ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2025
Return to Activity for On- and Off-Label Cervical Arthroplasty Patients: A Multicentered Expert Panel Recommendation.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- ACDF and cervical disc replacement for single-level cervical spine degenerative disease: a frailty driven propensity score-matched comparative analysis.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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial disc replacement (ADR) has become an evidence-based alternative to traditional fusion surgery. Current guidelines for safe return-to-activity (RTA) levels following surgery have yet to be determined. This Modified Delphi study aimed to establish expert-sourced consensus for safe and optimized RTA recommendations following cervical disc arthroplasty.
methodsTen expert spine surgeons with an average of 15 years of surgical experience participated in a 3-round Modified Delphi Method. The first round presented experts with 11 clinical cases and 19 multiple-choice questions regarding recommendations for patient RTA following surgery for 1-, 2-, or 3-level arthroplasty. First-round responses were analyzed and presented in second-round surveys to the experts, who repeated 19 multiple-choice questions. The third round presented consensus recommendation statements derived from the second round for the final assessment of the expert agreement.
resultsExperts agreed on 19 of 22 (86.4%) postarthroplasty RTA recommendations. Eight recommendations achieved unanimous agreement; the most robust consensus (95%-100% agreement) included recommendations that patients may return to basic activities such as walking, social activities, sedentary work, air travel, and sexual activity within 2 weeks of arthroplasty surgery and that arthroplasty patients will have a shorter recovery, resuming normal activities sooner than fusion patients. Experts agreed that patients may return to light and heavy physical activity (strong consensus) earlier for 2- and 3-level ADR compared to hybrid constructs. Experts also agreed that ADR patients can resume light physical activity at 4 to 6 weeks and engage in intense conditioning and sport-specific training at 6 weeks. However, a weaker consensus was achieved for returning to physically demanding work at 4 to 6 weeks and high-intensity physical activity/sports at 6 weeks, indicating that individual patient factors and the specific nature of the activity should be considered.
conclusionThis study provides the first consensus-based recommendations for RTA following cervical disc arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:
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.