Search

To determine whether the L3–L4 disc angle may be a surrogate marker for global lumbar alignment in thoracolumbar fusion surgery and to explore the relationship between radiographic and patient-reported outcomes after thoracolumbar fusion surgery. Retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who had undergone a lumbar fusion involving levels from T9 to pelvis. EuroQol-Five Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) scores and adverse events including adjacent-segment disease and degeneration, pseudoarthrosis, proximal junctional kyphosis, stenosis, and reoperation were collected. Pre- and postoperative spinopelvic parameters were measured on weight-bearing radiographs, with the L3–L4 disc angle of novel interest. Univariate logistic and linear regression were performed to assess the associations of radiographic parameters with adverse event incidence and improvement in EQ-5D-3L, respectively. In total, 182 patients met inclusion criteria. Univariable analysis revealed that increased magnitude of L3–L4 disc angle, anterior pelvic tilt, and pelvic incidence measures are associated with increased likelihood of developing postoperative adverse events. Conversely, increased lumbar lordosis demonstrated a decreased incidence of developing a postoperative adverse event. Linear regression showed that radiographic parameters did not significantly correlate with postoperative EQ-5D-3L scores, although scores were significantly improved postfusion in all dimensions except Self-Care (P = 0.51). L3–L4 disc angle magnitude may serve as a surrogate marker of global lumbar alignment. The degree of spinopelvic alignment did not correlate to improvement in EQ-5D-3L score in the present study, suggesting that quality of life metric change may not be a sensitive or specific marker of postfusion alignment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey was developed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as a result of their value-based purchasing initiative. It allows patients to rate their experience with their provider in the outpatient setting. This presents a unique situation in healthcare in which the patient experience drives the marketplace, and since its creation, providers have sought to improve patient satisfaction. Within the spine surgery setting, however, the question remains whether improved patient satisfaction correlates with improved outcomes., Methods: All patients who had undergone lumbar spine surgery between 2009 and 2017 and who completed a CG-CAHPS survey after their procedure were studied. Demographic and surgical characteristics were then obtained. The primary outcomes of this study include patient-reported health outcomes measures such as the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health (PROMIS-GH) surveys for both mental health (PROMIS-GH-MH) and physical health (PROMIS-GH-PH), and the visual analog scale for back pain (VAS-BP). A multivariable linear regression analysis was used to assess whether patient satisfaction with their provider was associated with changes in each health status measure after adjusting for potential confounders., Results: The study population included 647 patients who had undergone lumbar spine surgery. Of these, 564 (87%) indicated that they were satisfied with the care they received. Demographic and surgical characteristics were largely similar between the two groups. Multivariable linear regression demonstrated that patient satisfaction with their provider was not a significant predictor of change in two of the three patient-reported outcomes (PROMIS-GH-MH and PROMIS-GH-PH) assessed at 1 year. However, top-box patient satisfaction with their provider was a significant predictor of improvement in VAS-BP scores at 1 year., Conclusions: The authors found that after adjusting for patient-level covariates such as age, diagnosis of disc displacement, self-reported mental health, self-reported overall health, and preoperative patient-reported outcome measure status, a significant association was observed between top-box overall provider rating and 1-year improvement in VAS-BP, but no such association was observed for PROMIS-GH-PH and PROMIS-GH-MH. This suggests that pain-related outcome measures may serve as better predictors of patients' satisfaction with their spine surgeons. Furthermore, this suggests that the current method by which patient satisfaction is being assessed and publicly reported may not necessarily correlate with validated measures that are used within the spine surgery setting to assess surgical efficacy.