European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society
-
The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) is a short, multidimensional outcome instrument, with excellent psychometric properties, that has been recommended for use in monitoring the outcome of spinal surgery from the patient's perspective. This study examined the feasibility of implementation of COMI and its performance in clinical practice within a large Spine Centre. Beginning in March 2004, all patients undergoing spine surgery in our Spine Centre (1,000-1,200 patients/year) were asked to complete the COMI before and 3, 12 and 24 months after surgery. ⋯ The mean reductions in COMI score for each of these categories were 5.4 (SD2.5); 3.1 (SD2.2); 1.3 (SD1.7); 0.5 (SD2.2) and -0.7 (SD2.2), respectively, yielding respective standardised response mean values ("effect sizes") for each outcome category of 2.2, 1.4, 0.8, 0.2 and 0.3, respectively. The questionnaire was feasible to implement on a prospective basis in routine practice, and was as responsive as many longer spine outcome questionnaires. The shortness of the COMI and its multidimensional nature make it an attractive option to comprehensively assess all patients within a given Spine Centre and hence avoid selection bias in reporting outcomes.
-
Comparative Study
Sacroplasty in a cadaveric trial: comparison of CT and fluoroscopic guidance with and without balloon assistance.
Sacral insufficiency fractures can cause severe, debilitating pain to patients concerned. The incidence of this fracture type correlates with the appearance of osteoporosis in the elderly population. A polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement injection procedure called sacroplasty has been recently described as an optional method for the treatment of this fracture type. ⋯ Further, in comparison to fluoroscopy-assisted technique, the CT-guided cement injection seems to decrease the risk of cement extravasation, irrespective of the use of an additional balloon assistance. However, we have to consider a greater radiation exposure using CT guidance. Further investigations will proof the suitability in the normal course of clinical life.
-
Recent years have witnessed a paradigm shift in relation to the assessment of outcome in spine surgery: multidimensional patient-centred questionnaires have superseded traditional surgeon-based ratings of outcome, and surgical registries have been developed to capitalise on the principle of "strength in numbers." However, the assessment of complications has not enjoyed this same enlightened patient-centred approach. The present study investigated post-surgical complications from the patient's perspective. ⋯ The incidence of patient-rated complications was significantly associated with outcome/satisfaction (P < 0.05), suggesting these complications were not trivial to the patient. The results indicate that, just like outcome, "complications" should be assessed from both the patient's and the surgeon's perspectives, not least to better understand the reasons accounting for dissatisfaction and a poor patient-rated outcome.
-
Studies comparing the relative merits of microdiscectomy and standard discectomy report conflicting results, depending on the outcome measure of interest. Most trials are small, and few have employed validated, multidimensional patient-orientated outcome measures, considered essential in outcomes research. In the present study, data were collected prospectively from six surgeons participating in a surgical registry. ⋯ Though not equivalent to an RCT, the study included every single eligible patient in our Spine Center and allowed surgeons to use their regular procedure; it hence had extremely high external validity (relevance/generalisability). There was no clinically relevant difference in outcome after lumbar disc excision dependent on the use of the microscope. The decision to use the microscope should rest with the surgeon.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Corticosteroids in peri-radicular infiltration for radicular pain: a randomised double blind controlled trial. One year results and subgroup analysis.
The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of corticosteroids in patients with radicular pain due to lumbar disc herniation or lumbar spinal stenosis through a prospective randomised, double blind controlled trial, and whether there was an effect on subsequent interventions such as additional root blocks or surgery. Peri-radicular infiltration of corticosteroids has previously been shown to offer no additional benefit in patients with sciatica compared to local anaesthetic alone. It is not known if the response to peri-radicular infiltration is less marked in certain subgroups of patients such as those with radicular pain due to lumbar spinal stenosis. ⋯ Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis had a less marked reduction in the ODI at 3 months with a mean change of 3.3 points when compared with 15 points for patients with lumbar disc herniation. In conclusion, peri-radicular infiltration of corticosteroids for sciatica does not provide any additional benefit when compared to local anaesthetic injection alone. Corticosteroids do not obviate the need for subsequent interventions such as additional root blocks or surgery.