Trial reportYonsei medical journal2016
Surgical Outcome Predictor in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Disease Based on Health Related Quality of Life Using Euro-Quality 5 Dimensions Analysis.
Trial report in Yonsei medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spinal Injections: A Narrative Review from a Surgeon's Perspective.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- One-Year Clinical Outcomes of Minimal-Invasive Dorsal Percutaneous Fixation of Thoracolumbar Spine Fractures.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Development of a model to predict the probability of incurring a complication during spine surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2021Article
- Predicting Patient-Centered Outcomes from Spine Surgery Using Risk Assessment Tools: a Systematic Review.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2020Review
- Effect of Sagittal Balance on Risk of Falling after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Combined with Posterior Surgery.Yonsei medical journal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aim to introduce the predictive value of a quantitatively described formula model in a multicenter prospective analysis using the EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) health scale to anticipate postoperative improvement in patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease (DLSD). MATERIALS AND
methodsQuality of life was evaluated in 376 patients from 17 tertiary hospitals before and after spinal decompression and fusion surgery. The five items of the EQ-5D, mobility (M), self-care (S), usual activities (A), pain/discomfort (P), and anxiety/depression (D), were checked as level 1, 2, or 3, with 3 being the worst. A minimal significant change in the calculated EQ-5D (cEQ-5D) was set as 0.05. Logistic regression analysis was performed to predict the highest successful outcome (cEQ-5D improvement after operation >0.05) with the given sets of 5 items of the EQ-5D.
resultsIn the cEQ-5D analysis, among patients with a formula score of S+A+2×P+D≤8, 18/68 (27%) showed significant improvement in the cEQ-5D at 1 year postoperatively (p<0.05). However, in patients with a formula score of ≥9, 265/308 (86%) demonstrated significant improvements in the cEQ-5D at 1 year postoperatively (p<0.05).
conclusionWe suggest that S+A+2×P+D≥9 in the EQ-5D can quantitatively describe the better surgical outcome predictors for DLSD. With a definite DLSD lesion confirmed by an imaging study, patients who meet the formula scores of 9 or over and have refractory symptoms to non-operative treatment could be better surgical candidates resulting in satisfactory surgical outcomes of over 86%, than those who scored 8 or lower.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.