Cargando…

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

OBJECTIVES: Early physical therapy (PT) with specific stabilization training has been shown to benefit individuals after lumbar spinal surgery but has not been studied in patients after cervical spine surgery. The primary purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between early cervical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McFarland, Carol, Wang-Price, Sharon, Gordon, Charles R., Danielson, Guy Otis, Crutchfield, J. Stuart, Medley, Ann, Roddey, Toni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7196146/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32373366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/5946152
_version_ 1783528663691558912
author McFarland, Carol
Wang-Price, Sharon
Gordon, Charles R.
Danielson, Guy Otis
Crutchfield, J. Stuart
Medley, Ann
Roddey, Toni
author_facet McFarland, Carol
Wang-Price, Sharon
Gordon, Charles R.
Danielson, Guy Otis
Crutchfield, J. Stuart
Medley, Ann
Roddey, Toni
author_sort McFarland, Carol
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Early physical therapy (PT) with specific stabilization training has been shown to benefit individuals after lumbar spinal surgery but has not been studied in patients after cervical spine surgery. The primary purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between early cervical spine stabilizer (ECS) training and usual care (UC) in patients after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. The secondary purpose was to determine test-retest reliability of strength and endurance tests of cervical spinal stabilizers in this patient population. METHODS: Forty participants who were scheduled for ACDF surgery were randomized into either the ECS group or the UC group. After surgery, participants received their assigned group intervention during their hospital stay and continued their assigned intervention for 12 weeks. All participants had phone follow-ups twice during the first 6 weeks to address questions or problems. Clinical outcome measures including pain level using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), disability level using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Craniocervical Flexor Strength (CCF-S), and Craniocervical Flexor Endurance (CCF-E) were collected three times: before surgery and 6 and 12 weeks after surgery. Test-retest reliability was assessed in the first 10 participants. RESULTS: There was no significant interaction between the groups over time for any of the outcome measures. However, all participants made significant improvements in all four outcome measures at 6 and 12 weeks post surgery. The results showed good-to-excellent test-retest reliability for the CCF-S and CCF-E tests. CONCLUSIONS: Both ECS training and UC resulted in the same amount of improvement at 6 and 12 weeks; therefore, both therapy approaches appear to have similar and positive effects on patients in their first 3 months of recovery after ACDF. Both the CCF-S and CCF-E tests can be used reliably to assess the strength and endurance of the cervical spinal stabilizers for patients after ACDF surgery. The study was registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov (NIH, U.S. National Library of Medicine, identifier # NCT01519115) Protocol Registration system.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7196146
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71961462020-05-05 A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion McFarland, Carol Wang-Price, Sharon Gordon, Charles R. Danielson, Guy Otis Crutchfield, J. Stuart Medley, Ann Roddey, Toni Rehabil Res Pract Research Article OBJECTIVES: Early physical therapy (PT) with specific stabilization training has been shown to benefit individuals after lumbar spinal surgery but has not been studied in patients after cervical spine surgery. The primary purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between early cervical spine stabilizer (ECS) training and usual care (UC) in patients after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. The secondary purpose was to determine test-retest reliability of strength and endurance tests of cervical spinal stabilizers in this patient population. METHODS: Forty participants who were scheduled for ACDF surgery were randomized into either the ECS group or the UC group. After surgery, participants received their assigned group intervention during their hospital stay and continued their assigned intervention for 12 weeks. All participants had phone follow-ups twice during the first 6 weeks to address questions or problems. Clinical outcome measures including pain level using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), disability level using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Craniocervical Flexor Strength (CCF-S), and Craniocervical Flexor Endurance (CCF-E) were collected three times: before surgery and 6 and 12 weeks after surgery. Test-retest reliability was assessed in the first 10 participants. RESULTS: There was no significant interaction between the groups over time for any of the outcome measures. However, all participants made significant improvements in all four outcome measures at 6 and 12 weeks post surgery. The results showed good-to-excellent test-retest reliability for the CCF-S and CCF-E tests. CONCLUSIONS: Both ECS training and UC resulted in the same amount of improvement at 6 and 12 weeks; therefore, both therapy approaches appear to have similar and positive effects on patients in their first 3 months of recovery after ACDF. Both the CCF-S and CCF-E tests can be used reliably to assess the strength and endurance of the cervical spinal stabilizers for patients after ACDF surgery. The study was registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov (NIH, U.S. National Library of Medicine, identifier # NCT01519115) Protocol Registration system. Hindawi 2020-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7196146/ /pubmed/32373366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/5946152 Text en Copyright © 2020 Carol McFarland et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
McFarland, Carol
Wang-Price, Sharon
Gordon, Charles R.
Danielson, Guy Otis
Crutchfield, J. Stuart
Medley, Ann
Roddey, Toni
A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
title A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
title_full A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
title_fullStr A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
title_short A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Early Cervical Spine Stabilizer Training and Usual Care in Individuals following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
title_sort comparison of clinical outcomes between early cervical spine stabilizer training and usual care in individuals following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7196146/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32373366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/5946152
work_keys_str_mv AT mcfarlandcarol acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT wangpricesharon acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT gordoncharlesr acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT danielsonguyotis acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT crutchfieldjstuart acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT medleyann acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT roddeytoni acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT mcfarlandcarol comparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT wangpricesharon comparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT gordoncharlesr comparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT danielsonguyotis comparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT crutchfieldjstuart comparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT medleyann comparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion
AT roddeytoni comparisonofclinicaloutcomesbetweenearlycervicalspinestabilizertrainingandusualcareinindividualsfollowinganteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusion