Preoperative predictors for good postoperative satisfaction and functional outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery - A prospective observational study with a two-year follow-up

Scandinavian Journal of Surgery

Volumn 101, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 255-260

  Aalto, T ^a   Sinikallio, S ^b   Kroger H ^c   Viinamaki H ^c   Herno, A ^c   Leinonen, V ^c   Turunen, V ^c   Savolainen, S ^c   Airaksinen, O ^c  

^a Kyyhkyla Rehabilitation Center   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

^c KUOPIO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Finland)

Author keywords

Disability; Lumbar stenosis; Outcome; Predictor factor; Satisfaction; Surgical treatment

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; CONVALESCENCE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERVERTEBRAL DISKECTOMY; LAMINECTOMY; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SPINAL STENOSIS; SPINE FUSION; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SURGERY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DISKECTOMY; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LAMINECTOMY; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; SPINAL FUSION; SPINAL STENOSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84873694939     PISSN: 14574969     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/145749691210100406     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC et al: Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations. Spine 1994;19:1207-1212
2. Malmivaara A, Slätis P, Heliövaara M et al: Surgical or nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis? A randomized controlled trial. Spine 2007;32:1-8
3. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD et al: Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med 2008;358:794-810
4. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD et al: Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis four-year results of the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine 2010;35:1329-1338
5. Aalto TJ, Malmivaara A, Kovacs F et al: Preoperative predictors for postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review. Spine 2006;31:E648-E663
6. Turner J, Ersek M, Herron L et al: Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Attempted meta-analysis of the literature. Spine 1992; 17:1-8
7. Mannion AF, Elfering A: Predictors of surgical outcome and their assessment. Eur Spine J 2006;1:S93-108
8. Mannion AF, Denzler R, Dvorak J et al: A randomised controlled trial of post-operative rehabilitation after surgical decompression of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1101-1117
9. Sinikallio S, Aalto T, Airaksinen O et al: Depression is associated with a poorer outcome of lumbar spinal stenosis surgery: a two-year prospective follow-up study. Spine 2011;36:677-682
10. Sinikallio S, Aalto TJ, Airaksinen O et al: Lumbar spinal stenosis patients are satisfied with short-term results of surgery - younger age, symptom severity, disability and depression decrease satisfaction. Disabil Rehabil 2007;29:537-544
11. Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Brick GW et al: Clinical correlates of patient satisfaction after laminectomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1995;20:1155-1160
12. Schönström NS, Bolender NF, Spengler DM: The pathomorphology of spinal stenosis as seen on CT scans of the lumbar spine. Spine 1985;10:806-811
13. Spengler DM: Current concepts review: Degenerative stenosis of the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg 1987;69A:305-308
14. Katz JN, Stucki G, Lipson SJ, Fossel AH et al: Predictors of surgical outcome in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1999;24:2229-2233
15. Tuomi K, Ilmarinen J, Jahkola A et al: An approved version of the Work Disability Index. Occupational health series 19, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki 1998
16. Vitaz TW, Raque GH, Shields CB et al: Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in patients older than 75 years of age. J Neurosurg. 1999;91(2 Suppl):181-185
17. Mustajoki P, Kaukua J, Annanmäki L et al: Aikuisten lihavuus. Duodecim 2007;123:1107
18. Fairbank JCT, Pynsent PB: The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 2000;25:2940-2952
19. Grönblad M, Hupli M, Wennerstrand P et al: Intercorrelation and test-retest reliability of the Pain Disability Index (PDI) and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) and their correlation with pain intensity in low back pain patients. Clin J Pain 1993;9:189-195
20. Mannion AF, Junge A, Grob D et al: Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change afterspinal surgery. Eur Spine J 2006;15:66-73
21. Jakola AS, Sorlie A, Gulati S et al: Clinical outcomes and safety assessment in elderly patients undergoing Decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective study. BMC Surg 2010;10:34.
22. Ishii M, Wada E, Hamada M: Deterioration of surgical outcomes with aging in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord Tech 2012:17 (Epub ahead of print)
23. Andersen T, Christensen FB, Laursen M et al: Smoking as a predictor of negative outcome in lumbar spine fusion. Spine 2001;26:2623-2628
24. Glassman SD, Angnost SC, Parker A et al: The effect of cigarette smoking and smoking cessation on spinal fusion. Spine 2000;25:2608-2615
25. Sanden B, Forsth P, Michaelsson K: Smokers show less improvement than nonsmokers two years after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a study of 4555 patients from the Swedish spine register. Spine 2011;36:1059-1064
26. Daftari TK, Whitesides TE Jr, Heller JG et al: Nicotine on the revascularization of bone graft. An experimental study in rabbits. Spine 1994;19:904-911
27. Idler EL, Kasl S: Health perceptions and survival: do global evaluations of health status really predict mortality? J Gerontol 1991;46:S55-65
28. Lawrence JT, London N, Bohlman HH et al: Preoperative narcotic use as a predictor of clinical outcome: results following anterior cervical arthrodesis. Spine 2008;33:2074-2078
29. Jönsson B: Patient-related factors predicting the outcome of decompressive surgery. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1993;251:69-70