Literature DB >> 31328090

Risk Factors Associated With Failure to Reach Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Ankur S Narain1, Fady Y Hijji1, Benjamin Khechen1, Brittany E Haws1, Dil V Patel1, Daniel D Bohl1, Kelly H Yom1, Krishna T Kudaravalli1, Kern Singh1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The minimum clinically importance difference (MCID) represents a threshold for improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) that patients deem important. No previous study has comprehensively examined risk factors for failure to achieve MCID after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures for radiculopathic symptomatology. The purpose of this study is to determine risk factors for failure to reach MCID for Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) neck pain, and VAS arm pain in patients undergoing 1- or 2-level ACDF procedures.
METHODS: A surgical registry of patients who underwent primary, 1- or 2-level ACDF from 2014 to 2016 was reviewed. Rates of MCID achievement for NDI, VAS neck pain, and VAS arm pain at final follow-up were calculated based on published MCID values. Patients were then categorized into demographic and procedural categories. Bivariate regression was used to test for association of demographic and procedural characteristics with failure to reach MCID for each PRO. The final multivariate model including all demographic and procedural categories as controls was created using backward stepwise regression.
RESULTS: Eighty-three, 84, and 77 patients were included in the analysis for VAS neck, VAS arm, and NDI, respectively. Rates of MCID achievement for VAS neck, VAS arm, and NDI were 55.4%, 36.9%, and 76.6%, respectively. On bivariate analysis, patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) ≥ 2 were less likely to achieve MCID for NDI than patients with CCI < 2 (P = .025). On multivariate analysis, CCI ≥ 2 (P = .025) was further associated with failure to reach MCID for NDI.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the majority of patients do not reach MCID for arm pain. Additionally, higher comorbidity burden as evidenced by higher CCI scores is a negative predictive factor for the achievement of MCID in neck disability following ACDF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Charlson Comorbidity Index; Neck Disability Index; Visual Analog Scale; anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; arm pain; minimal clinically important difference; neck pain

Year:  2019        PMID: 31328090      PMCID: PMC6625705          DOI: 10.14444/6035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2211-4599


  30 in total

1.  The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion.

Authors:  G W SMITH; R A ROBINSON
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1958-06       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Predictive factors for arm pain, neck pain, neck specific disability and health after anterior cervical decompression and fusion.

Authors:  A Peolsson; L Vavruch; B Oberg
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2005-12-12       Impact factor: 2.216

3.  Predictive factors for the outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion.

Authors:  Anneli Peolsson; Rune Hedlund; Ludek Vavruch; Birgitta Oberg
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-04-02       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales.

Authors:  Amelia Williamson; Barbara Hoggart
Journal:  J Clin Nurs       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.036

5.  Investigation of clinically important benefit of anterior cervical decompression and fusion.

Authors:  Anneli Peolsson
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-12-02       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the japanese orthopaedic association scoring system for evaluation of cervical compression myelopathy.

Authors:  K Yonenobu; K Abumi; K Nagata; E Taketomi; K Ueyama
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  The impact of comorbidities on the change in short-form 36 and oswestry scores following lumbar spine surgery.

Authors:  James Slover; William A Abdu; Brett Hanscom; James N Weinstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Modified Smith-Robinson procedure for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  D S Brodke; T A Zdeblick
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 9.  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical disc disease.

Authors:  Cecile Cherry
Journal:  AORN J       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 0.676

10.  Comparing outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in workman's versus non-workman's compensation population.

Authors:  Edward J Goldberg; Kern Singh; U Van; Ralph Garretson; Howard S An
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.166

View more
  3 in total

1.  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

2.  Effects of Anterior Plating on Achieving Clinically Meaningful Improvement Following Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Authors:  Conor P Lynch; Elliot D K Cha; Madhav R Patel; Caroline N Jadczak; Shruthi Mohan; Cara E Geoghegan; Kern Singh
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2022-01-02

3.  Comorbidity Influence on Postoperative Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Authors:  Elliot D K Cha; Conor P Lynch; Caroline N Jadczak; Shruthi Mohan; Cara E Geoghegan; Kern Singh
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2021-06-30
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.