2022, Article / Letter to editor (European Spine Journal, vol. 31, iss. 12, (2022), pp. 3590-3602)PURPOSE: To understand the patient journey to Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery (LSFS) and patients' experiences of surgery. METHODS: Qualitative study using interpretive phenomenological analysis. Adult participants following LSFS were recruited from 4 UK clinical sites using purposive sampling to ensure representation of key features (e.g. age). Semi-structured interviews informed by a piloted topic guide developed from the literature were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Framework analysis for individual interviews and then across participants (deductive and inductive) identified emerging themes. Trustworthiness of data analyses was enhanced using multiple strategies (e.g. attention to negative cases). RESULTS: Four emerging themes from nn=n31 patients' narratives were identified: decision for surgery, coping strategies, barriers to recovery and recovery after surgery. Decision for surgery and recovery after surgery themes are distinguished by the point of surgery. However, barriers to recovery and coping strategies are key to the whole patient journey encompassing long journeys to surgery and their initial journey after surgery. The themes of coping strategies and barriers to recovery were inter-related and perceived by participants as parallel concepts. The 4 multifactorial themes interacted with each other and shaped the process of an individual patient's recovery. Factors such as sporadic interventions prior to surgery, time-consuming wait for diagnosis and surgery and lack of information regarding recovery strongly influenced perceptions of outcome. CONCLUSION: Patient driven data enables insights to inform research regarding surgery/rehabilitation through depth of understanding of the patient journey. Awareness of factors important to patients is important; ensuring that patient-driven data informs research and patient care.
2022, Article / Letter to editor (European Spine Journal, vol. 31, iss. 3, (2022), pp. 623-668)PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate the value of prognostic factors related to disability, pain and quality of life (QoL) for adult patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion surgery (LSFS). METHODS: Two reviewers independently searched the literature, assessed eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Key electronic databases were searched [PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PEDro and ZETOC] using pre-defined terms [e.g. LSFS] to 20/9/2020; with additional searching of journals, reference lists and unpublished literature. Prospective cohort studies with≥12-month follow-up after LSFS were included. Narrative synthesis was based on recommendations by Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group. The GRADE tool enabled assessment of certainty of evidence. Prognostic factors and outcome were analysed and summarised when examined in≥2 studies and when results pointed in the same direction in≥75% of studies. RESULTS: Sixteen studies (nn=nn8388, 2 low and 14 high risk of bias) were included with 39 prognostic factors identified. There is low certainty evidence that higher pre-operative severity of leg pain predicts greater improvement of leg pain and that pre-operative working predicts less post-operative disability both at 1-2-year follow-up. Other found associations were of very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSION: No moderate to high certainty evidence exists. Use of leg pain and pre-operative working may be valuable predictors of outcome to inform clinical decision-making and advice regarding LSFS surgery. There is need for adequately powered low-risk-of-bias prospective observational studies to further investigate candidate prognostic factors.
2020, Article / Letter to editor (European Spine Journal, vol. 29, iss. 7, (2020), pp. 1660-1670)PURPOSE: To conduct a meta-analysis to describe clinical course of pain and disability in adult patients post-lumbar discectomy (PROSPERO: CRD42015020806). METHODS: Sensitive topic-based search strategy designed for individual databases was conducted. Patients (>n16 years) following first-time lumbar discectomy for sciatica/radiculopathy with no complications, investigated in inception (point of surgery) prospective cohort studies, were included. Studies including revision surgery or not published in English were excluded. Two reviewers independently searched information sources, assessed eligibility at title/abstract and full-text stages, extracted data, assessed risk of bias (modified QUIPs) and assessed GRADE. Authors were contacted to request raw data where data/variance data were missing. Meta-analyses evaluated outcomes at all available time points using the variance-weighted mean in random-effect meta-analyses. Means and 95% CIs were plotted over time for measurements reported on outcomes of leg pain, back pain and disability. RESULTS: A total of 87 studies (nn=n31,034) at risk of bias (49 moderate, 38 high) were included. Clinically relevant improvements immediately following surgery (>nMCID) for leg pain (0-10, mean before surgery 7.04, 50 studies, nn=n14,910 participants) and disability were identified (0-100, mean before surgery 53.33, 48 studies, nn=n15,037). Back pain also improved (0-10, mean before surgery 4.72, 53 studies, nn=n14,877). Improvement in all outcomes was maintained (to 7 years). Meta-regression analyses to assess the relationship between outcome data and a priori potential covariates found preoperative back pain and disability predictive for outcome. CONCLUSION: Moderate-level evidence supports clinically relevant immediate improvement in leg pain and disability following lumbar discectomy with accompanying improvements in back pain. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
2020, Article / Letter to editor (PLoS One, vol. 15, iss. 12, (2020), pp. e0241931)The aim of this study was to capture and understand the immediate recovery journey of patients following lumbar spinal fusion surgery and explore the interacting constructs that shape their journey. A qualitative study using Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) approach. A purposive sample of 43 adult patients (≥16 years) undergoing ≤4 level instrumented fusion for back and/or leg pain of degenerative cause, were recruited pre-surgery from 4 UK spinal surgery centres. Patients completed a weekly diary expressed in their own words for the first 4 weeks following surgery to capture their life as lived. Diary content was based on previous research findings and recorded progress, recovery, motivation, symptoms, medications, healthcare appointments, rehabilitation, positive/negative thoughts, and significant moments; comparing to the previous week. To maximise completion and data quality, diaries could be completed in paper form, word document, as online survey or as audio recording. Strategies to enhance diary adherence included a weekly prompt. A framework analysis for individual diaries and then across participants (deductive and inductive components) captured emergent themes. Trustworthiness was enhanced by strategies including reflexivity, attention to negative cases and use of critical co-investigators. Twenty-eight participants (15 female; n = 18 (64.3%) aged 45-64) contributed weekly diaries (12 withdrew post-surgery, 3 did not follow through with surgery). Adherence with diaries was 89.8%. Participants provided diverse and vivid descriptions of recovery experiences. Three distinct recovery trajectories were identified: meaningful recovery (engagement in physical and functional activities to return to functionality/mobility); progressive recovery (small but meaningful improvement in physical ability with increasing confidence); and disruptive recovery (limited purpose for meaningful recovery). Important interacting constructs shaped participants' recovery including their pain experience and self-efficacy. This is the first account of immediate recovery trajectories from patients' perspectives. Recognition of a patient's trajectory may inform patient-centred recovery, follow-up and rehabilitation to improve patient outcomes.