Cargando…

Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study

PURPOSE: To explore risk profiles of patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) and their association with short-term recovery of patient after surgery. METHODS: Forty-nine patients scheduled for elective 1–3 level LSF between March 2019 and June 2020 were included. Patients underwent a preop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Janssen, Esther R. C., Prestigiacomo, F. G., van Leent, E. A. P., van Meeteren, N. L. U., Hulsbosch, M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9333351/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35902392
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-022-07325-5
_version_ 1784758855603847168
author Janssen, Esther R. C.
Prestigiacomo, F. G.
van Leent, E. A. P.
van Meeteren, N. L. U.
Hulsbosch, M.
author_facet Janssen, Esther R. C.
Prestigiacomo, F. G.
van Leent, E. A. P.
van Meeteren, N. L. U.
Hulsbosch, M.
author_sort Janssen, Esther R. C.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To explore risk profiles of patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) and their association with short-term recovery of patient after surgery. METHODS: Forty-nine patients scheduled for elective 1–3 level LSF between March 2019 and June 2020 were included. Patients underwent a preoperative risk screening, consisting of an anamnesis, questionnaires and physical performance tests. A latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify possible risk profiles within this population. RESULTS: Two risk profiles could be established: a fit and deconditioned risk profile. A significant between-profile difference was found in smoking status (p = 0.007), RAND36-PCS (p < 0.001), Timed Up and Go (TUG) (p < 0.001), de Morton Morbidity Index (DEMMI) (p < 0.001), finger floor distance (p = 0.050), motor control (p = 0.020) and steep ramp test (p = 0.005). Moreover, the fit risk profile had a significant shorter time to functional recovery (3.65 days versus 4.89 days, p = 0.013) and length of hospital stay (5.06 days versus 6.00 days, p = 0.008) compared to the deconditioned risk profile. No differences in complication rates between both risk profiles could be established. Allocation to a risk profile was associated with the functional recovery rate (p = 0.042), but not with LOS or complications. CONCLUSION: This study found a fit and deconditioned risk profile. The patients with a fit risk profile perceived a better quality of life, performed better in mobility, motor control, cardiopulmonary tests and showed also a significant shorter stay in the hospital and a shorter time to functional recovery. Preoperatively establishing a patient’s risk profile could aid in perioperative care planning and preoperative decision-making. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00586-022-07325-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9333351
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93333512022-07-29 Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study Janssen, Esther R. C. Prestigiacomo, F. G. van Leent, E. A. P. van Meeteren, N. L. U. Hulsbosch, M. Eur Spine J Review Article PURPOSE: To explore risk profiles of patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) and their association with short-term recovery of patient after surgery. METHODS: Forty-nine patients scheduled for elective 1–3 level LSF between March 2019 and June 2020 were included. Patients underwent a preoperative risk screening, consisting of an anamnesis, questionnaires and physical performance tests. A latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify possible risk profiles within this population. RESULTS: Two risk profiles could be established: a fit and deconditioned risk profile. A significant between-profile difference was found in smoking status (p = 0.007), RAND36-PCS (p < 0.001), Timed Up and Go (TUG) (p < 0.001), de Morton Morbidity Index (DEMMI) (p < 0.001), finger floor distance (p = 0.050), motor control (p = 0.020) and steep ramp test (p = 0.005). Moreover, the fit risk profile had a significant shorter time to functional recovery (3.65 days versus 4.89 days, p = 0.013) and length of hospital stay (5.06 days versus 6.00 days, p = 0.008) compared to the deconditioned risk profile. No differences in complication rates between both risk profiles could be established. Allocation to a risk profile was associated with the functional recovery rate (p = 0.042), but not with LOS or complications. CONCLUSION: This study found a fit and deconditioned risk profile. The patients with a fit risk profile perceived a better quality of life, performed better in mobility, motor control, cardiopulmonary tests and showed also a significant shorter stay in the hospital and a shorter time to functional recovery. Preoperatively establishing a patient’s risk profile could aid in perioperative care planning and preoperative decision-making. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00586-022-07325-5. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-07-28 2022-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9333351/ /pubmed/35902392 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-022-07325-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review Article
Janssen, Esther R. C.
Prestigiacomo, F. G.
van Leent, E. A. P.
van Meeteren, N. L. U.
Hulsbosch, M.
Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study
title Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study
title_full Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study
title_fullStr Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study
title_short Exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study
title_sort exploring clinically relevant risk profiles in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9333351/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35902392
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-022-07325-5
work_keys_str_mv AT janssenestherrc exploringclinicallyrelevantriskprofilesinpatientsundergoinglumbarspinalfusionacohortstudy
AT prestigiacomofg exploringclinicallyrelevantriskprofilesinpatientsundergoinglumbarspinalfusionacohortstudy
AT vanleenteap exploringclinicallyrelevantriskprofilesinpatientsundergoinglumbarspinalfusionacohortstudy
AT vanmeeterennlu exploringclinicallyrelevantriskprofilesinpatientsundergoinglumbarspinalfusionacohortstudy
AT hulsboschm exploringclinicallyrelevantriskprofilesinpatientsundergoinglumbarspinalfusionacohortstudy