ArticleAsian spine journal2026
Return to work rate and long-term effectiveness of delayed versus early surgery for back pain and sciatica in Russian railways employees: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2026. 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
STUDY
designRetrospective study. PURPOSE: To evaluate the return-to-work rate and long-term outcomes of delayed versus early surgery for back pain and sciatica among railway workers. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The timing of conservative versus surgical treatment and their long-term clinical effectiveness remain controversial. To our knowledge, there are no studies on the long-term postoperative outcomes and risk factors for unsatisfactory long-term clinical outcomes after conservative and surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases in railway workers.
methodsWe identified patients with persistent back pain and sciatica due to lumbar degeneration at L4-L5 or L5-S1 treated between 2010 and 2020. Two groups of patients were identified: The Delayed group (n=692) initially refused operative care despite 6-12 weeks of non-operative care, and the Early group (n=1,687) underwent surgery immediately after routine (6-12 weeks) non-operative care was unsuccessful. Perioperative clinical data and return-to-work rates were obtained before surgery and at a minimum of 40 months postoperatively. Factors associated with unfavorable outcomes were also identified.
resultsAt baseline, the two groups had comparable clinical data, demographics, and workload intensity. There were significantly better clinical results, fewer complications, and a higher frequency of return to work in the Early group than in the Delayed group (p<0.05); 15.3% (209) and 25.7% (147) of the patients in the Early and Delayed groups, respectively, had unsatisfactory long-term clinical outcomes. Specific factors associated with unsatisfactory long-term clinical outcomes in the delayed surgery group were male sex, diabetes mellitus, lower extremity pain Visual Analog Scale >40 mm, Oswestry Disability Index >48%, physical component score <18 points, preoperative use of narcotic analgesics, and light-to-medium and heavy-to-very heavy preoperative workload.
conclusionsIn this single-center study involving railway workers with lumbar degenerative back pain and sciatica, early surgery was superior to delayed surgery in terms of pain intensity, functional status, quality of life, return-to-work rate, and reoperation rate at the long-term follow-up. Further prospective studies with larger sample sizes are required to clarify this association.
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.