SynthesisBMC health services research2017
A systematic literature review of time to return to work and narcotic use after lumbar spinal fusion using minimal invasive and open surgery techniques.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrated care programmes for sport and work participation, performance of physical activities and quality of life among orthopaedic surgery patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Budget impact analysis of robot-assisted versus conventional spine surgery in Spain.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive cervical spine stabilization: A multicenter study of completely percutaneous pedicle screw-rod instrumentation.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Time Course of Functional Recovery Following Single-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with and Without Posterior Instrumentation: A Retrospective Single-Institution Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The Utilization of Navigation and Emerging Technologies With Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review.Neurospine · 2025Article
- Article
- A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy for Managing Lumbar Radiculopathy in Super Elderly Patients.Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Article
- Return to Work Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Percutaneous Posterior Pedicle Fixation: A Retrospective Analysis from Two Academic Centers in Germany.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Complications in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in the Last 10 Years: A Narrative Review.Neurospine · 2024Article
- Effects of Workload on Return to Work After Elective Lumbar Spine Surgery.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Practical answers to frequently asked questions in minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery.The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2023Review
- The Impact of Hot Spring Hydrotherapy on Pain Perception and Dysfunction Severity in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Recent Updates on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: Techniques, Technologies, and Indications.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- A Proposed Personalized Spine Care Protocol (SpineScreen) to Treat Visualized Pain Generators: An Illustrative Study Comparing Clinical Outcomes and Postoperative Reoperations between Targeted Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression Surgery, Minimally Invasive TLIF and Open Laminectomy.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Minimally invasive multiple-rod constructs with robotics planning in adult spinal deformity surgery: a case series.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 · 2022Article
- Durability of Endoscopes Used During Routine Lumbar Endoscopy: An Analysis of Use Patterns, Common Failure Modes, Impact on Patient Care, and Contingency Plans.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- State of the art advances in minimally invasive surgery for adult spinal deformity.Spine deformity · 2020Review
- Reliability Analysis of Deep Learning Algorithms for Reporting of Routine Lumbar MRI Scans.International journal of spine surgery · 2020Article
- Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: Techniques, Technologies, and Indications.Asian spine journal · 2020Article
- Complications associated with L4-5 anterior retroperitoneal trans-psoas interbody fusion: a single institution series.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic low back pain is a common health problem for adult workers and causes an enormous economic burden. With the improvement of minimally invasive surgical techniques (MIS) in spinal fusion and the development of fusion devices, more lumbar operations are today being performed through a less invasive technique. When compared with open surgeries (OS), MIS has demonstrated better clinical outcomes including operation time, blood loss, complication rates and length of hospital stay. The aim of this review was to identify and summarize evidence on the time to return to work and the duration of post-operation narcotic use for patients who had lumbar spinal fusion operations using MIS and OS techniques.
methodsA systematic literature review was performed including studies identified from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, and the Centre for Review and Dissemination (CRD) (January 2004–April 2014) for publications reporting on time to return to work and post-operation narcotic use after MIS or OS lumbar spinal fusion surgeries.
resultsOut of a total of 36 included studies, 28 reported on the time to return to work and 17 on the narcotic use after MIS or OS. Four studies described the time to return to work directly comparing MIS and OS. Three studies, from the US, directly compared the duration of narcotic use between MIS- transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and OS-TLIF. In addition to the time to return to work, 23 studies reported on the rate of return to work and the employment rate before and after surgery, and two Swedish studies presented sick leave data.
conclusionThere is a gap of good quality data describing the time to return to work and narcotic use after lumbar spinal fusion operations using MIS or OS techniques. However, the current systematic literature review indicates that patients who have lumbar spinal fusion operations, with the MIS procedure, generally return to work after surgery more quickly and require less post-operation narcotics for pain control compared to patients who have OS.
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.