Browsing by Author "Chotai, Silky"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 11 of 11
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database, Part 1. Disability, quality of life, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery: predicting likely individual patient outcomes for shared decision-making.
    (Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 2017-10) McGirt, Matthew J; Bydon, Mohamad; Archer, Kristin R; Devin, Clinton J; Chotai, Silky; Parker, Scott L; Nian, Hui; Harrell, Frank E; Speroff, Theodore; Dittus, Robert S; Philips, Sharon E; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Foley, Kevin T; Asher, Anthony L
    OBJECTIVE Quality and outcomes registry platforms lie at the center of many emerging evidence-driven reform models. Specifically, clinical registry data are progressively informing health care decision-making. In this analysis, the authors used data from a national prospective outcomes registry (the Quality Outcomes Database) to develop a predictive model for 12-month postoperative pain, disability, and quality of life (QOL) in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery. METHODS Included in this analysis were 7618 patients who had completed 12 months of follow-up. The authors prospectively assessed baseline and 12-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) via telephone interviews. The PROs assessed were those ascertained using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, and numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP). Variables analyzed for the predictive model included age, gender, body mass index, race, education level, history of prior surgery, smoking status, comorbid conditions, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, symptom duration, indication for surgery, number of levels surgically treated, history of fusion surgery, surgical approach, receipt of workers' compensation, liability insurance, insurance status, and ambulatory ability. To create a predictive model, each 12-month PRO was treated as an ordinal dependent variable and a separate proportional-odds ordinal logistic regression model was fitted for each PRO. RESULTS There was a significant improvement in all PROs (p < 0.0001) at 12 months following lumbar spine surgery. The most important predictors of overall disability, QOL, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery were employment status, baseline NRS-BP scores, psychological distress, baseline ODI scores, level of education, workers' compensation status, symptom duration, race, baseline NRS-LP scores, ASA score, age, predominant symptom, smoking status, and insurance status. The prediction discrimination of the 4 separate novel predictive models was good, with a c-index of 0.69 for ODI, 0.69 for EQ-5D, 0.67 for NRS-BP, and 0.64 for NRS-LP (i.e., good concordance between predicted outcomes and observed outcomes). CONCLUSIONS This study found that preoperative patient-specific factors derived from a prospective national outcomes registry significantly influence PRO measures of treatment effectiveness at 12 months after lumbar surgery. Novel predictive models constructed with these data hold the potential to improve surgical effectiveness and the overall value of spine surgery by optimizing patient selection and identifying important modifiable factors before a surgery even takes place. Furthermore, these models can advance patient-focused care when used as shared decision-making tools during preoperative patient counseling.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database, Part 2. Predictive model for return to work after elective surgery for lumbar degenerative disease.
    (Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 2017-10) Asher, Anthony L; Devin, Clinton J; Archer, Kristin R; Chotai, Silky; Parker, Scott L; Bydon, Mohamad; Nian, Hui; Harrell, Frank E; Speroff, Theodore; Dittus, Robert S; Philips, Sharon E; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Foley, Kevin T; McGirt, Matthew J
    OBJECTIVE Current costs associated with spine care are unsustainable. Productivity loss and time away from work for patients who were once gainfully employed contributes greatly to the financial burden experienced by individuals and, more broadly, society. Therefore, it is vital to identify the factors associated with return to work (RTW) after lumbar spine surgery. In this analysis, the authors used data from a national prospective outcomes registry to create a predictive model of patients' ability to RTW after undergoing lumbar spine surgery for degenerative spine disease. METHODS Data from 4694 patients who underwent elective spine surgery for degenerative lumbar disease, who had been employed preoperatively, and who had completed a 3-month follow-up evaluation, were entered into a prospective, multicenter registry. Patient-reported outcomes-Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP), and EQ-5D scores-were recorded at baseline and at 3 months postoperatively. The time to RTW was defined as the period between operation and date of returning to work. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, including an array of preoperative factors, was fitted for RTW. The model performance was measured using the concordance index (c-index). RESULTS Eighty-two percent of patients (n = 3855) returned to work within 3 months postoperatively. The risk-adjusted predictors of a lower likelihood of RTW were being preoperatively employed but not working at the time of presentation, manual labor as an occupation, worker's compensation, liability insurance for disability, higher preoperative ODI score, higher preoperative NRS-BP score, and demographic factors such as female sex, African American race, history of diabetes, and higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score. The likelihood of a RTW within 3 months was higher in patients with higher education level than in those with less than high school-level education. The c-index of the model's performance was 0.71. CONCLUSIONS This study presents a novel predictive model for the probability of returning to work after lumbar spine surgery. Spine care providers can use this model to educate patients and encourage them in shared decision-making regarding the RTW outcome. This evidence-based decision support will result in better communication between patients and clinicians and improve postoperative recovery expectations, which will ultimately increase the likelihood of a positive RTW trajectory.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Comparison of Outcomes Following Anterior vs Posterior Fusion Surgery for Patients With Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Analysis From Quality Outcomes Database.
    (Neurosurgery, 2019-04) Asher, Anthony L; Devin, Clinton J; Kerezoudis, Panagiotis; Chotai, Silky; Nian, Hui; Harrell, Frank E; Sivaganesan, Ahilan; McGirt, Matthew J; Archer, Kristin R; Foley, Kevin T; Mummaneni, Praveen V; Bisson, Erica F; Knightly, John J; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Bydon, Mohamad
    BACKGROUND:The choice of anterior vs posterior approach for degenerative cervical myelopathy that spans multiple segments remains controversial. OBJECTIVE:To compare the outcomes following the 2 approaches using multicenter prospectively collected data. METHODS:Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) for patients undergoing surgery for 3 to 5 level degenerative cervical myelopathy was analyzed. The anterior group (anterior cervical discectomy [ACDF] or corpectomy [ACCF] with fusion) was compared with posterior cervical fusion. Outcomes included: patient reported outcomes (PROs): neck disability index (NDI), numeric rating scale (NRS) of neck pain and arm pain, EQ-5D, modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score for myelopathy (mJOA), and NASS satisfaction questionnaire; hospital length of stay (LOS), 90-d readmission, and return to work (RTW). Multivariable regression models were fitted for outcomes. RESULTS:Of total 245 patients analyzed, 163 patients underwent anterior surgery (ACDF-116, ACCF-47) and 82 underwent posterior surgery. Patients undergoing an anterior approach had lower odds of having higher LOS (P < .001, odds ratio 0.16, 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.30). The 12-mo NDI, EQ-5D, NRS, mJOA, and satisfaction scores as well as 90-d readmission and RTW did not differ significantly between anterior and posterior groups. CONCLUSION:Patients undergoing anterior approaches for 3 to 5 level degenerative cervical myelopathy had shorter hospital LOS compared to those undergoing posterior decompression and fusion. Also, patients in both groups exhibited similar long-term PROs, readmission, and RTW rates. Further investigations are needed to compare the differences in longer term reoperation rates and functional outcomes before the clinical superiority of one approach over the other can be established.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Defining the minimum clinically important difference for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: insights from the Quality Outcomes Database.
    (Neurosurgical focus, 2018-01) Asher, Anthony L; Kerezoudis, Panagiotis; Mummaneni, Praveen V; Bisson, Erica F; Glassman, Steven D; Foley, Kevin T; Slotkin, Jonathan R; Potts, Eric A; Shaffrey, Mark E; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Coric, Domagoj; Knightly, John J; Park, Paul; Fu, Kai-Ming; Devin, Clinton J; Archer, Kristin R; Chotai, Silky; Chan, Andrew K; Virk, Michael S; Bydon, Mohamad
    OBJECTIVE Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) play a pivotal role in defining the value of surgical interventions for spinal disease. The concept of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is considered the new standard for determining the effectiveness of a given treatment and describing patient satisfaction in response to that treatment. The purpose of this study was to determine the MCID associated with surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS The authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database registry from July 2014 through December 2015 for patients who underwent posterior lumbar surgery for grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. Recorded PROs included scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, and numeric rating scale (NRS) for leg pain (NRS-LP) and back pain (NRS-BP). Anchor-based (using the North American Spine Society satisfaction scale) and distribution-based (half a standard deviation, small Cohen's effect size, standard error of measurement, and minimum detectable change [MDC]) methods were used to calculate the MCID for each PRO. RESULTS A total of 441 patients (80 who underwent laminectomies alone and 361 who underwent fusion procedures) from 11 participating sites were included in the analysis. The changes in functional outcome scores between baseline and the 1-year postoperative evaluation were as follows: 23.5 ± 17.4 points for ODI, 0.24 ± 0.23 for EQ-5D, 4.1 ± 3.5 for NRS-LP, and 3.7 ± 3.2 for NRS-BP. The different calculation methods generated a range of MCID values for each PRO: 3.3-26.5 points for ODI, 0.04-0.3 points for EQ-5D, 0.6-4.5 points for NRS-LP, and 0.5-4.2 points for NRS-BP. The MDC approach appeared to be the most appropriate for calculating MCID because it provided a threshold greater than the measurement error and was closest to the average change difference between the satisfied and not-satisfied patients. On subgroup analysis, the MCID thresholds for laminectomy-alone patients were comparable to those for the patients who underwent arthrodesis as well as for the entire cohort. CONCLUSIONS The MCID for PROs was highly variable depending on the calculation technique. The MDC seems to be a statistically and clinically sound method for defining the appropriate MCID value for patients with grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Based on this method, the MCID values are 14.3 points for ODI, 0.2 points for EQ-5D, 1.7 points for NRS-LP, and 1.6 points for NRS-BP.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Development and Validation of Cervical Prediction Models for Patient-Reported Outcomes at 1 Year After Cervical Spine Surgery for Radiculopathy and Myelopathy.
    (Spine, 2020-11) Archer, Kristin R; Bydon, Mohamad; Khan, Inamullah; Nian, Hui; Pennings, Jacquelyn S; Harrell, Frank E; Sivaganesan, Ahilan; Chotai, Silky; McGirt, Matthew J; Foley, Kevin T; Glassman, Steven D; Mummaneni, Praveen V; Bisson, Erica F; Knightly, John J; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Asher, Anthony L; Devin, Clinton J; QOD Vanguard sites

    Study design

    Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected registry data.

    Objective

    To develop and validate prediction models for 12-month patient-reported outcomes of disability, pain, and myelopathy in patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery.

    Summary of background data

    Predictive models have the potential to be utilized preoperatively to set expectations, adjust modifiable characteristics, and provide a patient-centered model of care.

    Methods

    This study was conducted using data from the cervical module of the Quality Outcomes Database. The outcomes of interest were disability (Neck Disability Index:), pain (Numeric Rating Scale), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for myelopathy. Multivariable proportional odds ordinal regression models were developed for patients with cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. Patient demographic, clinical, and surgical covariates as well as baseline patient-reported outcomes scores were included in all models. The models were internally validated using bootstrap resampling to estimate the likely performance on a new sample of patients.

    Results

    Four thousand nine hundred eighty-eight patients underwent surgery for radiculopathy and 2641 patients for myelopathy. The most important predictor of poor postoperative outcomes at 12-months was the baseline Neck Disability Index score for patients with radiculopathy and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for patients with myelopathy. In addition, symptom duration, workers' compensation, age, employment, and ambulatory and smoking status had a statistically significant impact on all outcomes (P < 0.001). Clinical and surgical variables contributed very little to predictive models, with posterior approach being associated with higher odds of having worse 12-month outcome scores in both the radiculopathy and myelopathy cohorts (P < 0.001). The full models overall discriminative performance ranged from 0.654 to 0.725.

    Conclusions

    These predictive models provide individualized risk-adjusted estimates of 12-month disability, pain, and myelopathy outcomes for patients undergoing spine surgery for degenerative cervical disease. Predictive models have the potential to be used as a shared decision-making tool for evidence-based preoperative counselling.

    Level of evidence

    2.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Effect of Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Severity Classifications on Satisfaction With Outcomes 12 Months After Elective Surgery for Cervical Spine Myelopathy.
    (Spine, 2019-06) Asher, Anthony L; Devin, Clinton J; Weisenthal, Benjamin M; Pennings, Jacquelyn; Khan, Inamullah; Archer, Kristin R; Sivaganesan, Ahilan; Chotai, Silky; Bydon, Mohamad; Nian, Hui; Harrell, Frank E; McGirt, Matthew J; Mummaneni, Praveen; Bisson, Erica F; Shaffrey, Christopher; Foley, Kevin T; for QOD Vanguard Sites

    Study design

    This study retrospectively analyzes prospectively collected data.

    Objective

    Here, we aim to determine the influence of preoperative and 12-month modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) on satisfaction and understand the change in mJOA severity classification after surgical management of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).

    Summary of background data

    DCM is a progressive degenerative spine disease resulting from cervical cord compression. The natural progression of DCM is variable; some patients experience periods of stability, while others rapidly deteriorate following disease onset. The mJOA is commonly used to grade and categorize myelopathy symptoms, but its association with postoperative satisfaction has not been previously explored.

    Methods

    The quality and outcomes database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing elective surgery for DCM. Patients were divided into mild (≥14), moderate (9 to 13), or severe (<9) categories on the mJOA scores. A McNemar-Bowker test was used to assess whether a significant proportion of patients changed mJOA category between preoperative and 12 months postoperative. A multivariable proportional odds ordinal logistic regression model was fitted with 12-month satisfaction as the outcome of interest.

    Results

    We identified 1963 patients who underwent elective surgery for DCM and completed 12-months follow-ups. Comparing mJOA severity level preoperatively and at 12 months revealed that 55% remained in the same category, 37% improved, and 7% moved to a worse category. After adjusting for baseline and surgery-specific variables, the 12-month mJOA category had the highest impact on patient satisfaction (P < 0.001).

    Conclusion

    Patient satisfaction is an indispensable tool for measuring quality of care after spine surgery. In this sample, 12-month mJOA category, regardless of preop mJOA, was significantly correlated with satisfaction. Given these findings, it is important to advise patients of the probability that surgery will change their mJOA severity classification and the changes required to achieve postoperative satisfaction.

    Level of evidence

    3.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Intrawound Vancomycin Decreases the Risk of Surgical Site Infection After Posterior Spine Surgery: A Multicenter Analysis.
    (Spine, 2018-01) Devin, Clinton J; Chotai, Silky; McGirt, Matthew J; Vaccaro, Alexander R; Youssef, Jim A; Orndorff, Douglas G; Arnold, Paul M; Frempong-Boadu, Anthony K; Lieberman, Isador H; Branch, Charles; Hedayat, Hirad S; Liu, Ann; Wang, Jeffrey C; Isaacs, Robert E; Radcliff, Kris E; Patt, Joshua C; Archer, Kristin R

    Study design

    Secondary analysis of data from a prospective multicenter observational study.

    Objective

    The aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients with and without intrawound vancomycin application controlling for confounding factors associated with higher SSI after elective spine surgery.

    Summary of background data

    SSI is a morbid and expensive complication associated with spine surgery. The application of intrawound vancomycin is rapidly emerging as a solution to reduce SSI following spine surgery. The impact of intrawound vancomycin has not been systematically studied in a well-designed multicenter study.

    Methods

    Patients undergoing elective spine surgery over a period of 4 years at seven spine surgery centers across the United States were included in the study. Patients were dichotomized on the basis of whether intrawound vancomycin was applied. Outcomes were occurrence of SSI within postoperative 30 days and SSI that required return to the operating room (OR). Multivariable random-effect log-binomial regression analyses were conducted to determine the relative risk of having an SSI and an SSI with return to OR.

    Results

    .: A total of 2056 patients were included in the analysis. Intrawound vancomycin was utilized in 47% (n = 966) of patients. The prevalence of SSI was higher in patients with no vancomycin use (5.1%) than those with use of intrawound vancomycin (2.2%). The risk of SSI was higher in patients in whom intrawound vancomycin was not used (relative risk (RR) -2.5, P < 0.001), increased number of levels exposed (RR -1.1, P = 0.01), and those admitted postoperatively to intensive care unit (ICU) (RR -2.1, P = 0.005). Patients in whom intrawound vancomycin was not used (RR -5.9, P < 0.001), increased number of levels were exposed (RR-1.1, P = 0.001), and postoperative ICU admission (RR -3.3, P < 0.001) were significant risk factors for SSI requiring a return to the OR.

    Conclusion

    The intrawound application of vancomycin after posterior approach spine surgery was associated with a reduced risk of SSI and return to OR associated with SSI.

    Level of evidence

    2.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Laminectomy alone versus fusion for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis in 426 patients from the prospective Quality Outcomes Database.
    (Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 2018-11) Chan, Andrew K; Bisson, Erica F; Bydon, Mohamad; Glassman, Steven D; Foley, Kevin T; Potts, Eric A; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Shaffrey, Mark E; Coric, Domagoj; Knightly, John J; Park, Paul; Wang, Michael Y; Fu, Kai-Ming; Slotkin, Jonathan R; Asher, Anthony L; Virk, Michael S; Kerezoudis, Panagiotis; Chotai, Silky; DiGiorgio, Anthony M; Haid, Regis W; Mummaneni, Praveen V
    OBJECTIVEThe AANS launched the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), a prospective longitudinal registry that includes demographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) data to measure the safety and quality of spine surgery. Registry data offer "real-world" insights into the utility of spinal fusion and decompression surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Using the QOD, the authors compared the initial 12-month outcome data for patients undergoing fusion and those undergoing laminectomy alone for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.METHODSData from 12 top enrolling sites were analyzed and 426 patients undergoing elective single-level spine surgery for degenerative grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis were found. Baseline, 3-month, and 12-month follow-up data were collected and compared, including baseline clinical characteristics, readmission rates, reoperation rates, and PROs. The PROs included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back and leg pain numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, and EuroQol-5 Dimensions health survey (EQ-5D) results.RESULTSA total of 342 (80.3%) patients underwent fusion, with the remaining 84 (19.7%) undergoing decompression alone. The fusion cohort was younger (60.7 vs 69.9 years, p < 0.001), had a higher mean body mass index (31.0 vs 28.4, p < 0.001), and had a greater proportion of patients with back pain as a major component of their initial presentation (88.0% vs 60.7%, p < 0.001). There were no differences in 12-month reoperation rate (4.4% vs 6.0%, p = 0.93) and 3-month readmission rates (3.5% vs 1.2%, p = 0.45). At 12 months, both cohorts improved significantly with regard to ODI, NRS back and leg pain, and EQ-5D (p < 0.001, all comparisons). In adjusted analysis, fusion procedures were associated with superior 12-month ODI (β -4.79, 95% CI -9.28 to -0.31; p = 0.04).CONCLUSIONSSurgery for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis-regardless of treatment strategy-was associated with significant improvements in disability, back and leg pain, and quality of life at 12 months. When adjusting for covariates, fusion surgery was associated with superior ODI at 12 months. Although fusion procedures were associated with a lower rate of reoperation, there was no statistically significant difference at 12 months. Further study must be undertaken to assess the durability of either surgical strategy in longer-term follow-up.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Minimally invasive versus open fusion for Grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database.
    (Neurosurgical focus, 2017-08) Mummaneni, Praveen V; Bisson, Erica F; Kerezoudis, Panagiotis; Glassman, Steven; Foley, Kevin; Slotkin, Jonathan R; Potts, Eric; Shaffrey, Mark; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Coric, Domagoj; Knightly, John; Park, Paul; Fu, Kai-Ming; Devin, Clinton J; Chotai, Silky; Chan, Andrew K; Virk, Michael; Asher, Anthony L; Bydon, Mohamad
    OBJECTIVE Lumbar spondylolisthesis is a degenerative condition that can be surgically treated with either open or minimally invasive decompression and instrumented fusion. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approaches may shorten recovery, reduce blood loss, and minimize soft-tissue damage with resultant reduced postoperative pain and disability. METHODS The authors queried the national, multicenter Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) registry for patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion between July 2014 and December 2015 for Grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. The authors recorded baseline and 12-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, numeric rating scale (NRS)-back pain (NRS-BP), NRS-leg pain (NRS-LP), and satisfaction (North American Spine Society satisfaction questionnaire). Multivariable regression models were fitted for hospital length of stay (LOS), 12-month PROs, and 90-day return to work, after adjusting for an array of preoperative and surgical variables. RESULTS A total of 345 patients (open surgery, n = 254; MIS, n = 91) from 11 participating sites were identified in the QOD. The follow-up rate at 12 months was 84% (83.5% [open surgery]; 85% [MIS]). Overall, baseline patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics were similarly distributed between the cohorts. Two hundred fifty seven patients underwent 1-level fusion (open surgery, n = 181; MIS, n = 76), and 88 patients underwent 2-level fusion (open surgery, n = 73; MIS, n = 15). Patients in both groups reported significant improvement in all primary outcomes (all p < 0.001). MIS was associated with a significantly lower mean intraoperative estimated blood loss and slightly longer operative times in both 1- and 2-level fusion subgroups. Although the LOS was shorter for MIS 1-level cases, this was not significantly different. No difference was detected with regard to the 12-month PROs between the 1-level MIS versus the 1-level open surgical groups. However, change in functional outcome scores for patients undergoing 2-level fusion was notably larger in the MIS cohort for ODI (-27 vs -16, p = 0.1), EQ-5D (0.27 vs 0.15, p = 0.08), and NRS-BP (-3.5 vs -2.7, p = 0.41); statistical significance was shown only for changes in NRS-LP scores (-4.9 vs -2.8, p = 0.02). On risk-adjusted analysis for 1-level fusion, open versus minimally invasive approach was not significant for 12-month PROs, LOS, and 90-day return to work. CONCLUSIONS Significant improvement was found in terms of all functional outcomes in patients undergoing open or MIS fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis. No difference was detected between the 2 techniques for 1-level fusion in terms of patient-reported outcomes, LOS, and 90-day return to work. However, patients undergoing 2-level MIS fusion reported significantly better improvement in NRS-LP at 12 months than patients undergoing 2-level open surgery. Longer follow-up is needed to provide further insight into the comparative effectiveness of the 2 procedures.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Patient characteristics of smokers undergoing lumbar spine surgery: an analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database.
    (Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 2017-12) Asher, Anthony L; Devin, Clinton J; McCutcheon, Brandon; Chotai, Silky; Archer, Kristin R; Nian, Hui; Harrell, Frank E; McGirt, Matthew; Mummaneni, Praveen V; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Foley, Kevin; Glassman, Steven D; Bydon, Mohamad
    OBJECTIVE In this analysis the authors compare the characteristics of smokers to nonsmokers using demographic, socioeconomic, and comorbidity variables. They also investigate which of these characteristics are most strongly associated with smoking status. Finally, the authors investigate whether the association between known patient risk factors and disability outcome is differentially modified by patient smoking status for those who have undergone surgery for lumbar degeneration. METHODS A total of 7547 patients undergoing degenerative lumbar surgery were entered into a prospective multicenter registry (Quality Outcomes Database [QOD]). A retrospective analysis of the prospectively collected data was conducted. Patients were dichotomized as smokers (current smokers) and nonsmokers. Multivariable logistic regression analysis fitted for patient smoking status and subsequent measurement of variable importance was performed to identify the strongest patient characteristics associated with smoking status. Multivariable linear regression models fitted for 12-month Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores in subsets of smokers and nonsmokers was performed to investigate whether differential effects of risk factors by smoking status might be present. RESULTS In total, 18% (n = 1365) of patients were smokers and 82% (n = 6182) were nonsmokers. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, the factors significantly associated with patients' smoking status were sex (p < 0.0001), age (p < 0.0001), body mass index (p < 0.0001), educational status (p < 0.0001), insurance status (p < 0.001), and employment/occupation (p = 0.0024). Patients with diabetes had lowers odds of being a smoker (p = 0.0008), while patients with coronary artery disease had greater odds of being a smoker (p = 0.044). Patients' propensity for smoking was also significantly associated with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class (p < 0.0001), anterior-alone surgical approach (p = 0.018), greater number of levels (p = 0.0246), decompression only (p = 0.0001), and higher baseline ODI score (p < 0.0001). In a multivariable proportional odds logistic regression model, the adjusted odds ratio of risk factors and direction of improvement in 12-month ODI scores remained similar between the subsets of smokers and nonsmokers. CONCLUSIONS Using a large, national, multiinstitutional registry, the authors described the profile of patients who undergo lumbar spine surgery and its association with their smoking status. Compared with nonsmokers, smokers were younger, male, nondiabetic, nonobese patients presenting with leg pain more so than back pain, with higher ASA classes, higher disability, less education, more likely to be unemployed, and with Medicaid/uninsured insurance status. Smoking status did not affect the association between these risk factors and 12-month ODI outcome, suggesting that interventions for modifiable risk factors are equally efficacious between smokers and nonsmokers.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Women fare best following surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparison of the most and least satisfied patients utilizing data from the Quality Outcomes Database.
    (Neurosurgical focus, 2018-01) Chan, Andrew K; Bisson, Erica F; Bydon, Mohamad; Glassman, Steven D; Foley, Kevin T; Potts, Eric A; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Shaffrey, Mark E; Coric, Domagoj; Knightly, John J; Park, Paul; Fu, Kai-Ming; Slotkin, Jonathan R; Asher, Anthony L; Virk, Michael S; Kerezoudis, Panagiotis; Chotai, Silky; DiGiorgio, Anthony M; Chan, Alvin Y; Haid, Regis W; Mummaneni, Praveen V
    OBJECTIVE The American Association of Neurological Surgeons launched the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), a prospective longitudinal registry that includes demographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) data, to measure the safety and quality of neurosurgical procedures, including spinal surgery. Differing results from recent randomized controlled trials have established a need to clarify the groups that would most benefit from surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. In the present study, the authors compared patients who were the most and the least satisfied following surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective, national longitudinal registry including patients who had undergone surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The most and least satisfied patients were identified based on an answer of "1" and "4," respectively, on the North American Spine Society (NASS) Satisfaction Questionnaire 12 months postoperatively. Baseline demographics, clinical variables, surgical parameters, and outcomes were collected. Patient-reported outcome measures, including the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for back pain, NRS for leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D (the EuroQol health survey), were administered at baseline and 3 and 12 months after treatment. RESULTS Four hundred seventy-seven patients underwent surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis in the period from July 2014 through December 2015. Two hundred fifty-five patients (53.5%) were the most satisfied and 26 (5.5%) were the least satisfied. Compared with the most satisfied patients, the least satisfied ones more often had coronary artery disease (CAD; 26.9% vs 12.2%, p = 0.04) and had higher body mass indices (32.9 ± 6.5 vs 30.0 ± 6.0 kg/m2, p = 0.02). In the multivariate analysis, female sex (OR 2.9, p = 0.02) was associated with the most satisfaction. Notably, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, smoking, psychiatric comorbidity, and employment status were not significantly associated with satisfaction. Although there were no significant differences at baseline, the most satisfied patients had significantly lower NRS back and leg pain and ODI scores and a greater EQ-5D score at 3 and 12 months postoperatively (p < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS This study revealed that some patient factors differ between those who report the most and those who report the least satisfaction after surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Patients reporting the least satisfaction tended to have CAD or were obese. Female sex was associated with the most satisfaction when adjusting for potential covariates. These findings highlight several key factors that could aid in setting expectations for outcomes following surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.