoms presented worse results on the VAS, ODI, and in seven out of eight SF-36 domains. Some authors have suggested that symptoms of depression may predispose to chronic low back pain, while others have suggested that the emotional problems are reactions to chronic low back pain. In the postoperative period, patients with symptoms of depression presented worse results in all SF-36 domains when compared with those without symptoms of depression. Katz et al. also observed that patients with depression symptoms undergoing decompression surgery for spinal stenosis reported more pain, less satisfaction with treatment, less walking capacity, and less satisfaction with life after surgery than the group that did not present symptoms of depression. Thus, it is necessary to use validated instruments to assess patients with degenerative spinal disease in order to assist in the selection and follow-up of patients. Without an objective evaluation, there is a risk of indicating surgery for a patient who will not have a good clinical outcome. Vialle et al. prospectively evaluated the ability of a group of spine surgeons to subjectively identify patients with depressive disorders, in comparison to an objective assessment. The study demonstrated that spine surgeons were unable to subjectively identify most patients with psychological disorders. Some authors29, 30 report that worse postoperative results occur in patients with secondary gains; however, the present study did not find significant statistical results to corroborate this claim. This may have occurred because the evaluation was performed four months after surgery, and most patients receive social security benefits for over four months when they undergo lumbar spine arthrodesis. Long-term assessments are necessary to analyze this association.

Conclusion

Lumbar spine arthrodesis has been shown to be effective in improving pain, low back pain, functional capacity, limitation due to physical aspects, vitality, and social and emotional aspects in patients with degenerative spinal disease. Patients without symptoms of anxiety and depression presented better health-related quality of life outcomes at the scales assessed when compared to those with anxiety and depression symptoms.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
  23 in total

Review 1.  Occupational low back disorder causation and control.

Authors:  W S Marras
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 2.  Low back pain.

Authors:  Cathy Speed
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-08

Review 3.  Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain.

Authors:  B W Koes; M W van Tulder; S Thomas
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-06-17

4.  The association between clinical findings on physical examination and self-reported severity in back pain. Results of a population-based study.

Authors:  A Michel; T Kohlmann; H Raspe
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1997-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  The impact of workers' compensation on outcomes of surgical and nonoperative therapy for patients with a lumbar disc herniation: SPORT.

Authors:  Steven J Atlas; Tor D Tosteson; Emily A Blood; Jonathan S Skinner; Glenn S Pransky; James N Weinstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Outcomes and presurgery correlates of lumbar discectomy in Utah Workers' Compensation patients.

Authors:  M Scott DeBerard; Rick A LaCaille; Glen Spielmans; Alan Colledge; Mary Ann Parlin
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2008-04-25       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  Chronic low-back pain and depression: an epidemiological survey.

Authors:  G Magni
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 6.392

8.  Chronic back pain and major depression in the general Canadian population.

Authors:  Shawn R Currie; JianLi Wang
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.961

Review 9.  Perioperative and long-term clinical outcomes for bone morphogenetic protein versus iliac crest bone graft for lumbar fusion in degenerative disk disease: systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andriy Noshchenko; Lilian Hoffecker; Emily M Lindley; Evalina L Burger; Christopher M J Cain; Vikas V Patel
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2014-05

10.  [Mood disorders among inpatients in ambulatory and validation of the anxiety and depression scale HAD].

Authors:  N J Botega; M R Bio; M A Zomignani; C Garcia; W A Pereira
Journal:  Rev Saude Publica       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 2.106

View more
  7 in total

1.  Psychological predictors of quality of life and functional outcome in patients undergoing elective surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease.

Authors:  Arthur Wagner; Youssef Shiban; Corinna Wagner; Kaywan Aftahy; Ann-Kathrin Joerger; Bernhard Meyer; Ehab Shiban
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Epidemiological Relevance of Elevated Preoperative Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Scores on Clinical Improvement Following Lumbar Decompression.

Authors:  James M Parrish; Nathaniel W Jenkins; 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

3.  Correlating Psychological Comorbidities and Outcomes After Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Keith L Jackson; Jacob Rumley; Matthew Griffith; Uzondu Agochukwu; John DeVine
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-11-22

4.  Concomitant back and leg pain as predictors for trajectories of poor outcome after single level lumbar micro-decompression alone and with micro-discectomy: a study of 3,308 patients.

Authors:  Roberto Carrasco; Mahmoud Elmalky; Silviu Sabou; John Leach; Rajat Verma; Saeed Mohammad; Irfan Siddique
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-12

5.  The efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in lumbar surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials.

Authors:  Kankan Xiao; Xianglong Zhuo; Xiaozhong Peng; Zhenguo Wu; Bing Li
Journal:  Jt Dis Relat Surg       Date:  2022-03-28

6.  The association between depressive symptoms or depression and health outcomes in adults with low back pain with or without radiculopathy: protocol of a systematic review.

Authors:  Jessica J Wong; Andrea C Tricco; Pierre Côté; Laura C Rosella
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2019-11-08

7.  Association between lifestyle and musculoskeletal pain: cross-sectional study among 10,000 adults from the general working population.

Authors:  Jéssica Kirsch Micheletti; Rúni Bláfoss; Emil Sundstrup; Hans Bay; Carlos Marcelo Pastre; Lars Louis Andersen
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 2.362

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.