ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2025
Effect of fusion and arthroplasty for cervical degenerative disc disease in patients with physically demanding occupations.
Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD) significantly affects the quality of life in labor-intensive careers. When conservative measures fail, either anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) may be indicated. Although ACDF is the gold standard, it can limit motion, whereas CDA preserves motion and may reduce adjacent segment disease (ASD). Few studies compare these surgeries in physically demanding populations, and the influence of workers' compensation (WC) on outcomes is unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of CDA versus ACDF in patients with labor-intensive jobs and to assess how workers' compensation (WC) status influences these outcomes. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 300 (CDA: 150, ACDF: 150) patients with 1- or 2-level cervical DDD with labor-intensive jobs were enrolled, including a subgroup of 60 WC patients (CDA: 30, ACDF: 30). Participants were followed for a minimum of 2 years. Data collected included demographic details, perioperative events, and complication rates. Functional outcomes were measured using the Visual Analog Scale for neck and arm pain (VAS-neck, VAS-arm) and the Neck Disability Index (NDI), with attention to timelines for returning to full-time work. Results: CDA patients returned to full-time work faster (4.3 vs 6.7 months, p=.025). More CDA patients resumed work by 6 weeks (p=.018) and 3 months (p=.022), though these differences waned by 6 months. WC patients had slower returns overall (CDA WC: 7.5 vs 5.0 weeks for non-WC, p=.015). CDA showed greater NDI improvement at all time points and significantly lower ASD incidence (1.3% vs. 26.7%, p<.001). Complications were comparable. Conclusion: CDA may facilitate faster work return, better recovery, and lower ASD risk in labor-intensive patients. WC status correlates with delayed recovery, suggesting a need for tailored approaches. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings and refine patient selection.
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.