An evaluation of a postoperative rehabilitation program after spinal surgery and its impact on outcome

App-Based Rehabilitation in Back Pain, a Systematic Review

Smartphones and their associated applications are used frequently by patients and clinicians alike. Despite the technology being widely accessible, their use to aid in rehabilitation is yet to be adopted. The SARS CoV-2 pandemic has presented an opportunity to expedite their integration given the difficulty patients currently have in accessing healthcare. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review on the use of smartphone rehabilitation applications compared to standard physiotherapy for back pain. We conducted a search of Medline/Pubmed and google databases using the search terms [APP] AND [[Orthopaedic] OR [Neurosurgery]], following the PRISMA guidelines. All prospective studies investigating rehabilitation applications for back pain or following spine surgery were included. A total of nine studies met the inclusion criteria which investigated 7636 patients, of which 92.4% were allocated to the interventional group (n = 7055/7636) with a follow up of 4 weeks to 6 months. All except one study reported on patients experiencing back pain on average for 19.6 ± 11.6 months. The VAS-pain score was presented in all studies without significance between the interventional and control group (p = 0.399 before and p = 0.277 after intervention). Only one research group found significantly higher improvement in PROMs for the application group, whereas the remaining showed similar results compared to the control group. Using application-based rehabilitation programs provides an easily accessible alternative or substitute to traditional physiotherapy for patients with back pain. Given that smartphones are so prevalent in activities in our daily lives, this will enhance and improve rehabilitation if patients are self-dedicated and compliant.

Rehabilitation and lumbar surgery: the French recommendations for clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Indications and techniques of rehabilitation differ widely across types of lumbar surgery, including timing (before or after surgery) and prescriptions (surgeons but also medical or paramedical professionals).

OBJECTIVES

This project aimed to build consensual recommendations for practice in this context.

METHODS

The SOFMER methodology was used to establish recommendations for physical medicine and rehabilitation: a steering committee defined the types of lumbar surgery involved and developed the main questions to be addressed; a scientific committee performed a literature review for grading evidence and proposed the first version of recommendations, which were discussed during a dedicated session at the national Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine congress; then an e-Delphi method with cross-professional experts was used to finalise recommendations and reach a multidisciplinary consensus.

RESULTS

The main questions developed were the value of rehabilitation before and after surgery, timing and type of rehabilitation, benefit of supervision and instrumental rehabilitation, value of patient education, and complementary interventions concerning rehabilitation for discectomy, fusion, and disc prosthesis (excluding decompression for spinal stenosis). The literature review identified 60 articles, but for several of the questions, no article in the literature addressed the issue. The multidisciplinary scientific committee analysed the literature and addressed the questions to propose the first version of a set of 23 recommendations. The congress session failed to answer all questions or to reach consensus for all items. After a three-step e-Delphi, 20 recommendations were retained, for which consensus among experts was reached. The recommendations are applicable only to patients without a neurological lesion.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide important and consensual knowledge to assist clinicians in decision-making for rehabilitation in lumbar surgery. Despite many of the recommendations relying exclusively on expert opinion rather than published evidence, this approach is an important advance to improve concordance among healthcare professionals.

Manipulative and manual therapies in the management of patients with prior lumbar surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Pain and disability may persist following lumbar spine surgery and patients may subsequently seek providers trained in manipulative and manual therapy (MMT). This systematic review investigates the effectiveness of MMT after lumbar surgery through identifying, summarizing, assessing quality, and grading the strength of available evidence. Secondarily, we synthesized the impact on medication utilization, and reports on adverse events.

METHODS

Databases and grey literature were searched from inception through August 2020. Article extraction consisted of principal findings, pain and function/disability, medication consumption, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Literature search yielded 2025 articles,117 full-text articles were screened and 51 citations met inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSION

There is moderate evidence to recommend neural mobilization and myofascial release after lumbar fusion, but inconclusive evidence to recommend for or against most manual therapies after most surgical interventions. The literature is primarily limited to low-level studies. More high-quality studies are needed to make recommendations.

Abstracts of low back pain trials are poorly reported, contain spin of information and are inconsistent with the full text: An overview study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate trials abstracts evaluating treatments for low back pain with regards to completeness of reporting, spin (i.e., interpretation of study results that overemphasizes the beneficial effects of the intervention), and inconsistencies in data with the full text.

DATA SOURCES

The search was performed on Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) in February 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

This is an overview study of a random sample of 200 low back pain trials published between 2010 and 2015. The languages of publication were restricted to English, Spanish and Portuguese.

DATA EXTRACTION

Completeness of reporting was assessed using the CONSORT for Abstracts checklist (CONSORT-A). Spin was assessed using a SPIN-checklist. Consistency between abstract and full text were assessed by applying the assessment tools to both the abstract and full text of each trial and calculating inconsistencies in the summary score (paired t test) and agreement in the classification of each item (Kappa statistics). Methodological quality was analyzed using the total PEDro score.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The mean number of fully reported items for abstracts using the CONSORT-A was 5.1 (SD 2.4) out of 15 points and the mean number of items with spin was 4.9 (SD 2.6) out of 7 points. Abstract and full text scores were statistically inconsistent (P=0.01). There was slight to moderate agreement between items of the CONSORT-A in the abstracts and full text (mean Kappa 0.20 SD 0.13) and fair to moderate agreement for items of the SPIN-checklist (mean Kappa 0.47 SD 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

The abstracts were incomplete, with spin and inconsistent with the full text. We advise health care professionals to avoid making clinical decisions based solely upon abstracts. Journal editors, reviewers and authors are jointly responsible for improving abstracts, which could be guided by amended editorial policies.

The Effectiveness and Safety of Utilizing Mobile Phone-Based Programs for Rehabilitation After Lumbar Spinal Surgery: Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Rehabilitation is crucial for postoperative patients with low back pain (LBP). However, the implementation of traditional clinic-based programs is limited in developing countries, such as China, because of the maldistribution of medical resources. Mobile phone–based programs may be a potential substitute for those who have no access to traditional rehabilitation.

Objective

The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of mobile phone–based rehabilitation systems in patients who underwent lumbar spinal surgery.

Methods

Patients who accepted spinal surgeries were recruited and randomized into 2 groups of rehabilitation treatments: (1) a mobile phone–based eHealth (electronic health) program (EH) or (2) usual care treatment (UC). The primary outcomes were (1) function and pain status assessed by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and (2) the visual analog scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes were (1) general mental health and (2) quality of life (Likert scales, EuroQol-5 Dimension health questionnaire, and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey). All the patients were assessed preoperatively and then at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively.

Results

A total of 168 of the 863 eligible patients were included and randomized in this study. Our analysis showed that the improvement of primary outcomes in the EH group was superior to the UC group at 24 months postoperatively (ODI mean 7.02, SD 3.10, P<.05; VAS mean 7.59, SD 3.42, P<.05). No significant difference of primary outcomes was found at other time points.

A subgroup analysis showed that the improvements of the primary outcomes were more significant in those who completed 6 or more training sessions each week throughout the trial (the highest compliance group) compared with the UC group at 6 months (ODI mean 17.94, SD 5.24, P<.05; VAS mean 19.56, SD 5.27, P<.05), 12 months (ODI mean 13.39, SD 5.32, P<.05; VAS mean 14.35, SD 5.23, P<.05), and 24 months (ODI mean 18.80, SD 5.22, P<.05; VAS mean 21.56, SD 5.28, P<.05).

Conclusions

This research demonstrated that a mobile phone–based telerehabilitation system is effective in self-managed rehabilitation for postoperative patients with LBP. The effectiveness of eHealth was more evident in participants with higher compliance. Future research should focus on improving patients’ compliance.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-TRC-13003314; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=6245 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/766RAIDNc)

Moving without moving: immediate management following lumbar spine surgery using a graded motor imagery approach: a case report

Representational body maps are dynamically maintained in the brain and negatively influenced by neglect, decreased movement and pain. Graded motor imagery (GMI) utilizing various tactile and cognitive processes has shown efficacy in decreasing pain, disability and movement restrictions in musculoskeletal pain. Limited information is known about the cortical changes patients undergo during lumbar surgery (LS), let alone the therapeutic effect of GMI for LS. A 56-year-old patient underwent LS for low back pain, leg pain and progressive neurological deficit. Twenty-four hours prior to and 48 h after LS various psychometric, physical movement and tactile acuity measurements were recorded. Apart from predictable postoperative increases in pain, fear-avoidance, disability and movement-restrictions, pressure pain thresholds (PPT), two-point discrimination (TPD) and tactile acuity was greatly reduced. The patient underwent six physiotherapy (PT) treatments receiving a GMI program aimed at restoring the PPT, TPD and tactile acuity. The results revealed that GMI techniques applied to a patient immediately after LS caused marked improvements in movement (flexion average improvement/session 3.3 cm; straight leg raise average 8.3°/session) and an immediate hypoalgesic effect. GMI may provide PT with a non-threatening therapeutic treatment for the acute LS patient and establish a new role for PT in acute LS patients.

Impact of wearable technology on psychosocial factors of osteoarthritis management: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To identify the impact the use of wearable technology could have in patients with osteoarthritis in terms of communication with healthcare providers and patients' empowerment to manage their condition.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using focus groups with patients with osteoarthritis; data from patients' responses were analysed using Framework Methodology.

PARTICIPANTS

21 patients with knee osteoarthritis from the London area (age range 45-65 years) participated in a total of four focus groups. Recruitment continued until data saturation.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a university setting.

RESULTS

Patients' responses suggested a positive attitude on the impact wearable technology could have on the management of osteoarthritis. It was perceived that the use of wearable devices would benefit patients in terms of feeling in control of their condition, providing them with awareness of their progress, empowering in terms of self-management and improving communication with their clinician.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper suggests positive patient perspectives on the perceived benefits wearable technology could have on the management of osteoarthritis. The data that could be collected with the use of wearable technology could be beneficial both to patients and clinicians. The information obtained from this study suggests that introducing wearable technology into patient-centred care could enhance patient experience in the field of osteoarthritis and beyond.

Use of wearable technology for performance assessment: a validation study

•

We assessed three sensors in monitoring activity performance.

•

A novel flexible sensor system was validated.

•

A functional sensor placement is as valid as a more conventional one.

•

A frequency domain approach was successfully applied to evaluate outcome measures.

The prevalence of osteoarthritis is increasing globally but current compliance with rehabilitation remains poor. This study explores whether wearable sensors can be used to provide objective measures of performance with a view to using them as motivators to aid compliance to osteoarthritis rehabilitation. More specifically, the use of a novel attachable wearable sensor integrated into clothing and inertial measurement units located in two different positions, at the waist and thigh pocket, was investigated. Fourteen healthy volunteers were asked to complete exercises adapted from a knee osteoarthritis rehabilitation programme whilst wearing the three sensors including five times sit-to-stand test, treadmill walking at slow, preferred and fast speeds. The performances of the three sensors were validated against a motion capture system and an instrumented treadmill. The systems showed a high correlation (r² > 0.7) and agreement (mean difference range: −0.02–0.03 m, 0.005–0.68 s) with gold standards. The novel attachable wearable sensor was able to monitor exercise tasks as well as the inertial measurement units (ICC > 0.95). Results also suggested that a functional placement (e.g., situated in a pocket) is a valid position for performance monitoring. This study shows the potential use of wearable technologies for assessing subject performance during exercise and suggests functional solutions to enhance acceptance.

Management of catastrophising and kinesiophobia improves rehabilitation after fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis and stenosis. A randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of a rehabilitation programme including the management of catastrophising and kinesiophobia on disability, dysfunctional thoughts, pain, and the quality of life in patients after lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis and/or lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

This was a parallel-group, randomised, superiority-controlled study in which 130 patients were randomly assigned to a programme consisting of exercises and cognitive-behavioural therapy (experimental group, 65 subjects) or exercises alone (control group, 65 subjects). Before treatment (T1), 4 weeks later (post-treatment analysis, T2) and 12 months after the end of treatment (follow-up, T3), all the patients completed a booklet containing the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, primary outcome), the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, the Pain Catastrophising Scale, a pain Numerical Rating Scale, and the Short-Form Health Survey. A linear mixed model for repeated measures was used for each outcome measure.

RESULTS

The ODI linear mixed model revealed significant main effects of group (F(1,122.8) = 95.78, p < 0.001) and time (F(2,120.1) = 432.02, p < 0.001) in favour of the experimental group. There was a significant group × time interaction effect (F(2,120.1) = 20.37, p < 0.001). The analyses of all of the secondary outcome measures revealed a significant effect of time, group and interaction in favour of the experimental group.

CONCLUSION

The rehabilitation programme, including the management of catastrophising and kinesiophobia, was superior to the exercise programme in reducing disability, dysfunctional thoughts, and pain, and enhancing the quality of life of patients after lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis and/or LSS. The effects lasted for at least 1 year after the intervention ended.