ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Characterising patients undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis associated neurogenic claudication in the UK: what does the British Spinal Registry tell us?
Article in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness of prehabilitation on post-operative recovery from lumbar spinal stenosis surgery - A systematic review and intervention component analysis.Clinical rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Validity and reliability of remote administration of the one-leg stand, timed up and go and 30-second sit-to-stand via video call in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis awaiting decompression surgery.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Trial
- Effect of virtual reality-integrated mindfulness-based cognitive therapy on pain and psychological symptoms in chronic non-specific low back pain: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in digital health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSurgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has a variable outcome with many not returning to pre-condition activity levels. We aimed to explore the (1) baseline characteristics of UK patients undergoing surgery, and (2) association of patient characteristics with a clinically important improvement in the 6-month Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in a population defined by previously developed LSS criteria.
methodsWe used data from the British Spinal Registry (BSR) (2012-2023). Anonymised data included demographics, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) (ODI; visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain); quality of life (EQ-5D)) at baseline, and 6-weeks and 6-months post-surgery, surgical procedure, surgery duration and intra-operative blood loss. We used descriptive and multivariate analyses to estimate the association between variables and the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) (30% improvement from baseline) in 6-month disability (ODI). MCIDs define the smallest benefit of value to patients. We explored differences in baseline values between 6-month responders and the total database, and between primary and revision surgery.
resultsIn 6801 patients sampled from the BSR the mean age was 70.5 (SD 9.1), 51% (3452/6794) were female, and most were from higher socioeconomic areas (mean Index of Multiple Deprivation rank 84.3, SD 38.8). Preoperatively most had severe disability (ODI 48.7, SD 17.5), moderate leg (VAS 7.0, SD 2.4) and back pain (VAS 6.3, SD 2.5). Proportionally 58% (1160/2008) of the 6-month responders achieved the MCID in ODI. Higher baseline back pain intensity (odds ratio (OR) 0.9, 95%CI 0.9, 0.9), revision surgery (OR 0.5 95%CI 0.3, 0.8), higher 6-week leg pain intensity (OR 0.9, 95%CI 0.8, 1.0) and severe 6-week disability (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.2, 0.5) reduced the odds of achieving the MCID in 6-month ODI.
conclusionsPatients undergoing surgery in the UK are severely disabled prior to surgery. The available data suggests that 42% of UK patients do not achieve a clinically important improvement in 6-month disability.
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.