Retze J Achttien1, Andrew Powell2, Konstantinos Zoulas3, J Bart Staal4,5, Alison Rushton6. 1. HAN University of Applied Science, Research Group Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, Nijmegen, Netherlands. Retze.Achttien@gmail.com. 2. British Canoeing, Lee Valley Whitewater Centre, English Institute of Sport, Station Road, Waltham Cross, Hertfordshire, UK. 3. Polyclinic De Lisieux, 175 Rue Roger Aini, 14100, Lisieux, France. 4. HAN University of Applied Science, Research Group Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, Nijmegen, Netherlands. 5. Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands. 6. School of Physical, Therapy Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate the value of prognostic factors related to disability, pain and quality of life (QoL) for adult patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion surgery (LSFS). METHODS: Two reviewers independently searched the literature, assessed eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Key electronic databases were searched [PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PEDro and ZETOC] using pre-defined terms [e.g. LSFS] to 20/9/2020; with additional searching of journals, reference lists and unpublished literature. Prospective cohort studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up after LSFS were included. Narrative synthesis was based on recommendations by Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group. The GRADE tool enabled assessment of certainty of evidence. Prognostic factors and outcome were analysed and summarised when examined in ≥ 2 studies and when results pointed in the same direction in ≥ 75% of studies. RESULTS: Sixteen studies (n = 8388, 2 low and 14 high risk of bias) were included with 39 prognostic factors identified. There is low certainty evidence that higher pre-operative severity of leg pain predicts greater improvement of leg pain and that pre-operative working predicts less post-operative disability both at 1-2-year follow-up. Other found associations were of very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSION: No moderate to high certainty evidence exists. Use of leg pain and pre-operative working may be valuable predictors of outcome to inform clinical decision-making and advice regarding LSFS surgery. There is need for adequately powered low-risk-of-bias prospective observational studies to further investigate candidate prognostic factors.
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate the value of prognostic factors related to disability, pain and quality of life (QoL) for adult patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion surgery (LSFS). METHODS: Two reviewers independently searched the literature, assessed eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Key electronic databases were searched [PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PEDro and ZETOC] using pre-defined terms [e.g. LSFS] to 20/9/2020; with additional searching of journals, reference lists and unpublished literature. Prospective cohort studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up after LSFS were included. Narrative synthesis was based on recommendations by Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group. The GRADE tool enabled assessment of certainty of evidence. Prognostic factors and outcome were analysed and summarised when examined in ≥ 2 studies and when results pointed in the same direction in ≥ 75% of studies. RESULTS: Sixteen studies (n = 8388, 2 low and 14 high risk of bias) were included with 39 prognostic factors identified. There is low certainty evidence that higher pre-operative severity of leg pain predicts greater improvement of leg pain and that pre-operative working predicts less post-operative disability both at 1-2-year follow-up. Other found associations were of very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSION: No moderate to high certainty evidence exists. Use of leg pain and pre-operative working may be valuable predictors of outcome to inform clinical decision-making and advice regarding LSFS surgery. There is need for adequately powered low-risk-of-bias prospective observational studies to further investigate candidate prognostic factors.
Authors: Mark Wilhelm; Michael Reiman; Adam Goode; William Richardson; Christopher Brown; Daniel Vaughn; Chad Cook Journal: Physiother Res Int Date: 2015-08-13
Authors: Jens Ivar Brox; Olav Reikerås; Øystein Nygaard; Roger Sørensen; Aage Indahl; Inger Holm; Anne Keller; Tor Ingebrigtsen; Oliver Grundnes; Johan Emil Lange; Astrid Friis Journal: Pain Date: 2006-03-20 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Nadine E Foster; Johannes R Anema; Dan Cherkin; Roger Chou; Steven P Cohen; Douglas P Gross; Paulo H Ferreira; Julie M Fritz; Bart W Koes; Wilco Peul; Judith A Turner; Chris G Maher Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-03-21 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Anna Huguet; Jill A Hayden; Jennifer Stinson; Patrick J McGrath; Christine T Chambers; Michelle E Tougas; Lori Wozney Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2013-09-05