Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Stanford Medicine Outpatient Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Redwood City, CA 94063, USA.
Spine J. 2010 Apr;10(4):313-20. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.001.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Defining success after spinal surgery remains problematic. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in pain or functional outcomes is a common metric often calculated independent of perceived risk and morbidity, which is an important consideration in large procedures such as spinal fusion and instrumentation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe a method of assessing treatment success based on prospective, patient-reported "minimum acceptable" outcome for which they would undergo a procedure. These goals can then be compared at follow-up to gauge how frequently patient goals are met and determine correlation with patient satisfaction. STUDY DESIGN: This is a clinical descriptive study of the patient-reported minimum acceptable outcomes for spinal fusion surgery. OUTCOME MEASURES: Minimum acceptable outcomes were determined by patients on preoperatively administered standard questionnaires regarding ultimate pain intensity, functional outcome (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), medication usage, and work status. Satisfaction with outcomes was assessed at 2-year follow-up. METHODS: One hundred sixty-five consecutive patients undergoing lumbar fusion for either isthmic spondylolisthesis or disc degeneration were asked to preoperatively define on standard questionnaires their minimum acceptable outcomes after surgery. Two-year outcomes and satisfaction were subsequently reported and compared with the preoperatively determined minimum acceptable outcomes. RESULTS: Both the spondylolisthesis and the degenerative disc disease (DDD) groups reported that a high degree of improvement was the minimum acceptable threshold for considering spinal fusion. A large majority indicated that the minimum acceptable outcomes included at least a decrease in pain intensity to 3/10 or less, an improvement in ODI of 20 or more, discontinuing opioid medications, and return to some occupational activity. Achieving the minimum acceptable outcome was strongly associated with satisfaction at 2 years after surgery. Patients with compensation claims, psychological distress, and other psychosocial stressors were more likely to report satisfaction in the absence of achieving their minimum acceptable outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with spondylolisthesis and DDD both have relatively high minimum acceptable outcomes for spinal fusion. In these cohorts, few subjects considered more commonly proposed MCIDs for pain and function as an acceptable outcome and report that they would not have surgery if they did not expect to achieve more than those marginal improvements. Although there was good concordance between achieving the minimum acceptable outcomes and ultimate satisfaction, patients with significant psychosocial factors (compensation claims, psychological distress, and others) are less likely to associate satisfaction with outcomes with actually achieving these improvements.
背景:脊柱手术后的成功定义仍然存在问题。疼痛或功能结果的最小临床重要差异(MCID)是一种常用的衡量标准,通常独立于感知风险和发病率进行计算,这在脊柱融合和器械等大型手术中是一个重要的考虑因素。
目的:本研究的目的是描述一种基于前瞻性、患者报告的“最低可接受”治疗结果的评估方法,患者愿意接受该结果进行手术。然后,可以在随访时将这些目标进行比较,以衡量患者目标的实现频率,并确定与患者满意度的相关性。
研究设计:这是一项关于脊柱融合手术患者报告的最低可接受结果的临床描述性研究。
结果测量:最低可接受的结果是通过患者在术前进行的标准问卷确定的,涉及最终疼痛强度、功能结果(Oswestry 残疾指数[ODI])、药物使用和工作状态。在 2 年随访时评估对结果的满意度。
方法:165 例连续接受腰椎融合术治疗峡部裂性脊柱滑脱或椎间盘退行性变的患者,在术前标准问卷中定义了他们对手术后最低可接受结果的要求。随后报告了 2 年的结果和满意度,并与术前确定的最低可接受结果进行了比较。
结果:脊柱滑脱症和退行性椎间盘疾病(DDD)组的患者均表示,高度改善是考虑脊柱融合的最低可接受阈值。绝大多数患者表示,最低可接受的结果至少包括疼痛强度降低至 3/10 或更低、ODI 改善 20 或更多、停止使用阿片类药物以及恢复某种职业活动。在术后 2 年达到最低可接受的结果与满意度高度相关。有赔偿要求、心理困扰和其他心理社会压力的患者在未达到最低可接受结果的情况下更有可能报告满意度。
结论:脊柱滑脱症和 DDD 患者对脊柱融合的最低可接受结果均相对较高。在这些队列中,很少有患者认为疼痛和功能的常见 MCID 是可接受的结果,并报告说如果他们预期不会获得比这些边缘改善更多的结果,他们将不会进行手术。尽管达到最低可接受结果与最终满意度之间存在良好的一致性,但有重大心理社会因素(赔偿要求、心理困扰和其他因素)的患者不太可能将满意度与实际获得这些改善联系起来。