Cost-effectiveness Applications of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Spine Surgery

Using Resource Utilization in Spine Healthcare to Complement Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements in Assessing Surgical Success

OBJECTIVE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are utilized to assess surgical success but are limited by data collection, response bias, and subjectivity. The large volume of digital healthcare data offers a new method to utilize healthcare utilization as a longitudinal, individualized, and objective proxy for health needs among surgical patients. This study aimed to design and evaluate a novel resource utilization in spine healthcare (RUSH) clustering method that complements PROMs in evaluating postoperative patient outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study conducted at a large, tertiary healthcare system included all adult patients undergoing cervical or lumbar surgery between 2014 and 2020 with at least 3 months follow-up. Postoperative healthcare utilization was analyzed using clinic visits, inpatient encounters, telephone encounters, MyChart messages, opioid use, physical therapy, injections, and imaging. Latent profile analysis determined RUSH clusters and changes in PROM Information System Physical Health (PROMIS-PH) scores preoperation and 12-months postoperation.

RESULTS

This study included 5602 surgeries (mean age 61.3 ± 13.1 years, 49.9% female). Four RUSH groups were identified: low utilizers (21.5%), moderate utilizers without advanced imaging (34.7%), moderate utilizers with advanced imaging (10.7%), and high utilizers (33.1%). Utilization patterns varied by surgery type, with lower-utilization patterns among non-fusion procedures and a consistent sub-population of high utilizers across all surgery types. High RUSH utilizers had the lowest pre-operative PROMIS-PH scores and the worst average postoperative change.

CONCLUSIONS

RUSH clustering provides a novel, data-driven approach to measure surgical success, complementing traditional PROMs, and leveraging big data to monitor and respond to surgical outcomes.

Development and validation of Tamil version of CARIES-QC questionnaire among socially marginalized school children in Chennai City

BACKGROUND

The Caries Impacts and Experiences Questionnaire for Children (CARIES-QC), which was developed to assess dental caries-specific Child Oral Health Related Quality of Life (COHRQoL), has been translated into few world languages.

AIM

To develop and validate the Tamil version of Caries Impacts and Experience Questionnaire for Children (CARIES-QC).

DESIGN

This cross-sectional study was conducted among socially marginalized school children in Chennai City. The initial translation of the English CARIES-QC questionnaire to Tamil was made by two independent translators followed by an expert committee discussion to derive a prefinal version of the Tamil questionnaire. Subsequently, content validation was performed by bilingual subject experts followed by preliminary pilot testing among 30 school children aged 8-10 years studying in Adidravidar Welfare High School, Chennai, to produce the final version of the questionnaire. Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and test-retest reliability of the translated questionnaire were tested among 191 children.

RESULTS

The content validation process revealed that the translated version had relevant questions and content coverage (Scale-wise Content Validity Index score = .91). The children with and without dental caries had mean CARIES-QC scores of 5.39 + 3.7 and 3.71 + 5.1, respectively, and their statistically significant difference (p-value = .04) between them indicates the scale's satisfactory discriminant validity. The Cronbach's alpha was .87 indicating the questionnaire's good internal consistency.

CONCLUSION

The newly developed Tamil CARIES-QC questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for assessing COHRQoL among Tamil-speaking school children.

Impact of Preoperative Intervertebral Disc Degeneration on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Lumbar Fusion

OBJECTIVE

The Pfirrmann scoring system classifies lumbosacral disc degeneration based on magnetic resonance imaging signal intensity. The relationship between pre-existing disc degeneration and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after one-level lumbar fusion is not well documented. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the severity of preoperative intervertebral disc degeneration and preoperative and postoperative PROMs in patients undergoing one-level lumbar fusion.

METHODS

All adult patients who underwent posterior lumbar decompression and fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion between 2014 and 2022 were included. Patient demographics and comorbidities were extracted from medical records. Lumbar intervertebral discs on sagittal magnetic resonance imaging T2-weighted images were assessed by 2 independent graders utilizing Pfirrmann criteria. Grades I-III were categorized as low-grade disc degeneration, while IV-V were considered high grade. Multivariable linear regression assessed the impact of disc degeneration on PROMs.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients were included, of which 69 (46%) had low-grade disc degeneration, while 81 (54%) had high-grade degeneration. Patients with high-grade degeneration had increased preoperative visual analog scale (VAS)-Leg scores (6.10 vs. 4.54, P = 0.005) and displayed greater 1-year postoperative improvements in VAS-Back scores (-2.11 vs. -0.66, P = 0.002). Multivariable regression demonstrated Pfirrmann scores as independent predictors for both preoperative VAS-Leg scores (P = 0.004) and postoperative VAS-Back improvement (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing one-level lumbar fusion, higher Pfirmann scores were associated with increased preoperative leg pain and greater 1-year postoperative improvement in back pain. Further studies into the relationship of preoperative disc degeneration and their impact on postoperative outcomes may help guide clinical decision-making and patient expectations.

Assessment of patient-reported outcomes measures in heart failure: a systematic review

Heart failure (HF) is a prevalent global disease, particularly impacting developed countries. With the world's aging population, HF's impact on the quantity and quality of life is expected to grow. This review aims to ascertain the frequency, characteristics, and properties of all patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) studied in HF patients. We searched Ovid/Medline and Web of Science for original articles about PROMs performed in adults with HF. Using pre-established quality criteria for measurement properties, an overall rating was assigned to evaluate and compare different instruments. The quality of evidence was assessed with the COSMIN risk of bias checklist. Of 4283 records identified, we reviewed 296 full-text documents and included 64 papers, involving 30,185 participants. Thirty different PROMs were identified, with 14 specifically designed for HF being the most commonly used. Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) were evaluated 16 and 13 times, respectively, demonstrating good psychometric properties. The MacNew Heart Disease Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, a common heart disease-specific instrument, exhibited negative performances across various psychometric measures. Evidence for generic instruments was scant and unremarkable and they proved to be less responsive in HF populations. MLHF and KCCQ emerged as the most commonly used and well-supported PROMs, with robust overall evidence. They are comprehensive and accurate instruments, particularly suitable for application in clinical practice and research. Future research should explore how computer-adapted instruments can enhance precision, reduce respondent burden, and improve communication between clinicians and patients, thereby promoting more efficient and patient-centered services.

Impact of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Patient-reported Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of preoperative symptom duration (PSD) on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DSpond).

BACKGROUND

A prolonged duration of preoperative symptoms may implicate inferior long-term outcomes postsurgery. Prior studies of lumbar fusion recipients are limited by the inclusion of heterogeneous populations.

METHODS

A single-surgeon registry was retrospectively queried for privately insured patients who had undergone primary, elective, single-level MIS-TLIF for DSpond with a recorded symptom start date. Cohorts were formed by PSD: shorter duration (PSD <1 y) or greater duration (GD; PSD ≥1 y). PROMs evaluated included Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function, Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale-Back, Visual Analog Scale-Leg, and 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire. The magnitude of PROM (∆PROM) improvement from preoperative baseline to 6 weeks and final follow-up (∆PROM-FF) were compared between cohorts. Intercohort achievement rates of a minimum clinically important difference in each PROM were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 133 patients included 85 patients with GD cohort. There were no significant differences in pre hoc demographics and perioperative characteristics between cohorts, as well as preoperative, 6-week, or final follow-up PROMs between cohorts. Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in all PROMs at 6 weeks and final follow-up ( P ≤ 0.049, all). There were no significant intercohort differences demonstrated in minimum clinically important difference achievement rates, ∆PROM-6W, or ∆PROM-FF in any PROM.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of the symptom duration before MIS-TLIF for DSpond, patients demonstrate significant improvement in physical function, pain, disability, and mental health. Patients with a GD of preoperative symptoms did not report inferior scores in any PROM domain. Patients with a GD of preoperative symptoms did not suffer inferior rates of clinically meaningful improvement after surgical intervention. These findings should be considered when counseling patients before surgical intervention for DSpond.

Readability of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Spine Surgery and Implications for Health Literacy

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the readability of commonly utilized patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although studies have evaluated patient education materials, discharge instructions, and informed consent forms in spine surgery, there is a dearth of literature on the readability of PROMs despite widespread health illiteracy. Without knowledge of PROM readability, it is unclear whether these measures are able to be understood by the average spine patient.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed all commonly utilized nonvisual PROMs within the spinal literature and uploaded PROMs into an online readability calculator. The Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index were collected. A FRES>79 or SMOG<7 was considered readable by the general population per American Medical Association and Centers for Disease Control guidelines. A stricter threshold recommended in health care (SMOG <6 or FRES>89) was then used to further review readability.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven PROMs were included. Based on FRES, the mean readability of all PROMs was 69.2 ± 17.2 (range, 10-96.4), indicating an average eighth to ninth-grade reading level. The mean readability score categorized by the SMOG Index was 8.12 ± 2.65 (range, 3.1-25.6), representing an eighth-grade reading level. Compared with the reading level of the general population, 49 (63.6%) PROMs are written above the United States literacy level, according to FRES. Using stricter definitions of readability, 8 PROMs were considered readable, including PROM Information System pain behavior (FRES: 96.4 and SMOG: 5.2), PROM Information System sleep disturbance (SMOG: 5.6), Neck Pain and Disability Scale (SMOG: 4.3), and Zung Depression Scale (SMOG: 3.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Most PROMs utilized in spine surgery require an average reading competency far above the average patient's comprehension. This may have a meaningful impact on understanding PROM instruments and may affect the accuracy of complete surveys and the rates of incompletion.

The Veterans Rand-12 Physical Composite Score Prognosticates Postoperative Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To determine prognostic value of preoperative Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) physical composite score (PCS) on outcomes in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

ACDF patients with preoperative VR-12 PCS formed 2 cohorts: VR-12 PCS <35 and VR-12 PCS ≥35. The following patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were gathered preoperatively and postoperatively up to 2 years: VR-12 mental composite score (MCS)/PCS, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PF, 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), visual analog scale (VAS) neck/arm pain, and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) PCS/MCS. Comparing PROMs change with established thresholds determined achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Univariate analysis compared demographics, perioperative characteristics, and preoperative PROMs. Multivariable regression analysis compared postoperative PROMs and MCID achievement.

RESULTS

Of 174 patients, 83 had VR-12 PCS <35. Preoperatively, patients with reduced PF displayed lower patient-reported outcome scores in NDI, PHQ-9, and SF-12 MCS (P ≤ 0.008), but not in VAS arm. At 6 weeks postoperatively, these patients continued to score lower in NDI (P ≤ 0.014) and SF-12 PCS (P ≤ 0.001), among others. By the final check, most scores remained lower (P ≤ 0.002) except for PHQ-9 and VAS arm (P > 0.05). Greater improvements at 6 weeks postoperatively were especially noted in patients with lower initial VR-12 PCS for NDI, PROMIS PF, and SF-12 PCS (P < 0.05). However, by final follow-up, only PROMIS PF showed noteworthy improvement (P = 0.19). Regarding MCID achievement, significant differences were largely absent except in NDI, where patients with reduced PF exhibited more MCID achievement (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

ACDF patients with VR-12 PCS <35 experienced inferior PF, mental health, and disability postoperatively until final follow-up. There were no significant differences in postoperative improvement magnitude and MCID achievement. Results suggest that baseline VR-12 PCS in ACDF patients may indicate poorer PF, mental health, and disability postoperatively. However, VR-12 PCS does not limit extent of postoperative improvement.

State-of-the-art Applications of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Spinal Care

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assign objective measures to patient's subjective experiences of health, pain, disability, function, and quality of life. PROMs can be useful for providers in shared decision making, outcome assessment, and indicating patients for surgery. In this article, we provide an overview of the legacy PROMs used in spinal care, recent advancements in patient-reported outcomes, and future directions in PROMs. Recent advances in patient-reported outcome assessments have included standardization of measurement tools, integration of data collection into workflow, and applications of outcome measures in predictive models and decision-making tools. Continual appraisal of instruments and incorporation into artificial intelligence and machine learning analytics will continue to augment the delivery of high-value spinal care.

System-wide integration of patient reported outcome measure collection through an electronic medical record system: A state-wide retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In spine neurosurgery practice, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are tools used to convey information about a patient's health experience and are an integral component of a clinician's decision-making process as they help guide treatment strategies to improve outcomes and minimize pain. Currently, there is limited research showing effective integration strategies of PROMs into electronic medical records. This study aims to provide a framework for other healthcare systems by outlining the process from start to finish in seven Hartford Healthcare Neurosurgery outpatient spine clinics throughout the state of Connecticut.

METHODS

On March 1, 2021, a pilot implementation program began in one clinic and on July 1, 2021, all outpatient clinics were implementing the revised clinical workflow that included the electronic collection of PROMs within the electronic health record (EHR). A retrospective chart analysis studied all adult (18+) new patient visits in seven outpatient clinics by comparing the rates of PROMs collection in Half 1 (March 1, 2021-August 31, 2022) and in Half 2 (September 1, 2022-February 28, 2022) across all sites. Additionally, patient characteristics were studied to identify any variables that may lead to higher rates of collection.

RESULTS

During the study period, 3528 new patient visits were analyzed. There was a significant change in rates of PROMs collection across all departments between H1 and H2 (p < 0.05). Additional significant predictors for PROMs collection were the sex and ethnicity of the patient as well as the provider type for the visit (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study proved that implementing the electronic collection of PROMs into an already existing clinical workflow reduces previously identified collection barriers and enables PROMs collection rates that meet or exceed current benchmarks. Our results provide a successful step-by-step framework for other spine neurosurgery clinics to implement a similar approach.

The Additional Economic Burden of Frailty in Adult Cervical Deformity Patients Undergoing Surgical Intervention

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The influence of frailty on economic burden following corrective surgery for the adult cervical deformity (CD) is understudied and may provide valuable insights for preoperative planning.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the influence of baseline frailty status on the economic burden of CD surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CD patients with frailty scores and baseline and two-year Neck Disability Index data were included. Frailty score was categorized patients by modified CD frailty index into not frail (NF) and frail (F). Analysis of covariance was used to estimate marginal means adjusting for age, sex, surgical approach, and baseline sacral slope, T1 slope minus cervical lordosis, C2-C7 angle, C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis. Costs were derived from PearlDiver registry data. Reimbursement consisted of a standardized estimate using regression analysis of Medicare payscales for services within a 30-day window including length of stay and death. This data is representative of the national average Medicare cost differentiated by complication/comorbidity outcome, surgical approach, and revision status. Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at two years was calculated for NF and F patients.

RESULTS

There were 126 patients included. There were 68 NF patients and 58 classified as F. Frailty groups did not differ by overall complications, instance of distal junctional kyphosis, or reoperations (all P >0.05). These groups had similar rates of radiographic and clinical improvement by two years. NF and F had similar overall cost ($36,731.03 vs. $37,356.75, P =0.793), resulting in equivocal costs per QALYs for both patients at two years ($90,113.79 vs. $80,866.66, P =0.097).

CONCLUSION

F and NF patients experienced similar complication rates and upfront costs, with equivocal utility gained, leading to comparative cost-effectiveness with NF patients based on cost per QALYs at two years. Surgical correction for CD is an economical healthcare investment for F patients when accounting for anticipated utility gained and cost-effectiveness following the procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

The Effect of the Preoperative Severity of Neck Pain on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimum Clinically Important Difference Achievement After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement rates among patients undergoing single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with varying severity of preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) neck score.

METHODS

Patients with ACDF were grouped: severity of preoperative VAS neck score ≤8 or >8. Demographic/perioperative variables and PROMs (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function [PROMIS PF] score, 12-Item Short Form [SF-12] Mental Component Score [MCS], VAS neck/arm score, and Neck Disability Index [NDI]) were collected preoperatively/postoperatively. MCID attainment comparison by grouping was evaluated using χ² analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients were included (103 VAS neck preoperative score ≤8; 34 VAS neck preoperative score >8). The VAS neck preoperative score ≤8 cohort did not improve: 6 weeks PROMIS-PF score, 6 weeks SF-12 Physical Component Score [PCS], 12 weeks/1 year/2 years SF-12 MCS, 2 years VAS neck score, and 1 years/2 years VAS arm score (P ≤ 0.015, all). VAS neck preoperative score >8 did not improve: 6 weeks/12 weeks/2 years PROMIS-PF score, all time points SF-12 PCS, 6 weeks/12 weeks/1 year/2 years SF-12 MCS, and 2 years VAS arm score (P ≤ 0.013, all). VAS neck preoperative score >8 had inferior PROMIS-PF scores all time points except 1 year (P ≤ 0.036, all), lower SF-12 PCS 6 weeks/6 months (P ≤ 0.043, both), inferior SF-12 MCS at preoperative to 6 months (P ≤ 006, all), higher VAS neck score from preoperative to 6 months (P ≤ 0.018), higher VAS arm score preoperative/12 weeks/6 months (P ≤ 0.020, all), and higher NDI at preoperative/12 weeks/6 months (P ≤ 0.030, all). MCID attainment rates for VAS neck preoperative score >8 were greater for NDI 2 years (P = 0.040), lower for PROMIS-PF score 2 years, and overall (P = 0.018), lower for SF-12 MCS 12 weeks (P = 0.046), lower for VAS neck score 12 weeks to 1 year and overall (P ≤ 0.032, all), and lower for VAS arm score 6 weeks/1 year (P ≤ 0.030, both).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with single-level ACDF presenting with greater baseline neck pain showed poorer physical function/pain/disability/mental health at preoperative/intermediate postoperative time points, but had comparable long-term PROMs by 2 years. MCID attainment was lower among patients with greater preoperative neck pain; MCID among the VAS neck score >8 cohort were only significantly inferior for neck pain.

ALIF Versus TLIF for L5-S1 Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: ALIF Demonstrates Superior Segmental and Regional Radiographic Outcomes and Clinical Improvements Across More Patient-reported Outcome Measures Domains

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare segmental and regional radiographic parameters between anterior interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior interbody fusion (TLIF) for treatment of L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis, and to assess for changes in these parameters over time. Secondarily, we sought to compare clinical outcomes via patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between techniques and within groups over time.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Isthmic spondylolistheses are frequently treated with interbody fusion via ALIF or TLIF approaches. Robust comparisons of radiographic and clinical outcomes are lacking.

METHODS

We reviewed pre- and postoperative radiographs as well as Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) elements for patients who received L5-S1 interbody fusions for isthmic spondylolisthesis in the Mass General Brigham (MGB) health system (2016-2020). Intraclass correlation testing was used for reliability assessments; Mann-Whitney U tests and Sign tests were employed for intercohort and intracohort comparative analyses, respectively.

RESULTS

ALIFs generated greater segmental and L4-S1 lordosis than TLIF, both at first postoperative visit (mean 26 days [SE = 4]; 11.3° vs. 1.3°, P  < 0.001; 6.2° vs. 0.3°, P  = 0.005) and at final follow-up (mean 410days [SE = 45]; 9.6° vs. 0.2°, P < 0.001; 7.9° vs. 2.1°, P = 0.005). ALIF also demonstrated greater increase in disc height than TLIF at first (9.6 vs. 5.5 mm, P < 0.001) and final follow-up (8.7 vs. 3.6 mm, P < 0.001). Disc height was maintained in the ALIF group but decreased over time in the TLIF cohort (ALIF 9.6 vs. 8.7 mm, P = 0.1; TLIF 5.5 vs. 3.6 mm, P < 0.001). Both groups demonstrated improvements in Pain Intensity and Pain Interference scores; ALIF patients also improved in Physical Function and Global Health - Physical domains.

CONCLUSION

ALIF generates greater segmental lordosis, regional lordosis, and restoration of disc height compared to TLIF for treatment of isthmic spondylolisthesis. Additionally, ALIF patients demonstrate significant improvements across more PROMs domains relative to TLIF patients.Level of Evidence: 3.

How Do Patient-Reported Outcomes Vary Between Lumbar Fusion Patients with Complete Versus Incomplete Follow-Up?

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between patients who do and do not follow up for 2 years after lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Primary, elective, single-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion, lateral lumbar interbody fusion, or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures were identified. Patients were grouped by 2-year PROM follow-up completion. Mean and delta PROM scores for visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), short-form (SF)-12 Physical Composite Score (PCS), and Mental Composite Score (MCS) were computed for both groups preoperatively and postoperatively. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement was determined for PROM scores using established threshold values. Linear and logistic regression assessed mean and ΔPROM scores as predictors of 2-year follow-up completion and compared MCID achievement between groups, respectively.

RESULTS

We included 316 lumbar fusion patients. PROM scores were more favorable for complete follow-up patients for 6-month VAS back (P = 0.003), 6-month and 1-year ODI (P ≤ 0.027, both), and 6-week and 6-month SF-12 PCS (P ≤ 0.015, both). Six-month VAS back (P = 0.007); 6-month and 1-year ODI (P ≤ 0.028, both); 6-week, 6-month, and 1-year SF-12 PCS (P ≤ 0.041, all); and 6-week SF-12 MCS (P ≤ 0.028, both) significantly predicted 2-year follow-up. ΔPROMs significantly differed between groups at 1 year for ΔVAS leg (P = 0.029), ΔODI (P = 0.013), and ΔSF-12 MCS (P = 0.004). One-year ΔVAS leg (P = 0.035), ΔODI (P = 0.011), and ΔSF-12 MCS (P = 0.003) significantly predicted follow-up. MCID achievement for ΔPROMs significantly differed between groups for 6-week VAS leg (P = 0.035), overall ODI (P = 0.034), and SF-12 PCS from 12 weeks through 1 year (P ≤ 0.011, all) and overall (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with full follow-up demonstrated significantly more favorable outcome scores and improvement in pain, disability, and physical function at several postoperative time points.