Rehabilitation to improve outcomes of lumbar fusion surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis

What is the volume, quality and characteristics of evidence relating to the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multi-disciplinary occupational health interventions aiming to improve work-related outcomes for employed adults? An evidence and gap map of systematic reviews

Background

In the UK, tens of millions of working days are lost due to work-related ill health every year, costing billions of pounds. The role of Occupational Health (OH) services is vital in helping workers to maintain employment when they encounter injury or illness. OH providers traditionally rely on a clinical workforce to deliver these services, particularly doctors and nurses with OH qualifications. However, the increasing demand for OH services is unlikely to be met in the future using this traditional model, due to the declining number of OH-trained doctors and nurses in the UK. Multi-disciplinary models of OH delivery, including a more varied range of healthcare and non-healthcare professionals, could provide a way to meet this new demand for OH services. There is a need to identify collaborative models of OH service delivery and review their effectiveness on return-to work outcomes. There is an existing pool of systematic review evidence evaluating workplace based, multi-disciplinary OH interventions, but it is difficult to identify which aspects of the content and/or delivery of these interventions may be associated with improved work-related outcomes.

Objectives

The aim of this evidence and gap map (EGM) was to provide an overview of the systematic review evidence that evaluates the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multi-disciplinary OH interventions intending to improve work-related outcomes.

Search Methods

In June 2021 we searched a selection of bibliographic databases and other academic literature resources covering a range of relevant disciplines, including health care and business studies, to identify systematic review evidence from a variety of sectors of employment. We also searched Google Search and a selection of topically relevant websites and consulted with stakeholders to identify reports already known to them. Searches were updated in February 2023.

Selection Criteria

Systematic reviews needed to be about adults (16 years or over) in employment, who have had absence from work for any medical reason. Interventions needed to be multi-disciplinary (including professionals from different backgrounds in clinical and non-clinical professions) and designed to support employees and employers to manage health conditions in the workplace and/or to help employees with health conditions retain and/or return to work following medical absence. Effectiveness needed to be measured in terms of return to work, work retention or measures of absence, or economic evaluation outcomes. These criteria were applied to the title and abstract and full text of each systematic review independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved through discussion. We awarded each systematic review a rating of 'High', 'Medium' or 'Low' relevance to indicate the extent to which the populations, interventions and their contexts synthesised within the review were consistent with our research question. We also recorded the number of primary studies included within each of the 'High' and 'Medium' reviews that were relevant to research question using the same screening process applied at review level.

Data Collection and Analysis

Summary data for each eligible review was extracted. The quality of the systematic reviews, rated as 'High' or 'Medium' relevance following full text screening, was appraised using the AMSTAR-2 quality appraisal tool. All data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second, with disagreements being settled through discussion. Summary data for all eligible systematic reviews were tabulated and described narratively. The data extracted from reviews of 'High' and 'Medium' relevance was imported into EPPI-Mapper software to create an EGM.

Stakeholder Involvement

We worked alongside commissioners and policy makers from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), OH personnel, and people with lived experience of accessing OH services themselves and/or supporting employees to access OH services. Individuals contributed to decision making at all stages of the project. This ensured our EGM reflects the needs of individuals who will use it.

Main Results

We identified 98 systematic reviews that contained relevant interventions, which involved a variety of professionals and workplaces, and which measured effectiveness in terms of return to work (RTW). Of these, we focused on the 30 reviews where the population and intervention characteristics within the systematic reviews were considered to be of high or medium relevance to our research questions. The 30 reviews were of varying quality, split evenly between High/Moderate quality and Low/Critically-Low quality ratings. We did not identify any relevant systematic review evidence on any other work-related outcome of interest. Interventions were heterogenous, both within and across included systematic reviews. The EGM is structured according to the health condition experienced by participants, and the effectiveness of the interventions being evaluated, as reported within the included systematic reviews. It is possible to view (i) the quality and quantity of systematic review evidence for a given health condition, (ii) how review authors assessed the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of the interventions evaluated. The EGM also details the primary studies relevant to our research aim included within each review.

Authors’ Conclusions

This EGM map highlights the array of systematic review evidence that exists in relation to the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of multi-disciplinary, workplace-based OH interventions in supporting RTW. This evidence will allow policy makers and commissioners of services to determine which OH interventions may be most useful for supporting different population groups in different contexts. OH professionals may find the content of the EGM useful in identifying systematic review evidence to support their practice. The EGM also identifies where systematic review evidence in this area is lacking, or where existing evidence is of poor quality. These may represent areas where it may be particularly useful to conduct further systematic reviews.

Qualitative study exploring the views of patients and healthcare providers on current rehabilitation practices after lumbar fusion surgery

OBJECTIVES

To explore the views of patients and healthcare providers on current rehabilitation after lumbar fusion surgery (LFS) to fuel the development of a novel rehabilitation care pathway.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional, qualitative study with an interpretive descriptive design.

SETTING

Academic and non-academic hospital setting in Belgium.

PARTICIPANTS

31 caregivers from (non)-academic settings and 5 patients with LFS were purposefully sampled and in-depth interviewed.

RESULTS

Out of the data of all interviews, participants reported opinions on 23 thematic clusters that were expressed in a time-contingent manner from the preoperative, perioperative to postoperative phase. Afterwards, themes were mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, with a larger role for concepts related to the innovation, inner and individual domain. As an overarching theme, the importance of an 'individualised, patient-centred rehabilitation built on a strong therapeutic alliance with an accessible interprofessional team' was stressed for patients undergoing LFS. Specifically, participants stated that a biopsychosocial approach to rehabilitation should start in the preoperative phase and immediately be continued postoperatively. No consensus was observed for movement restrictions postoperatively. Uniform communication between the involved caregivers was considered essential for optimal therapeutic alliance and clinical outcome. The precise role and competence of each member of the interprofessional team needs, therefore, to be clearly defined, respected and discussed. An accessible case manager to guide the patient trajectory and tackle problems could further support this. Interestingly, only patients, psychologists and physiotherapists addressed return to work as an important outcome after LFS.

CONCLUSIONS

This qualitative study identified key experiences and points to consider in the current and future rehabilitation pathway for LFS. Future research should incorporate these findings to build a novel rehabilitation pathway for LFS and evaluate its feasibility and cost-effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03427294).

Preoperative rehabilitation optimization for spinal surgery: a narrative review of assessment, interventions, and feasibility

PURPOSE

Postoperative physical therapy (PT) is a cornerstone of orthopedic and musculoskeletal rehabilitation, proven to provide various positive clinical benefits. However, there is a paucity of literature evaluating the utility of preoperative rehabilitation specific to spine surgery. Thus, this review article aims to provide an overview of previously published studies discussing the efficacy of preoperative rehabilitation programs and its role in spinal surgery. Special emphasis was given to preoperative frailty assessments, physical performance tests, interventional strategies, feasibility, and future directions.

METHODS

We performed a literature review using PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and PubMed Central (PMC) using directed search terms. Articles that examined preoperative rehabilitation in adult spine surgery were compiled for this review. Prehabilitation programs focused on exercise, flexibility, and behavioral modifications have been shown to significantly improve pain levels and functional strength assessments in patients undergoing elective spine surgery. In addition, studies suggest that these programs may also decrease hospital stays, return to work time, and overall direct health care expenditure costs. Screening tools such as the FRAIL scale can be used to assess frailty while physical function tests like the timed-up-and go (TUGT), 5 repetition sit-to-stand test (5R-STST), and hand grip strength (HGS) can help identify patients who would most benefit from prehabilitation.

CONCLUSIONS

This review illustrates that prehabilitation programs have the potential to increase quality of life, improve physical function and activity levels, and decrease pain, hospital stays, return to work time, and overall direct costs. However, there is a paucity of literature in this field that requires further study and investigation.

Evaluation and Rehabilitation after Adult Lumbar Spine Surgery

Purpose: With an increase in the proportion of elderly patients, the global burden of spinal disease is on the rise. This is gradually expected to increase the number of surgical procedures all over the world in the near future. As we know, rehabilitation following spine surgery is critical for optimal recovery. However, the current literature lacks consensus regarding the appropriate post-operative rehabilitation protocol. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the optimal protocol for rehabilitation after lumbar spine surgery in adults. Materials and Methods: The goals of rehabilitation after lumbar spine surgery are to improve physical and psychosocial function and may include multiple modalities such as physical therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, specialized instruments, and instructions to be followed during activities of daily living. In recent years, not only are a greater number of spine surgeries being performed, but various different techniques of lumbar spine surgery and spinal fusion have also emerged. (1) Our review summarizes post-operative rehabilitation under the following headings-1. Historical aspects, 2. Subjective functional outcomes, and (3) Actual rehabilitation measures, including balance. Results: Physical therapy programs need to be patient-specific and surgery-specific, such that they consider patient-reported outcome measures and take into consideration the technique of spinal fusion used and the muscle groups involved in these surgeries. By doing so, it is possible to assess the level of functional impairment and then specifically target the strengthening of those muscle groups affected by surgery whilst also improving impaired balance and allowing a return to daily activities. Conclusions: Rehabilitation is a multi-faceted journey to restore mobility, function, and quality of life. The current rehabilitation practice focuses on muscle strengthening, but the importance of spinal balance is less elaborated. We thus equally emphasize muscle strengthening and balance improvement post-lumbar spine surgery.

Get Back, a person-centred digital programme targeting physical activity for patients undergoing spinal stenosis surgery-a study protocol of a randomized feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Spinal stenosis is the most common reason for elective spine surgery, and the cardinal symptom is leg pain and discomfort when walking. Patients with spinal stenosis have a decreased level of physical activity and thereby an increased risk of poor health. Get Back is a person-centred digital programme that strives to support patients being physically active after surgery. The aim is to explore if Get Back, in its present format (referred to as Get Backfeasibility), is feasible and contributes to detectable change in variables related to intervention content.

METHODS

Thirty patients planned for decompression surgery due to central lumbar spinal stenosis who present with low physical activity, pain catastrophizing or fear of movement, will be included in a randomized feasibility study. All patients will be randomly allocated to either Get Backfeasibility or usual physical therapy. Get Backfeasibility aims to increase the patient's physical activity level by combining a person-centred and cognitive behavioural approach. It comprises 10 video and telephone sessions led by a physical therapist over 12 weeks (pre/postoperatively). Outcomes are treatment fidelity (treatment dose, adherence, and content), process feasibility (recruitment, intervention use, and acceptability of measurements and intervention), and variables related to the intervention content (steps per day, physical activity level, pain catastrophizing, fear of movement, and general self-efficacy). Treatment fidelity and feasibility data will be assessed during the full study period (12 weeks). Physical activity, physical capacity, and patient-reported outcomes will be assessed digitally at baseline (2 weeks preoperatively) and 11-12 weeks postoperatively. Variables related to the intervention content will be monitored weekly through a digital application. Feasibility data will be analysed descriptively and inferentially using a nonparametric approach, data from repeated measures will be displayed graphically and data from telephone interviews will be analysed using content analysis with a descriptive manifest approach.

DISCUSSION

The results will provide information on whether Get Back in its present format is feasible and can be evaluated for effectiveness in a larger randomized controlled trial, for patients with a low physical activity level and a high fear of movement who are undergoing decompression surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at ClinicalTrails.gov 04/08/2023, registration no. NCT05806593.

The effect of exercise post vertebral augmentation in osteoporotic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis investigated the effects of exercise on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores following vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty in osteoporotic fractures. A literature search of PubMed, EMBASE (Elsevier), CiNAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted from database inception to October 6, 2022. Eligible studies reported osteoporosis patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of at least one vertebral fracture via radiography or clinical assessment. This review was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022340791). Ten studies met the eligibility criteria (n = 889). VAS scores at baseline were 7.75 (95% CI: 7.54, 7.97, I2  = 76.11%). Following initiation of exercise, VAS scores at the endpoint of 12 months were 1.91 (95% CI: 1.53, 2.29, I2  = 92.69%). ODI scores at baseline were 68.66 (95% CI: 56.19, 81.13, I2  = 85%). Following initiation of exercise, ODI scores at the endpoint of 12 months were 21.20 (95% CI: 14.52, 27.87, I2  = 99.30). A two-arm analysis demonstrated improved VAS and ODI for the exercise group compared to non-exercise control at 6 months (MD = -0.70, 95% CI: -1.08, -0.32, I2  = 87% and MD = -6.48, 95% CI: -7.52, -5.44, I2  = 46%, respectively) and 12 months (MD = -0.88, 95% CI: -1.27, -0.49, I2  = 85% and MD = -9.62, 95% CI: -13.24, -5.99, I2  = 93%). Refracture was the only adverse event reported and occurred almost twice as frequently in the non-exercise group than in the exercise group. Exercise rehabilitation post vertebral augmentation is associated with improved pain and functionality, particularly after 6 months of exposure, and may reduce refracture rate.

Trials We Cannot Trust: Investigating Their Impact on Systematic Reviews and Clinical Guidelines in Spinal Pain

We previously conducted an exploration of the trustworthiness of a group of clinical trials of cognitive-behavioral therapy and exercise in spinal pain. We identified multiple concerns in 8 trials, judging them untrustworthy. In this study, we systematically explored the impact of these trials ("index trials") on results, conclusions, and recommendations of systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). We conducted forward citation tracking using Google Scholar and the citationchaser tool, searched the Guidelines International Network library and National Institute of Health and Care Excellence archive to June 2022 to identify systematic reviews and CPGs. We explored how index trials impacted their findings. Where reviews presented meta-analyses, we extracted or conducted sensitivity analyses for the outcomes of pain and disability, to explore how the exclusion of index trials affected effect estimates. We developed and applied an 'Impact Index' to categorize the extent to which index studies impacted their results. We included 32 unique reviews and 10 CPGs. None directly raised concerns regarding the veracity of the trials. Across meta-analyses (55 comparisons), the removal of index trials reduced effect sizes by a median of 58% (Inter Quartlie Range (IQR) 40-74). 85% of comparisons were classified as highly, 3% as moderately, and 11% as minimally impacted. Nine out of 10 reviews conducting narrative synthesis drew positive conclusions regarding the intervention tested. Nine out of 10 CPGs made positive recommendations for the intervention(s) evaluated. This cohort of trials, with concerns regarding trustworthiness, has substantially impacted the results of systematic reviews and guideline recommendations. PERSPECTIVE: We found that a group of trials of CBT for spinal pain with concerns relating to their trustworthiness has had substantial impacts on the analyses and conclusions of systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines. This highlights the need for a greater focus on the trustworthiness of studies in evidence appraisal. PRE-REGISTRATION: Our protocol was preregistered on the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/m92ax/.

Mechanisms inherent in acute-to-chronic pain after surgery - risk, diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic factors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pain is an expected consequence of a surgery, but it is far from being well controlled. One major complication of acute pain is its risk of persistency beyond healing. This so-called chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) is defined as new or increased pain due to surgery that lasts for at least 3 months after surgery. CPSP is frequent, underlies a complex bio-psycho-social process and constitutes an important socioeconomic challenge with significant impact on patients' quality of life. Its importance has been recognized by its inclusion in the eleventh version of the ICD (International Classification of Diseases).

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence for most pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions preventing CPSP is inconsistent. Identification of associated patient-related factors, such as psychosocial aspects, comorbidities, surgical factors, pain trajectories, or biomarkers may allow stratification and selection of treatment options based on underlying individual mechanisms. Consequently, the identification of patients at risk and implementation of individually tailored, preventive, multimodal treatment to reduce the risk of transition from acute to chronic pain is facilitated.

SUMMARY

This review will give an update on current knowledge on mechanism-based risk, prognostic and predictive factors for CPSP in adults, and preventive and therapeutic approaches, and how to use them for patient stratification in the future.

Surgeon Preferences Worldwide in Wound Drain Utilization in Open Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Pathologies

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE

Although literature does not recommend routine wound drain utilization, there is a disconnect between the evidence and clinical practice. This study aims to explore into this controversy and analyze the surgeon preferences related to drain utilization, and the factors influencing drain use and criterion for removal.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to AO Spine members worldwide. Surgeon demographics and factors related to peri-operative drain use in 1 or 2-level open fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative pathologies were collected. Multivariate analyses by drain utilization, and criterion of removal were conducted.

RESULTS

231 surgeons participated, including 220 males (95.2%), orthopedics (178, 77.1%), and academic/university-affiliated (114, 49.4%). Most surgeons preferred drain use (186, 80.5%) and subfascial drains (169, 73.2%). Drains were removed based on duration by 52.87% of the surgeons, but 27.7% removed drains based on outputs. On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of drain use were surgeon's aged 35-44 (OR = 11.9, 95% CI = 1.2-117.2, P = .034), 45-54 (29.1, 3.1-269.6, P = .003), 55-64 (8.9, 1.4-56.5, .019), and wound closure using coaptive films (6.0, 1.2-29.0, P = .025). Additionally, surgeons from Asia Pacific (OR = 5.19, 95% CI = 1.65-16.38, P = .005), Europe (3.55, 1.22-10.31, P = .020), and Latin America (4.40, 1.09-17.83, .038) were more likely to remove drain based on time duration, but surgeons <5 years of experience (10.23, 1.75-59.71, P = .010) were more likely to remove drains based on outputs.

CONCLUSIONS

Most spine surgeons worldwide prefer to place a subfascial wound drain for degenerative open lumbar surgery. The choice for drain placement is associated with the surgeon's age and use of coaptive films for wound closure, while the criterion for drain removal is associated with the surgeons' region of practice and experience.

The Rehabilitation-Related Effects on the Fear, Pain, and Disability of Patients With Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: The lumbar fusion is an important surgery for the orthopedic diseases. The rehabilitation might improve the outcome of patients with lumbar fusion surgery. The rehabilitation-related effects can be revealed by a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The purpose of this study is to clarify the rehabilitation effects in the patients with lumbar fusion surgery.Methods: We performed a systematic search and a meta-analysis for the RCT of rehabilitation treatment on the patients with lumbar fusion surgery. The comparison between rehabilitation treatment (including psychological rehabilitation, exercise, and multimodal rehabilitation) and typical treatment was performed to find if the rehabilitation treatment can improve the outcome after the lumbar fusion surgery. Fifteen studies of lumbar fusion patients under rehabilitation treatment and typical treatment were enrolled in a variety of rehabilitation modalities. The focused outcome was the rehabilitation-related effects on the fear, disability, and pain of patients after the lumbar fusion surgery.Results: Five hundred twenty-eight rehabilitation subjects and 498 controls were enrolled. The psychological-related rehabilitation showed a significant decrease in pain-related fear when compared to usual treatment. The multimodal rehabilitation can improve the disability outcome to a greater extent when compared to usual treatment. The multimodal rehabilitation seemed to have a more significantly positive effect to decrease disability after lumbar fusion surgery. In addition, the exercise and multimodal rehabilitation can relieve the pain after lumbar fusion surgery. The exercise rehabilitation seemed to have a more significantly positive effect to relieve pain after lumbar fusion surgery.Conclusion: The rehabilitation might relieve the pain-related fear, disability, and pain after lumbar fusion surgery.

Let’s Get Physical! A Comprehensive Review of Pre- and Post-Surgical Interventions Targeting Physical Activity to Improve Pain and Functional Outcomes in Spine Surgery Patients

The goal of this comprehensive review was to synthesize the recent literature on the efficacy of perioperative interventions targeting physical activity to improve pain and functional outcomes in spine surgery patients. Overall, research in this area does not yet permit definitive conclusions. Some evidence suggests that post-surgical interventions may yield more robust long-term outcomes than preoperative interventions, including large effect sizes for disability reduction, although there are no studies directly comparing these surgical approaches. Integrated treatment approaches that include psychosocial intervention components may supplement exercise programs by addressing fear avoidance behaviors that interfere with engagement in activity, thereby maximizing the short- and long-term benefits of exercise. Efforts should be made to test brief, efficient programs that maximize accessibility for surgical patients. Future work in this area should include both subjective and objective indices of physical activity as well as investigating both acute postoperative outcomes and long-term outcomes.