Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42645544›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026

Beyond one-time PROMs: high-frequency single-item mobile ePROM tracking of postoperative recovery in spine surgery-a prospective feasibility study.

Pavlina Lenga, Robin Fleige, Max Christian Blumenstock, Matthias Ganzinger, Sebastian Ille, Sandro M Krieg, Martin Dugas

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Pavlina LengaHeidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. pavlina.lenga@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3842-0783
Robin FleigeHeidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Max Christian BlumenstockHeidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Matthias GanzingerHeidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2716-5425
Sebastian IlleHeidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2065-6464
Sandro M KriegHeidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4050-1531
Martin DugasHeidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9740-0788

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBetween lumbar decompression and the first follow-up visit (~ 6 weeks post-op), the day-to-day course of recovery is not routinely captured in detail. We tested whether a single-item, smartphone well-being ePROM ("How are you today?", 0-100 VAS; higher = better), sent every 2-3 days, could be deployed in routine care, what level of endpoint completion was achieved, whether it showed preliminary convergent validity when measured at the same visit as clinic PROMs (ODI, PHQ-9), and whether serial responses could illustrate postoperative recovery trajectories.

methodsConsecutive patients with degenerative lumbar disease completed a digital baseline survey (Feb 1-Aug 31, 2025; n = 429). Patients with an operative indication for lumbar disc herniation or spinal canal stenosis who underwent lumbar decompression entered postoperative high-frequency well-being monitoring for 6 weeks. Patients were not included in the digital follow-up pathway when web-based participation was not feasible in routine care. The pathway generated electronic health record-accessible submissions but did not include automated alert thresholds or a mandated alert-to-action protocol.

resultsOf 183 operated patients invited to postoperative monitoring, 70/183 (38.3%) contributed an evaluable clinic ODI at ~ 6 weeks, 68/183 (37.2%) had a same-day PHQ-9, and 48/183 (26.2%) were endpoint-complete for both visit-day measures; this low endpoint-completion rate represents a major implementation barrier. In the pair-level timing dataset, same-day well-being versus reverse-coded ODI (100 - ODI; higher = less disability) showed moderate concordance (ρ = 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.68; n = 107 pairs), with similar moderate estimates at short lags (≤ 2 days ρ ≈ 0.46; ≤4 days ρ ≈ 0.42), while longer-lag estimates were exploratory and non-monotonic. On the visit day, well-being related inversely to depressive burden (PHQ-9 ρ = -0.25; n = 68). In a joint model using raw ODI and PHQ-9, higher disability and higher depressive burden were associated with lower concurrent well-being (standardized β: -0.35 for ODI; -0.20 for PHQ-9), although explained variance was limited (adjusted R² = 0.151).

conclusionRoutine-care deployment was technically possible, and time-aligned measures showed preliminary convergent validity, but endpoint completion was low (26.2%) and prevents any claim of broad feasibility or universal scalability. The ePROM should be considered a hypothesis-generating trajectory signal that requires equity safeguards and prospective closed-loop alert-to-action testing before implementation as a clinical decision tool.

Indexed as

Degenerative lumbar diseaseDepressionePROMsLow back pain

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.