Methods: A surgical database was reviewed for eligible patients who underwent lumbar fusion. Patient satisfaction and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain were the outcomes of interest. Meeting expectations was calculated as a difference of ≤0 between preoperative expectations and postoperative VAS scores. MCID achievement was calculated by comparing changes in VAS scores with established values. Meeting preoperative expectations or MCID achievement as predictors of patient satisfaction was evaluated using regression analysis. Results: A total of 134 patients were included in this study. Patients demonstrated significant improvements in VAS back and VAS leg (p<0.001). At 1 year, 56.4% of patients had their VAS back expectations met compared with 59.5% for VAS leg. Similarly, at 1 year, 77.3% and 71.3% of patients achieved MCID for VAS back and leg, respectively. Meeting expectations for VAS back was significantly associated with patient satisfaction at all postoperative timepoints; however, MCID achievement only demonstrated a significant association with patient satisfaction at 6 and 12 weeks (all, p≤0.024). Meeting VAS leg expectations and MCID achievement both demonstrated a significant association with patient satisfaction at all postoperative timepoints (all, p≤0.02). No differences between MCID achievement and meeting expectations as predictors of satisfaction were noted. Conclusions The majority of patients achieved MCID and had their back and leg pain expectations met by 1 year. Both measures were significant predictors of patient satisfaction and suggest that MCID achievement may act as a suitable substitute for patient satisfaction.

Methods: A surgical database was retrospectively reviewed for patients undergoing primary, single-level MIS LD from 2013 to 2020. Patients lacking preoperative narcotic consumption data were excluded. Demographics, spinal pathologies, and operative characteristics were collected. Patients were grouped based on preoperative narcotic consumption. Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-item Short Form Physical Component Summary, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF) were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Preestablished values were used to calculate achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Differences in mean PROs and MCID achievement between groups were evaluated. Results: The cohort was 453 patients; 184 used preoperative narcotics and 269 did not. Significant differences were found in American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, ethnicity, insurance type, and estimated blood loss between groups. Significant differences were also found in preoperative PHQ-9, VAS leg, ODI, and PROMIS-PF between groups (all p<0.05). Mean postoperative PROs did not differ by group (p>0.05). A higher rate of MCID achievement was associated with the narcotic group for PHQ-9 and PROMIS-PF at 6 weeks (both p≤0.050), VAS leg at 1 year (p=0.009), and overall for ODI and PHQ-9 (both p≤0.050). Conclusions Preoperative narcotic consumption was associated with worse preoperative depression, leg pain, disability, and physical function. In patients consuming preoperative narcotics, a higher proportion achieved an overall MCID for disability and depressive symptoms. Patients taking preoperative narcotic medications may report significantly worse preoperative PROs but demonstrate greater improvements in postoperative disability and mental health.

Methods: Obese patients (body mass index [BMI] ≥30.0 kg/m2) who underwent single-level MIS TLIF or ALIF at L5/S1 were included in the study. Demographic/perioperative variables, presenting patient pathology, and 1-year arthrodesis statistics were collected. PROM scores for Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back/leg, Oswestry Disability Index, 12-item Short Form Physical Composite Scale, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) were collected from preoperative and postoperative (6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years) PROMIS-PF. The obese patients were classified based on the procedure they underwent (MIS TLIF vs. ALIF). Results: The criteria were met by 210 patients in total. After coarsened exact matching for Charlson comorbidity index score, degenerative spondylolisthesis, isthmic spondylolisthesis, degenerative scoliosis, foraminal stenosis, insurance, male, and ethnicity, 94 obese patients were included in the total cohort, with 59 receiving MIS TLIF and 35 receiving ALIF. ALIF recipients had higher PROMIS-PF scores at 6 weeks (p=0.014) and 12 weeks (p=0.030), as well as a higher VAS leg at 2 years (p=0.017). Following multiple regression accounting for differences in baseline BMI, only the 6-week PROMIS-PF significantly differed (p=0.028), with no other intergroup differences in mean PROMs between fusion types. Aside from a significantly higher 6-week MCID achievement rate for PROMIS-PF among ALIF recipients (p=0.006), no differences in attainment were observed. Conclusions There were no statistically significant differences in perioperative characteristics, fusion rates, PROMs, or MCID achievement between obese patients receiving MIS TLIF vs. ALIF. As a result, our findings indicate that MIS TLIF and ALIF at L5/S1 are equally effective in an obese patient population.

Methods: WC recipients undergoing single-level MIS TLIF were identified. PROMs of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-item Short Form Physical and Mental Composite Scale (SF-12 PCS/MCS), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function evaluated subjects preoperatively/postoperatively. Subjects were grouped according to preoperative SF-12 MCS: <41 vs. ≥41. Demographic/perioperative variables, PROMs, and MCID were compared using inferential statistics. Multiple regression was used to account for differences in spinal pathology. Results: The SF-12 MCS <41 and SF-12 MCS ≥41 groups included 48 and 45 patients, respectively. Significant differences in ΔPROMs were observed at SF-12 MCS at all timepoints, except at 6 months (p≤0.041, all). The SF-12 MCS <41 group had worse preoperative to 6-months SF-12 MCS, 12-weeks/6-months VAS back, 12-week VAS leg, and preoperative to 6-months ODI (p≤0.029, all). The SF-12 MCS <41 group had greater MCID achievement for overall ODI and 6-weeks/1-year/overall SF-12 MCS (p≤0.043, all); the SF-12 MCS ≥41 group had greater attainment for 6-month VAS back (p=0.004). Conclusions Poorer mental functioning adversely affected the baseline and intermediate postoperative quality-of-life outcomes pertaining to mental health, back pain, and disability among WC recipients undergoing lumbar fusion. However, outcomes did not differ 1–2 years after surgery. While MCID achievement for pain and physical function was largely unaffected by preoperative mental health score, WC recipients with poorer baseline mental health demonstrated higher rates of overall clinically meaningful improvements for disability and mental health

Methods: A surgical database was reviewed to identify patients undergoing cervical spine procedures. Demographics, operative characteristics, comorbidities, NDI, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and 12-item Short Form (SF-12) physical and mental composite scores (PCS and MCS) were recorded. NDI severity was categorized using previously established threshold values. Improvement from preoperative scores at each postoperative timepoint and convergent validity of NDI was evaluated. Discriminant validity of NDI was evaluated against VAS neck and arm and SF-12 PCS and MCS. Results: All 290 patients included in the study demonstrated significant improvements from baseline values for all patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at all postoperative timepoints (p<0.001) except SF-12 MCS at 2 years (p =0.393). NDI showed a moderate- to-strong correlation (r≥0.419) at most timepoints for VAS neck, VAS arm, SF-12 PCS, and SF-12 MCS (p<0.001, all). NDI severity categories demonstrated significant differences in mean VAS neck, VAS arm, SF-12 PCS, and SF-12 MCS at all timepoints (p<0.001, all). Differences between NDI severity groups were not uniform for all PROMs. VAS neck values demonstrated significant intergroup differences at most timepoints, whereas SF-12 MCS showed significantly different values between most severity groups. Conclusions Neck disability is strongly correlated with neck and arm pain, physical function, and mental health and demonstrates worse outcomes with increasing severity. Previously established severity categories may be more applicable to pain than physical function or mental health and may be more uniformly applied preoperatively for cervical spine patients.

Methods: Individuals undergoing single-level ACDF were identified. Patients were grouped by preoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) arm ≤8 vs. >8. PROMs collected preoperatively and postoperatively included VAS-arm/VAS-neck/Neck Disability Index (NDI)/12-item Short Form (SF-12) Physical Composite Score (PCS)/SF-12 mental composite score (MCS)/Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF). Demographics, PROMs, and MCID rates were compared between cohorts. Results: A total of 128 patients were included. The VAS arm ≤8 cohort significantly improved for all PROMs excepting VAS arm at 1-year/2-years, SF-12 MCS at 12-weeks/1-year/2-years, and SF-12 PCS/PROMIS-PF at 6-weeks, only (p ≤0.021, all). The VAS arm >8 cohort significantly improved for VAS neck at all timepoints, VAS arm from 6-weeks to 1-year, NDI from 6-weeks to 6-months, and SF-12 MCS/PROMIS-PF at 6-months (p ≤0.038, all). Postoperatively, the VAS arm >8 cohort had higher VAS-neck (6 weeks/6 months), VAS-arm (12 weeks/6 months), NDI (6 weeks/6 months), lower SF-12 MCS (6 weeks/6 months), SF-12 PCS (6 months), and PROMISPF (12 weeks/6 months) (p ≤0.038, all). MCID achievement rates were higher among the VAS arm >8 cohort for the VAS-arm at 6-weeks/12-weeks/1-year/overall and NDI at 2 years (p ≤0.038, all). Conclusions Significance in PROM score differences between VAS arm ≤8 vs. >8 generally dissipated at the 1-year and 2-year timepoint, although higher preoperative arm pain patients suffered from worse pain, disability, and mental/physical function scores. Furthermore, clinically meaningful rates of improvement were similar throughout the vast majority of timepoints for all PROMs studied.