Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: McFarland C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7196146 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

McFarland Carol C Wang-Price Sharon S Gordon Charles R CR Danielson Guy Otis GO Crutchfield J Stuart JS Medley Ann A Roddey Toni T

Rehabilitation research and practice 20200424

<h4>Objectives</h4>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 s ...[more]

PMID: 32373366

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a commonly performed procedure for the treatment of degenerative cervical disease. With continued increase in U.S. healthcare expenditure, surgeons have begun to more closely examine the benefits of performing ACDF in an outpatient setting to increase efficiency, reduce the overall financial burden on patients/providers, and provide streamlined care for these patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze outcomes following outpatient ACDF for the treatment of myelopathy.Methods14,490 patients who had undergone ACDF for myelopathy from 2010 to 2018 were included in this retrospective study, of which 2956 (20.40%) patients were considered to have undergone outpatient surgery. Pearson chi-squared tests and Fischer's Exact Tests were used to analyze differences in categorical variables of demographics, preoperative comorbidities, and postoperative complications, while Mann-Whitney-U-Tests were used to compare mean values of continuous variables. Coarsened-exact-matching (CEM) was implemented to control for baseline differences in demographics and comorbidities, and post-matching diagnostics included multivariate and univariate imbalance measure assessment. Outcomes were compared between the CEM-matched inpatient and outpatients ACDF cohorts.ResultsUpon CEM-matching (L1-statistic <0.001), the outpatient cohort (n = 2610, 25.13%) demonstrated significantly lower rates of any complication (p < 0.001), minor complications (p = 0.001), urinary tract infections (p = 0.029), blood transfusions (p < 0.001), major complications (p < 0.001), deep incisional surgical site infections (p = 0.017), ventilator dependence (p = 0.027), cardiac arrest (p = 0.028), unplanned reoperations (p = 0.001), and mortality (p = 0.006) in the 30-day postoperative period when compared to inpatient controls (n = 7774, 74.87%).ConclusionACDF has been a target amongst spinal procedures as a prime candidate for outpatient surgery. However, no previous reports have described complication rates and perioperative parameters in the sub-population of outpatient ACDF patients with myelopathy. In addition to shorter times from admission to operating room, operative time, and LOS, our study also demonstrated lower rates of major and overall complications in outpatient ACDF's for myelopathy in comparison to their inpatient counterparts. Performing ACDF's for myelopathy in an outpatient setting may help to curb costs, improve outcomes, and serve as a valuable learning resource for graduate medical education with rapid turnovers and shorter operative times.

Project description:STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. BACKGROUND: Several studies focus on the long-term results of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgeries, but little information exists regarding how various patient-related, procedure-related, and payer-related variables may affect postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS). OBJECTIVE: To determine what factors, if any, contribute to increased hospital LOS in patients who have had an ACDF. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 108 consecutive patients who underwent elective ACDF at a Midwest academic medical center. Extensive preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were abstracted and analyzed to identify prognostic factors for an increased LOS. Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the effects of patient and hospital characteristics on hospital LOS. RESULTS: 103 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean LOS for patients undergoing ACDF was 1.98 (±1.6) days. Only 29% of patients had one level fused. The mean blood loss during surgery was 87.4 ± 99.6 mL. One subject lost 700 mL of blood. Complications, though rare, included uncontrolled postoperative pain (13%), cardiac (6%), pulmonary (4%), and urinary (3%). Covariates included in the final model were age, sex, cardiac complication, urinary complication, and pulmonary complication. Factors that contributed to increased LOS and their associated adjusted mean days were: ≥50 years of age (2.5 ± 1.2 days), female gender (2.3 ± 1.2 days), and three particular types of complications. The complications that had the largest effect on increased LOS from least to most severe were cardiac (3.5 ± 1.3 days), urinary (4.7 ± 1.3 days), and pulmonary (5.3 ± 1.3 days). CONCLUSIONS: The information presented in this study may be useful for patients, clinicians, and insurance companies, including precertification and case-management services. Our results can be instrumental in designing future prospective studies using more detailed analyses with more patients, more surgeons, and multiple institutions. [Table: see text].

Project description:BackgroundAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion is a standard surgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy, but reoperations sometimes are performed to treat complications of fusion such as pseudarthrosis and adjacent-segment degeneration. A cervical disc arthroplasty is designed to preserve motion and avoid the shortcomings of fusion. Available evidence suggests that a cervical disc arthroplasty can provide pain relief and functional improvements similar or superior to an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. However, there is controversy regarding whether a cervical disc arthroplasty can reduce the frequency of reoperations.Questions/purposesWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion regarding (1) the overall frequency of reoperation at the index and adjacent levels; (2) the frequency of reoperation at the index level; and (3) the frequency of reoperation at the adjacent levels.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify RCTs comparing cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and reporting the frequency of reoperation. We also manually searched the reference lists of articles and reviews for possible relevant studies. Twelve RCTs with a total of 3234 randomized patients were included. Eight types of disc prostheses were used in the included studies. In the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group, autograft was used in one study and allograft in 11 studies. Nine of 12 studies were industry sponsored. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and associated 95% CI were calculated for the frequency of reoperation using random-effects or fixed-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies. A funnel plot suggested the possible presence of publication bias in the available pool of studies; that is, the shape of the plot suggests that smaller negative or no-difference studies may have been performed but have not been published, and so were not identified and included in this meta-analysis.ResultsThe overall frequency of reoperation at the index and adjacent levels was lower in the cervical disc arthroplasty group (6%; 108/1762) than in the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group (12%; 171/1472) (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.80; p = 0.002). Subgroup analyses were performed according to secondary surgical level. Compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical disc arthroplasty was associated with fewer reoperations at the index level (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37-0.68; p < 0.001) and adjacent levels (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74; p < 0.001).ConclusionsCervical disc arthroplasty is associated with fewer reoperations than anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, indicating that it is a safe and effective alternative to fusion for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. However, because of some limitations, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Additional studies are needed.Level of evidenceLevel I, therapeutic study.

Project description:When surgically treating cervical degenerative disc disease, the most commonly performed procedure is anterior cervical discectomy. This procedure is performed with, or without fusion promoting methods. For both options the rate of fusion is high and there is much debate whether fusion of the treated segment is a contributing factor to accelerated degeneration of adjacent motion segments. In an effort to prevent degeneration of adjacent segments (ASDeg) due to loss of mobility at the operated level, cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) was introduced. To evaluate the effectiveness of CDA in preventing ASDeg long term studies are necessary. However, prevention of ASDeg is based on the premise that mobile disc prostheses preserve cervical spine motion in a physiological way. In this article the authors describe a short term protocol for a study that aims to investigate whether CDA reaches the intended goal: restoration or preservation of physiological cervical spine motion. To this end, a technique is used to establish the sequence of contributions of cervical motion segments to flexion/extension of the spine.24 subjects between 18 and 55 years old, with radicular symptoms due to a herniated disc between C5 and C7, refractory to conservative therapy are randomized to simple discectomy, or CDA. These groups are preceded by a pilot group of three subjects receiving CDA. Fluoroscopic flexion-extension recordings are acquired preoperatively, and at three and 12 months postoperative. At these same time points, patient reported outcomes are collected, and a neurological examination is performed by and independent physician.Studies investigating arthroplasty determine mobility by measuring segmental range of motion (sROM), which gives no information other than presence, and quantity, of mobility. SROM suffer from high variability. The authors therefore chose to use a method previously used in healthy controls, to describe the dynamic process of cervical spine motion in more detail. Determining cervical spine motion patterns has been reported to be more consistent than sROM. If a physiological motion pattern is absent after surgery in the CDA group, prevention of future ASDeg is less likely. Radiological outcomes will be correlated to clinical outcomes.NCT00868335.

Dataset Information

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

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets