ArticleSpine surgery and related research2024
Predictors of Patient Dissatisfaction after Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis Surgery: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Clinical and biomechanical biomarkers of altered functional transitions in lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication.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 · 2026Article
- Can preoperative visual analogue scale chart patterns predict surgical outcomes in older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis? A two-center retrospective study.Fujita medical journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Recently, patient satisfaction has gained prominence as a crucial measure for ensuring patient-centered care. Furthermore, patient satisfaction after lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LCS) surgery is an important metric for physician's decision of surgical indication and informed consent to patient. This study aimed to elucidate how patient satisfaction changed after LCS surgery to identify factors that predict patient dissatisfaction. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed time-course data of patients aged ≥40 years who underwent LCS surgery at multiple hospitals. The participants completed the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) before surgery and then 6 months and 1 year postsurgery. Patient satisfaction was categorized according to the postoperative score of the satisfaction domain of the ZCQ: satisfied, score ≤2.0; moderately satisfied, 2.0< score ≤2.5; and dissatisfied, score >2.5. Results: The study enrolled 241 patients. Our data indicated a satisfaction rate of around 70% at 6 months and then again 1 year after LCS surgery. Among those who were dissatisfied 6 months after LCS surgery, 47.6% were more satisfied 1 year postsurgery. Furthermore, 86.2% of those who were satisfied 6 months after LCS surgery remained satisfied at 1 year. Multivariable analysis revealed that age (relative risk, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.8) and preoperative score of psychological disorders on the JOABPEQ (relative risk, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.08) were significantly associated with LCS surgery dissatisfaction. In addition, the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the cutoff value for the preoperative score of psychological disorder of the JOABPEQ was estimated at 40 for LCS surgery dissatisfaction. Conclusions: Age and psychological disorders were identified as significant predictors of dissatisfaction, with a JOABPEQ cutoff value providing potential clinical applicability.
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.