Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39884868›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2025

Postoperative Brace Prescription Practices for Elective Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Questionnaire-Based Study of Spine Surgeons in Japan.

Michita Noma, Yujiro Takeshita, Kota Miyoshi, Fumiko Saiki, Naohiro Kawamura, Akiro Higashikawa, Nobuhiro Hara, Takashi Ono, So Kato, Yoshitaka Matsubayashi and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Michita NomaDepartment of Orthopedic and Spine Surgery, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan m.noma@me.com.
Yujiro TakeshitaDepartment of Orthopedic and Spine Surgery, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kota MiyoshiDepartment of Orthopedic and Spine Surgery, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Fumiko SaikiDepartment of Orthopedic and Spine Surgery, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Naohiro KawamuraUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.
Akiro HigashikawaUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.
Nobuhiro HaraUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.
Takashi OnoUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.
So KatoUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshitaka MatsubayashiUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.
Yuki TaniguchiUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.
Sakae TanakaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yasushi OshimaUniversity of Tokyo Spine Group (UTSG), Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe efficacy of postoperative braces for degenerative lumbar disorders has long been debated, with conflicting reports regarding the promotion of bone fusion and pain relief. The current aspects of postoperative brace prescriptions have been previously reported in Western countries but not in Asia. This study aimed to elucidate prescription practices in Japan and identify factors influencing prescription decisions. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe survey was conducted at a spine group research meeting comprising spine surgeons from multiple institutions. The questionnaire assessed aspects of postoperative brace prescription, including the type, purpose, and duration of usage, categorized by surgical procedures for degenerative lumbar disorders: endoscopic decompression, open surgery decompression, and fusion involving 1 or more than 3 levels. The respondents' backgrounds, scientific knowledge of postoperative braces, nonscientific reasons, and basis for prescription decisions were also investigated.

resultsThere were 63 valid responses. The overall postoperative brace prescription rate was 83%, with 66% for decompression and 98% for fusion procedures, surpassing the rates reported in Western studies. The primary prescription purpose was to slow down patient activity (83%, double the previously reported rates). Prescription rates for endoscopic and open surgical decompression were significantly correlated with facility attributes and annual number of surgeries. Scientific knowledge of postoperative braces was lacking in 56% of respondents, with scientific evidence being the least frequent decision for brace prescription (14%). Nonscientific reasons influenced the prescription decisions of 84% of participants.

conclusionThe postoperative brace prescription rate among spine surgeons in Japan was significantly higher than that in Western studies, largely due to nonscientific factors such as physician reassurance and the intention to slow down patient activity. Comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines are needed regarding consistent brace usage to optimize patient outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study highlights the high postoperative brace prescription rates among spine surgeons in Japan, which are significantly influenced by nonscientific factors, such as tradition, physician reassurance, and patient satisfaction, rather than scientific evidence. These findings underscore the need for evidence-based guidelines to improve consistency in postoperative brace usage. The results are particularly relevant in regions with aging populations and a high prevalence of osteoporosis, providing insights for improving postoperative management strategies and patient outcomes in Japan as well as in similar demographic settings globally. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:

Indexed as

bracelumbar spineorthosispostoperative managementsurveillance

Identifiers

PMID39884868
PMCPMC12230311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.