Search

The article presents a study which identifies the complications in patients following the use of bone morphogenetic proteins (BMP) in spinal fusion surgery. The study conducted a systemic review of literatures published from 1990 to June 2009 in the Cochrane Collaboration Library, EMBASE and MEDLINE. Results show that multiple complications including resorption, subsidence and dysphagia are associated following the use of recombinant BMP-2 in lumbar and cervical spinal fusion surgery.

Study Design: A retrospective cohort study.Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with bilateral facetectomy (BF) versus unilateral facetectomy (UF).Summary Of Background Data: BF is a surgical technique utilized with the intent of creating a greater degree of segmental lordosis than UF alone. However, the clinical benefits of this technique have not been defined. We seek to determine whether a difference exists between bilateral versus UF during TLIF by utilizing both clinical and radiographic outcome measures.Methods: The electronic medical records of 57 patients who underwent single-level TLIF with either a UF (n = 28) or BF (n = 29) were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were measured through Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health State, and Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY). Radiographic parameters including disc height and sagittal balance were measured on plain radiographs at 1 year following operation.Results: All radiographic parameters showed no significant differences between the UF and BF cohorts. Segmental lordosis increased significantly in both cohorts. However, there was no significant difference in the increase of segmental lordosis between cohorts. Overall lumbar lordosis did not increase significantly in either cohort. Perioperative complications were also similar between cohorts. PDQ and EQ-5D scores improved significantly in both cohorts at 1 year postoperatively. The BF cohort showed a significantly greater improvement in both EQ-5D (0.1 ± 0.2 vs. 0.3 ± 0.2, P = 0.01) and PHQ-9 scores (-0.8 ± 4.6 vs. 4.6 ± 5.2, P = 0.03) than the UF cohort. The PDQ score improved over the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of 26 in only the BF cohort.Conclusion: The findings in the present study demonstrate that BF during single-level TLIF improves clinical outcomes to a greater degree than UF without any notable differences in perioperative complications or radiographic measurements.Level Of Evidence: 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Retrospective review.Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the association between preoperative depression and patient satisfaction in the outpatient spine clinic after lumbar surgery.Summary Of Background Data: The Clinician and Group Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey is used to measure patient experience in the outpatient setting. CG-CAHPS scores may be used by health systems in physician incentive programs and quality improvement initiatives or by prospective patients when selecting spine surgeons. Although preoperative depression has been shown to predict poor patient-reported outcomes and less satisfaction with the inpatient experience following lumbar surgery, its impact on patient experience with spine surgeons in the outpatient setting remains unclear.Methods: Patients who underwent lumbar surgery and completed the CG-CAHPS survey at postoperative follow-up with their spine surgeon between 2009 and 2017 were included. Data were collected on patient demographics, Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) scores, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global Health Physical Health (PROMIS-GPH) subscores. Patients with preoperative PHQ-9 scores ≥10 (moderate-to-severe depression) were included in the depressed cohort. The association between preoperative depression and top-box satisfaction ratings on several dimensions of the CG-CAHPS survey was examined.Results: Of the 419 patients included in this study, 72 met criteria for preoperative depression. Depressed patients were less likely to provide top-box satisfaction ratings on CG-CAHPS metrics pertaining to physician communication and overall provider rating (OPR). Even after controlling for patient-level covariates, our multivariate analysis revealed that depressed patients had lower odds of reporting top-box OPR (odds ratio [OR]: 0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06-0.63, P = 0.007), feeling that their spine surgeon provided understandable explanations (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11-0.91, P = 0.032), and feeling that their spine surgeon provided understandable responses to their questions or concerns (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.06-0.63, P = 0.007).Conclusion: Preoperative depression is independently associated with lower OPR and satisfaction with spine surgeon communication in the outpatient setting after lumbar surgery.Level of Evidence: 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Context: Routine use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a diagnostic tool in lumbar stenosis is becoming more prevalent due to the aging population. Currently, there is no clinical guideline to clarify the utility of repeat MRI in patients with lumbar stenosis, without instability, neurological deficits, or disc herniation.Purpose: To evaluate the utility of routine use of MRI as a diagnostic tool in lumbar stenosis, and to help formulate clinical guidelines on the appropriate use of preoperative imaging for lumbar stenosis.Study Design/setting: Retrospective radiographic analysis.Patient Sample: Retrospective chart review was performed to review patients with lumbar stenosis, who underwent lumbar decompression without fusion from 2011 to 2015 at a single institution.Outcome Measures: Previously established stenosis grading systems were used to measure and compare the initial and the subsequent repeat lumbar MRIs performed preoperatively. If patients were found to have a moderate or severe grade change, and if the surgical plan was altered due to such exacerbated radiographic findings, then their grade changes were considered clinically meaningful.Methods: We identified patients with lumbar stenosis without radiographic instability or neurological deficits, who had at least two preoperative lumbar MRIs performed and underwent decompressive surgeries. At each pathologic disc level, the absolute value of the change in grade for central and lateral recess stenosis, right foraminal stenosis, and left foraminal stenosis from the first preoperative MRI to the repeated MRI was calculated. These changed data were then used to calculate the mean and median changes in each of the three types of stenosis for each pathologic disc level. Identical calculations were carried out for the subsample of patients who only underwent discectomy or had a discectomy included as part of their surgery.Results: Among the 103 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 37 of those patients had more than one level surgically addressed, and a total of 161 lumbar levels were reviewed. Among the subset of patients that had any grade change, the majority of the grades only had a mild change of 1 (36 out of 42 patients, 85.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.1%-94.1%); there was a moderate grade change of 2 in two patients (4.8%, CI: 0.8%-14.0%), and a severe change of 3 in one patient (2.4%, CI: 0.2%-10.1%). There were three patients with decreased grade change (7.1%, CI: 1.8%-17.5%). All clinically meaningful grade changes were from the subset of patients who had only discectomy or discectomy as part of the procedure. Lastly, both patients that had a clinically meaningful grade change had their MRIs performed at an interval of greater than 360 days.Conclusions: The radiographic evaluation of the utility of routinely repeated MRIs in lumbar stenosis without instability, neurological deficits, or disc herniations demonstrated that there were no significant changes found in the repeated MRI in the preoperative setting, especially if the MRIs were performed less than one year apart. The results of this present study can help to standardize the diagnostic evaluation of lumbar stenosis and to formulate clinical guidelines on the appropriate use of preoperative imaging for lumbar stenosis patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Context: Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a very common postoperative complication of all surgeries (5%-70%) that may lead to complications such as urinary tract infection (UTI), bladder overdistension, autonomic dysregulation, and increased postoperative length of stay (LOS). Within the field of spine surgery, the reported incidence rate of POUR is highly variable (5.6%-38%). Lack of clear stratification of surgical level, spinal pathology, and inadequate sample size are major limitations of available studies concerning POUR following spine surgery, which may lead to inconsistency in the incidence of POUR and the ability to model its occurrence and consequences.Purpose: This study examines the incidence, predictive factors, and complications of POUR in patients undergoing elective posterior lumbar decompression with or without fusion for lumbar stenosis to eliminate bias from studying procedures done in different anatomical regions and with different approaches. Additionally, this study intends to identify the consequences of POUR.Study Design and Setting: A retrospective consecutive cohort analysis was performed to examine patients undergoing posterior lumbar decompression who did and did not develop POUR.Patient Sample: All patients undergoing posterior lumbar decompression with or without fusion for lumbar stenosis with claudication from January 2014 through December 2015 at our institution were evaluated. Patients under the age of 18 and patients with spinal malignancies or infections were excluded.Outcome Measures: Physiological measures included identification of POUR by evidence of reinsertion of a Foley catheter, use of straight catheterization postoperatively, or by a clear medical diagnosis with pharmacologic treatment. Other physiological measures included identification of development of UTI, sepsis, acute kidney injury (AKI), surgical site infection (SSI), or readmission within 90 days after surgery, as well as LOS and discharge disposition.Methods: The electronic medical record was searched for all patients meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria. Postoperative urinary retention was defined as reinsertion of a Foley catheter, use of straight catheterization postoperatively, or a clear medical diagnosis with pharmacologic treatment. Statistical analysis was performed in R statistical software package version 3.3.2. Multiple variable selection techniques were used to determine appropriate variables for regression models, and logistic models were fit to the development of POUR and postoperative complications, whereas a linear regression model was used for LOS.Results: Data were collected on 1,592 consecutive patients. Among the sample population, the mean age at surgery was 67 (standard deviation 10.1) and 45% of patients were women. The incidence rate of POUR was 17.1% (273/1592). Increased age (odds ratio [OR]=1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.06; p<.001), benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (OR=1.92; 95% CI, 1.32-2.78); p<.001), previous AKI (OR=3.29; 95% CI, 1.11-9.29; p=.025), and previous UTI (OR=1.69; 95% CI, 1.24-2.24; p<.001) significantly increased the probability of developing POUR. Factors including increased body mass index, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, tobacco use, and fusion were found to be non-significant and were excluded from the model. With respect to complications, POUR was found to be associated with development of UTI (OR=4.50; 95% CI, 3.14-6.45; p<.001), sepsis (OR=4.05; 95% CI, 1.16-13.55; p=.022), increased LOS (p<.001), increased likelihood to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) (OR of discharge to home=0.44; 95% CI, 0.32-0.62; p<.001), and increased risk of readmission within 90 days of the index surgery (OR=1.60; 95% CI, 1.11-2.26; p=.009). Development of POUR did not increase the risk of developing AKI (OR=2.45; 95% CI, 0.93-6.30; p=.063) or a SSI (OR=1.09; 95% CI, 0.56-2.02; p=.79).Conclusions: Overall, POUR was a significant risk factor for the development of UTI, sepsis, increased LOS, discharge to a SNF, and readmission within 90 days. Surgeons and anesthesiologists should take preventative measures against POUR in individuals with increased age, BPH, AKI, and UTI within 90 days before surgery, as these factors were found to significantly increase the risk of POUR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Context: There is significant variability in the materials commonly used for interbody cages in spine surgery. It is theorized that three-dimensional (3D)-printed interbody cages using porous titanium material can provide more consistent bone ingrowth and biological fixation.Purpose: The purpose of this study was to provide an evidence-based approach to decision-making regarding interbody materials for spinal fusion.Study Design: A comparative animal study was performed.Methods: A skeletally mature ovine lumbar fusion model was used for this study. Interbody fusions were performed at L2-L3 and L4-L5 in 27 mature sheep using three different interbody cages (ie, polyetheretherketone [PEEK], plasma sprayed porous titanium-coated PEEK [PSP], and 3D-printed porous titanium alloy cage [PTA]). Non-destructive kinematic testing was performed in the three primary directions of motion. The specimens were then analyzed using micro-computed tomography (µ-CT); quantitative measures of the bony fusion were performed. Histomorphometric analyses were also performed in the sagittal plane through the interbody device. Outcome parameters were compared between cage designs and time points.Results: Flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) was statistically reduced for the PTA group compared with the PEEK cages at 16 weeks (p-value=.02). Only the PTA cages demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in ROM and increase in stiffness across all three loading directions between the 8-week and 16-week sacrifice time points (p-value≤.01). Micro-CT data demonstrated significantly greater total bone volume within the graft window for the PTA cages at both 8 weeks and 16 weeks compared with the PEEK cages (p-value<.01).Conclusions: A direct comparison of interbody implants demonstrates significant and measurable differences in biomechanical, µ-CT, and histologic performance in an ovine model. The 3D-printed porous titanium interbody cage resulted in statistically significant reductions in ROM, increases in the bone ingrowth profile, as well as average construct stiffness compared with PEEK and PSP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Context: Lumbar fusion is an effective and durable treatment for symptomatic lumbar spondylolisthesis; however, the current literature provides insufficient evidence to recommend an optimal surgical fusion strategy.Purpose: The present study aims to compare the clinical outcomes, fusion rates, blood loss, and operative times between open posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) alone and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) + posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis.Study Design: This is a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of English language studies for the treatment of spondylolisthesis with PLF versus PLF + TLIF.Patient Sample: Data were obtained from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies.Outcome Measures: Clinical outcomes included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back pain, leg pain, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores. Fusion rate, operative time, blood loss, and infection rate were also assessed.Methods: A literature search of three electronic databases was performed to identify investigations performed comparing PLF alone with PLF + TLIF for treatment of low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis. The summary effect size was assessed from pooling observational studies for each of the outcome variables, with odds ratios (ORs) used for fusion and infection rate, mean difference used for improvement in ODI and leg pain as well as operative time and blood loss, and standardized mean difference used for improvement in back pain and HRQOL outcomes. Studies were weighed based on the inverse of the variance and heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2-an estimate of the error caused by between-study variation. Effect sizes from the meta-analysis were then compared with data from the RCTs to assess congruence in outcomes.Results: The initial literature search yielded 282 unique, English language studies. Seven were determined to meet our inclusion criteria and were included in our qualitative analysis. Five observational studies were included in our quantitative meta-analysis. The pooled fusion success rates were 84.7% (100/118) in the PLF group and 94.3% (116/123) in the TLIF group. Compared with TLIF patients, PLF patients had significantly lower odds of achieving solid arthrodesis (OR 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.82, p=.02; I2=0%). With regard to improvement in back pain, the point estimate for the effect size was -0.27 (95% CI -0.43 to -0.10, p=.002; I2=0%), in favor of the TLIF group. For ODI, the pooled estimate for the effect size was -3.73 (95% CI -7.09 to -0.38, p=.03; I2=35%), significantly in favor of the TLIF group. Operative times were significantly shorter in the PLF group, with a summary effect size of -25.55 (95% CI -43.64 to -7.45, p<.01; I2=54%). No significant difference was observed in leg pain, HRQOL improvement, blood loss, or infection rate. Our meta-analysis results were consistent with RCTs, in favor of TLIF for achieving radiographic fusion and greater improvement in ODI and back pain.Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that for patients undergoing fusion for spondylolisthesis, TLIF is superior to PLF with regard to achieving radiographic fusion. However, current data only provide weak support, if any, favoring TLIF over PLF for clinical improvement in disability and back pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys are used to assess the quality of the patient experience following an inpatient stay. Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems scores are used to determine reimbursement for hospital systems and incentivize spine surgeons nationwide. There are conflicting data detailing whether early readmission or other postdischarge complications are associated with patient responses on the HCAHPS survey. Currently, the association between postdischarge emergency department (ED) visits and HCAHPS scores following lumbar spine surgery is unknown.Purpose: To determine whether ED visits within 30 days of discharge are associated with HCAHPS scores for patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery.Study Design: Retrospective cohort study.Patient Sample: A total of 453 patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery who completed the HCAHPS survey between 2013 and 2015 at a single tertiary care center.Outcome Measures: The HCAHPS survey-the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' official measure of patient experience-results for each patient were analyzed as the primary outcome of this study.Methods: All patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery between 2013 and 2015 who completed an HCAHPS survey were studied. Patients were excluded from the study if they had been diagnosed with spinal malignancy or scoliosis. Patients who had an ED visit at our institution within 30 days of discharge were included in the ED visit cohort. The primary outcomes of this study include 21 measures of patient experience on the HCAHPS survey. Statistical analysis included Pearson chi-square for categorical variables, Student t test for normally distributed continuous variables, and Mann-Whitney U test for nonparametric variables. Additionally, log-binomial regression models were used to analyze the association between ED visits within 30 days after discharge and odds of top-box HCAHPS scores. No funds were received in support of this study, and the authors report no conflict of interest-associated biases.Results: After adjusting for patient-level covariates using log-binomial regression models, we found postdischarge ED visits were independently associated with lower likelihood of top-box score for several individual questions on HCAHPS. Emergency department visits within 30 days of discharge were negatively associated with perceiving your doctor as "always" treating you with courtesy and respect (risk ratio [RR] 0.26, p<.001), as well as perceiving your doctor as "always" listeningcarefully to you (RR 0.40, p=.003). Also, patients with an ED visit were less likely to feel as if their preferences were taken into account when leaving the hospital (RR 0.61, p=.008), less likely to recommend the hospital to family or friends (RR 0.46, p=.020), and less likely to rate the hospital as a 9 or a 10 out of 10, the top-box score (RR 0.43, p=.005).Conclusions: Our results demonstrate a strong association between postdischarge ED visits and low HCAHPS scores for doctor communication, discharge information, and global measures of hospital satisfaction in a lumbar spine surgery population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Context: The patient experience of care as measured by the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey is currently used to determine hospital reimbursement. The current literature inconsistently demonstrates an association between patient satisfaction and surgical outcomes.Purpose: To determine whether patient satisfaction with hospital experience is associated with better clinical outcomes in lumbar spine surgery.Study Design: A retrospective cohort study conducted at a single institution.Patient Sample: A total of 249 patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery between 2013 and 2015 and completed the HCAHPS survey.Outcome Measures: Self-reported health status measures, including the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), and visual analog score for back pain (VAS-BP).Methods: All patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery between 2013 and 2015 who completed an HCAHPS survey were studied. Patients were excluded from the study if they had been diagnosed with spinal malignancy, scoliosis, or had less than 1 year of follow-up. Patients who selected a 9 or 10 overall hospital rating (OHR) on HCAHPS were placed in the satisfied group, and the remaining patients comprised the unsatisfied group. The primary outcomes of this study include patient-reported health status measures such as EQ-5D, PDQ, and VAS-BP. No funds were received in support of this study, and the authors report no conflict of interest-associated biases.Results: Our study population consisted of 249 patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. Of these, 197 (79%) patients selected an OHR of 9 or 10 on the HCAHPS survey and were included in the satisfied group. The only preoperative characteristics that differed significantly between the twogroups were gender, a diagnosis of degenerative disc disease (DDD), heavy preoperative narcotic use, and a diagnosis of chronic renal failure. At 1 year follow-up, no statistically significant differences in EQ-5D, PDQ, or VAS-BP were observed. After using multivariable linear regression models to assess the association between patient satisfaction and pre- to 1-year postoperative changes in health status measures, selecting a top-box OHR was not found to be significantly associated with change in either EQ-5D (beta=0.055 [95% confidence interval {CI}: -0.035 to 0.145]), PDQ (beta=-9.013 [95% CI: -23.782 to 5.755]), or VAS-BP (beta=-0.849 [95% CI: -2.125 to 0.426]). These results suggest high satisfaction with the hospital experience may not necessarily correlate with favorable clinical outcomes.Conclusions: Top-box OHR was not associated with pre- to 1-year postoperative improvement in EQ-5D, PDQ, and VAS-BP. Although the associations between high satisfaction and improvement in health status did not reach statistical significance, the best estimates from our multivariable models reflect greater clinical improvement with top-box satisfaction. Future studies should seek to investigate whether HCAHPS are a reliable indicator of quality care in lumbar spine surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Context: Lumbar fusion is a common and costly procedure in the United States. Reimbursement for surgical procedures is increasingly tied to care quality and patient safety as part of value-based reimbursement programs. The incidence of adverse quality events among lumbar fusion patients is unknown using the definition of care quality (patient safety indicators [PSI]) used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The association between insurance status and the incidence of PSI is similarly unknown in lumbar fusion patients.Purpose: This study sought to determine the incidence of PSI in patients undergoing inpatient lumbar fusion and to quantify the association between primary payer status and PSI in this population.Study Design: A retrospective cohort study was carried out.Patient Sample: The sample comprised all adult patients aged 18 years and older who were included in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) that underwent lumbar fusion from 1998 to 2011.Outcome Measure: The incidence of one or more PSI, a validated and widely used metric of inpatient health-care quality and patient safety, was the primary outcome variable.Methods: The NIS data were examined for all cases of inpatient lumbar fusion from 1998 to 2011. The incidence of adverse patient safety events (PSI) was determined using publicly available lists of the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. Logistic regression models were used to determine the association between primary payer status (Medicaid and self-pay relative to private insurance) and the incidence of PSI.Results: A total of 539,172 adult lumbar fusion procedures were recorded in the NIS from 1998 to 2011. Patients were excluded from the secondary analysis if "other" or "missing" was listed for primary insurance status. The national incidence of PSI was calculated to be 2,445 per 100,000 patient years of observation, or approximately 2.5%. In a secondary analysis, after adjusting for patient demographics and hospital characteristics, Medicaid and self-pay patients had significantly greater odds of experiencing one or more PSI during the inpatient episode relative to privately insured patients (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.27).Conclusions: Among patients undergoing inpatient lumbar fusion, insurance status is associated with the adverse health-care quality events used to determine hospital reimbursement by the CMS. The source of this disparity must be studied to improve the quality of care delivered to vulnerable patient populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Retrospective Review.Objective: The aim of this study was to determine medical, radiographic, and surgical risk factors for the development of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar fusion.Summary Of Background Data: ASD is a recognized outcome of spinal fusion that leads to increased costs and debilitating symptoms for patients. However, a comprehensive understanding of risk factors for the development of this surgical outcome does not exist.Methods: The medical records of patients who received their first lumbar fusion for any indication were retrospectively examined for preoperative medical comorbidities and medications, as well as surgical approach and perioperative complications. A blinded reviewer assessed radiographs for each patient to examine sagittal alignment after fusion. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model the risk of developing ASD on the basis of one or more predictors.Results: A total of 137 patients fit the inclusion criteria; 9% required a follow-up operation for degeneration at segments adjacent to the fusion. The ASD group had a mean follow-up of 21.1 months prior to revision surgery and an overall follow-up of 41.0 months. The average follow-up in the control group was 14.0 months. Statistically significant independent predictors of developing ASD included antidepressant use [odds ratio (OR) = 5.4], diagnosis of degenerative scoliosis (OR = 34.2), fusion of L4-S1 (OR = 56.5), having no decompressions adjacent to the fusion, and low sacral slope (OR = 0.9). No patient who developed ASD received a decompression adjacent to the fusion such that an OR could not be generated for this independent predictor.Conclusion: This study is the first to use a combination of medical, surgical, and postoperative sagittal balance as risk factors for the development of adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion. The awareness of these risk factors may allow for better patient selection and surgical technique to decrease the probability of acquiring this adverse outcome.Level Of Evidence: 4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background context Some, smaller studies have investigated the effect of preoperative depression on postoperative improvement in quality of life (QOL). However, they have not used the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) in self-reported depression. Purpose To assess the effect of preoperative depression as measured by the PHQ-9 on postoperative improvement in QOL. Study design A retrospective review at a single tertiary-care referral center. Patient sample Patients who underwent lumbar decompression or fusion between 2008 and 2012. Outcomes measures A self-reported EuroQol five-dimensions (EQ-5D) quality-adjusted life-years Index. Methods Quality of life data were collected using the institutional prospectively collected database of patient-reported health status measures. The EQ-5D questionnare, PDQ, and PHQ-9 were used. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of preoperative depression on QOL improvement. Results Elevated preoperative pain (PDQ, β=−0.0017, p=.0009) and worsened depression (PHQ-9, β=−0.0044, p=.0359) were significantly associated with diminished postoperative improvement in QOL, as measured by the EQ-5D. Furthermore, greater depression (PHQ-9, odds ratio [OR] 0.93, p<.0001) and pain (PDQ, OR 0.99, p=.02) were associated with significantly diminished postoperative improvement exceeding the minimum clinically important difference. Conclusions Increased preoperative pain and depression were shown to be associated with significantly reduced improvement in postoperative QOL, as measured by the EQ-5D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]