SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2026
The impact of workers' compensation claims on outcomes of cervical spine surgery: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2026. 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.
- Impact of a digital mindfulness and motor imagery intervention on pain and perceived function in 203 patients with musculoskeletal pain.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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designMeta-analysis.
objectiveThis meta-analysis aims to clarify the clinical and functional impact of Workers' compensation (WC) status on cervical spine surgery outcomes.
backgroundWork-related musculoskeletal disorders can lead to significant disability, impaired productivity, and quality of life. WC status in patients has been linked to worse outcomes following orthopedic surgeries, including cervical spine procedures (ACDF, CDA). Studies analyzing the influence of WC claims on different cervical spine surgeries report contradicting results.
methodsAdhering to the PRISMA guidelines, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and PubMed were searched since inception until May 2025. The data that was extracted included overall complications, number of reoperations, surgery-related outcomes (estimated blood loss (EBL), operative time, and length of stay (LOS)), the improvement in patient reported outcome measures (PROMS) at 1 year post-operatively, number of patients returning to work, and mean time to return to work.
resultsEight retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria, including 801 patients in the WC group and 1102 in the NWC group. The patients in the WC group had a shorter operative time (Mean difference = - 2.83 min; 95% CI - 5.03 to - 0.64, p = 0.01), and LOS (Mean difference = - 2.62 h; 95% CI - 4.61 to - 0.63, p = 0.01). On the other hand, they had a worse improvement in neck pain (Standardized mean difference = - 0.32; 95% CI - 0.45 to - 0.19, p < 0.001), and arm pain (Standardized mean difference = - 0.26; 95% CI - 0.39 to - 0.13, p < 0.001), as well as a longer time to return to work (Mean difference = 4.53 weeks; 95% CI 2.70-6.36, p < 0.001).
conclusionPatients with WC claims had worse improvement in arm and neck pain and needed more time to return to work. These results highlight the impact of WC claims have on cervical spine surgery outcomes, making compensation status an essential factor to consider in clinical evaluation and patient counseling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41493498What 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.