ArticleGlobal spine journal2022
Disability, Health-Related Quality of Life and Mortality in Lumbar Spine Fusion Patients-A 5-Year Follow-Up and Comparison With a Population Sample.
Article in Global spine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence of spine surgery for degenerative and traumatic pathologies in patients with a history of cancer: a nationwide register-based study between 1997 and 2020 from Finland.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Article
- Postoperative Pedicle Fracture in an Adult With Idiopathic Scoliosis After Posterior Spinal Fusion: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designProspective follow-up study.
objectivesWe aimed to assess the effect of lumbar spine fusion (LSF) on disability, health-related quality of life and mortality in a 5-year follow-up, and to compare these results with the general population.
methods523 consecutive LSF operations were included in a prospective follow-up. Disability was assessed by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and HRQoL by the 36-item Short Form (SF-36) questionnaire using the physical and mental summary scores (PCS and MCS). The patients were compared with an age-, sex-, and residential area matched general population cohort.
resultsThe preoperative ODI in the patients was 46 (SD 16), and the change at 5 years was -26 (95% CI: -24 to -28), p < 0.001. In the population, ODI (baseline 13, SD 16) remained unchanged. The preoperative PCS in the patients was 27 (SD 7), in the population 45 (SD 11), and the increase in the patients at 5 years was 8 (95% CI: 7 to 9), p < 0.001. The patients did not reach the population in ODI or PCS. The baseline MCS in the patients was 47 (SD 13), and the change at 5 years 4 (95% CI: 3 to 7), p < 0.001. MCS of the females reached the population at 5-year follow-up. When analyzing short and long fusions separately, comparable changes were seen in both subgroups. There was no difference in mortality between the patients (3.4%) and the population (4.8%), hazard ratio (HR) 0.86.
conclusionsAlthough the patients who had undergone LSF benefited from surgery still at 5 years, they never reached the physical level of the population.
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.