The Relationship Between Preoperative PROMIS Scores With Postoperative Improvements in Physical Function After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
Objective Assess preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) scores and differences between preoperative and postoperative PROMIS-PF scores for patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Methods After Institutional Review Board approval, a prospectively maintained surgical registry was retrospectively reviewed for elective spine surgeries of nontraumatic, degenerative pathology between 2015–2018. Inclusion criteria were primary or revision, single-level ACDF procedures. Multilevel procedures and patients without preoperative surveys were excluded. A preoperative PROMIS score cutoff of 35 divided patients into PROMIS-PF score categories (e.g., ≥ 35.0, < 35.0). Categorical and continuous variables were evaluated with chi-square tests and t-tests. Linear regression analyzed PROMIS-PF score improvement. Results Eighty-six patients were selected, the high and low PROMIS-PF subgroups only differed in mean age (49.1 vs. 41.3, p = 0.002). Significant differences in PROMIS-PF scores were observed among high and low preoperative PROMIS-PF score subgroups at 6 weeks (p = 0.006), 12 weeks (p = 0.006), and 6 months (p = 0.014). Mean differences between preoperative and postoperative PROMIS-PF scores were significantly different between the high and low PROMIS-PF subgroups at 6 weeks (p = 0.041) and 1 year (p = 0.038). A significant negative association was observed between preoperative PROMIS scores and magnitude of improvement at the 6-week postoperative time point (slope = -0.6291, p < 0.001). Conclusion Patients with low preoperative PROMIS-PF scores demonstrated greater improvements at 6 weeks and 1 year. Clinicians should consider patients with low preoperative PROMIS-PF scores to be in the unique position to potentially experience larger postoperative improvement magnitudes than patients with higher preoperative PROMIS-PF scores..
Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
---|
Erscheinungsjahr: |
2020 |
---|---|
Erschienen: |
2020 |
Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:17 |
---|---|
Enthalten in: |
Neurospine - 17(2020), 2, Seite 398-406 |
Sprache: |
Englisch |
---|
Beteiligte Personen: |
James M. Parrish [VerfasserIn] |
---|
Links: |
doi.org [kostenfrei] |
---|
Themen: |
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion |
---|
doi: |
10.14245/ns.1938352.176 |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
DOAJ037548174 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | DOAJ037548174 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240413130722.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230227s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.14245/ns.1938352.176 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ037548174 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ817ae4da49c94b8b9c5bf819d5cfedab | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
050 | 0 | |a RC346-429 | |
100 | 0 | |a James M. Parrish |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 4 | |a The Relationship Between Preoperative PROMIS Scores With Postoperative Improvements in Physical Function After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion |
264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Objective Assess preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) scores and differences between preoperative and postoperative PROMIS-PF scores for patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Methods After Institutional Review Board approval, a prospectively maintained surgical registry was retrospectively reviewed for elective spine surgeries of nontraumatic, degenerative pathology between 2015–2018. Inclusion criteria were primary or revision, single-level ACDF procedures. Multilevel procedures and patients without preoperative surveys were excluded. A preoperative PROMIS score cutoff of 35 divided patients into PROMIS-PF score categories (e.g., ≥ 35.0, < 35.0). Categorical and continuous variables were evaluated with chi-square tests and t-tests. Linear regression analyzed PROMIS-PF score improvement. Results Eighty-six patients were selected, the high and low PROMIS-PF subgroups only differed in mean age (49.1 vs. 41.3, p = 0.002). Significant differences in PROMIS-PF scores were observed among high and low preoperative PROMIS-PF score subgroups at 6 weeks (p = 0.006), 12 weeks (p = 0.006), and 6 months (p = 0.014). Mean differences between preoperative and postoperative PROMIS-PF scores were significantly different between the high and low PROMIS-PF subgroups at 6 weeks (p = 0.041) and 1 year (p = 0.038). A significant negative association was observed between preoperative PROMIS scores and magnitude of improvement at the 6-week postoperative time point (slope = -0.6291, p < 0.001). Conclusion Patients with low preoperative PROMIS-PF scores demonstrated greater improvements at 6 weeks and 1 year. Clinicians should consider patients with low preoperative PROMIS-PF scores to be in the unique position to potentially experience larger postoperative improvement magnitudes than patients with higher preoperative PROMIS-PF scores. | ||
650 | 4 | |a spine | |
650 | 4 | |a patient-reported outcome measures | |
650 | 4 | |a pain measurement | |
650 | 4 | |a anterior cervical discectomy and fusion | |
650 | 4 | |a patient-reported outcomes measurement information system | |
653 | 0 | |a Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system | |
700 | 0 | |a Nathaniel W. Jenkins |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Nadia M. Hrynewycz |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Thomas S. Brundage |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Kern Singh |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Neurospine |d Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society, 2019 |g 17(2020), 2, Seite 398-406 |w (DE-627)DOAJ000041157 |x 25866591 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:17 |g year:2020 |g number:2 |g pages:398-406 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1938352.176 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/817ae4da49c94b8b9c5bf819d5cfedab |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://www.e-neurospine.org/upload/pdf/ns-1938352-176.pdf |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2586-6583 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2586-6591 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 17 |j 2020 |e 2 |h 398-406 |