Associations of cognitive appraisal and patient activation on disability and mental health outcomes: a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: With the increased use of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) to assess spine surgery outcomes, it is important to understand how patients interpret their health changes over time. The measurement of cognitive-appraisal processes enables the quantification of how individuals think about quality of life (QOL). This study examined how appraisal processes were associated with patients' views of their role in managing their health-patient activation. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study from August 2019 to January 2022 included 222 adults undergoing spine surgery for cervical (n = 107) and/or lumbar (n = 148) pathology at an academic medical center. PROMs assessed disability (Neck Disability Index for cervical or Oswestry Disability Index for lumbar) and mental health (PROMIS-29 v2.0), cognitive-appraisal processes (QOLAPv2-SF), and patient activation (Patient Activation Measure). ANOVA models were used to examine the relationships between QOL and cognitive appraisal processes before and after surgery, overall and stratified by patient-activation stage. Effect sizes facilitated interpretation. RESULTS: There were significant improvements in pain-related disability and mental health following surgery. Cognitive appraisal processes explained substantial amounts of variance, particularly with changes in mental health (45% before surgery, 75% at three months, and 63%, at 12-months after surgery). With respect to physical disability, less disability was associated with a lesser focus on negative aspects of QOL. Appraisal explained the most variance before surgery for high-activation patients. At 12-months post-surgery, however, appraisal explained the most variance for the low-activation patients. Appraisal explained similar amounts of variance in mental health at baseline and three-months post-surgery for all activation groups, but substantially more variance in the low-activation group at 12-months post-surgery. There were differences in the direction of appraisal-outcome associations by activation group in selected appraisal items/domains. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive-appraisal processes demonstrate a significant relationship with QOL among spine surgery patients. These processes explain substantial variance in pain-related disability and mental health, especially among those high in activation before surgery and those low in activation at 12-months post-surgery. Our findings suggest that patients' ways of thinking about their health may be effective targets of motivational coaching, to help them become more engaged over the recovery trajectory.

Mental health after lumbar spine surgery: cognitive appraisal processes and outcome in a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: A not uncommon finding following spine surgery is that many patients do not achieve mental health improvement up to population norms for their age cohort, despite improvement in pain and functioning. PURPOSE: This study examined how patients who were categorized as depressed versus not depressed think about health-related quality of life as assessed by cognitive-appraisal processes. It examined cross-sectional and longitudinal differences over 12 months postsurgery. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal cohort study with data collected at presurgery and at ∼3- and ∼12-months postsurgery from August 2013 to August 2023. PATIENT SAMPLE: We included 173 adults undergoing lumbar spine surgery for degenerative spinal conditions at an academic medical center. The study sample was 47% female, with a mean age of 61 (SD=15.0), and a median level of education of college graduate. OUTCOME MEASURES: Depression was defined as a Mental Component Score (MCS)≤38 on the Rand-36, building on studies that equated MCS scores with significant depression as assessed by clinically validated depression scales. The Quality-of-Life Appraisal Profile assessed the cognitive-appraisal domains of Experience Sampling and Standards of Comparison. METHODS: The analysis focused on two comparisons: cross-sectionally comparing those who were not depressed (n=82) to those who were depressed (n=77) at baseline; and comparing longitudinal trajectories among those depressed before surgery and improved (n=54) versus did not improve (n=23). T-tests characterized group differences in appraisal endorsement; analysis of variance evaluated appraisal items in terms of explained variance; and Pearson correlation coefficients assessed direction of association in predicting mental health. RESULTS: There were presurgical and longitudinal differences in both cognitive appraisal domains. Before surgery, depressed patients were less likely than nondepressed patients to endorse emphasizing the positive; more likely to focus on worst moments, recent flare-ups, their spinal condition, and the future; and more likely to compare themselves to high aspirations (eg, perfect health). Over time, among those who were depressed before surgery, those who improved focused decreasingly on worst moments and on the time before their spinal condition, and increasingly on emphasizing the positive and balancing the positives/negatives. Appraisal explained more variance in mental health among those who did not improve as compared to those who did, at all timepoints. All appraisal items were more highly correlated with mental health among those who remained depressed as compared to those who improved, particularly over time. CONCLUSIONS: Endorsement of cognitive appraisal processes was different for depressed versus nondepressed spine-surgery patients before surgery and distinguished those who were depressed before surgery and improved versus those who did not improve. These findings suggest that targeted interventions could be beneficial for addressing mental health concerns during the spine surgery recovery trajectory. These interventions might use appraisal measures to identify patients likely to remain depressed after surgery, and then focus on helping these patients shift their focus and standards of comparison.

Functional Status Correlates of Change and Stability in Appraisal after Spine Surgery: Earlier versus Later Effects.

Spine surgery generally yields a notable improvement in patients' health state, and there is variability in measured patient outcomes after spine surgery. The present work aimed to describe for clinicians how appraisal underlies their patients' experience of healthcare interventions. This prospective longitudinal cohort study (n = 156) included adults undergoing spine surgery for degenerative spinal conditions. The analysis was a descriptive illustration of the relationship between change in the spine-related disability using the Oswestry Disability Index and change in cognitive-appraisal processes using the Quality-of-Life Appraisal Profilev2-Short Form, early versus later during the recovery trajectory (i.e., between baseline and 3 months post-surgery; and between 3 and 12 months post-surgery). Cognitive-appraisal processes related to Sampling of Experience showed greater change soon after surgery, whereas Standards of Comparison appraisals changed more later in the recovery trajectory. Different appraisal processes were emphasized by patients who reported worsening of the spine-related disability, as compared to those who reported no change or improvement. These findings suggest that changes in appraisal differ depending on the individual's experience of the impact of spine surgery. Appraisal processes thus reflect an ongoing dynamic in adaptation to changing function.

Quality of life issues in patients with bone metastases: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Bones are frequent sites of metastatic disease, observed in 30-75% of advanced cancer patients. Quality of life (QoL) is an important endpoint in studies evaluating the treatments of bone metastases (BM), and many patient-reported outcome tools are available. The primary objective of this systematic review was to compile a list of QoL issues relevant to BM and its interventions. The secondary objective was to identify common tools used to assess QoL in patients with BM, and the QoL issues they fail to address. METHODS: A search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between 1946 and 27 January 2023 with the keywords "bone metastases", "quality of life", and "patient reported outcomes". Specific QoL issues in original research studies and the QoL tools used were extracted. RESULTS: The review identified the QoL issues most prevalent to BM in the literature. Physical and functional issues observed in patients included pain, interference with ambulation and daily activities, and fatigue. Psychological symptoms, such as helplessness, depression, and anxiety were also common. These issues interfered with patients' relationships and social activities. Items not mentioned in existing QoL tools were related to newer treatments of BM, such as pain flare, flu-like symptoms, and jaw pain due to osteonecrosis. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights that QoL issues for patients with BM have expanded over time due to advances in BM-directed treatments. If they are relevant, additional treatment-related QoL issues identified need to be validated prospectively by patients and added to current assessment tools.

Minimally Invasive Tubular Lumbar Discectomy Versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effectiveness of minimally invasive (MIS) tubular discectomy in comparison to conventional open surgery among patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN). METHODS: We performed an observational analysis of data that was prospectively collected. We implemented Minimum Clinically Important Differences (MCIDs), and we adjusted for potential confounders with multiple logistic regression. Adverse events were collected according to the Spinal Adverse Events Severity (SAVES) protocol. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-nine (62%) patients underwent MIS tubular discectomy and 211 (38%) underwent conventional open discectomy. There were no significant differences between groups for improvement of leg pain and disability, but the MIS technique was associated with reduced odds of achieving the MCID for back pain (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.99, P < 0.05). We identified statistically significant differences in favor of MIS for each of operating time (MIS mean (SD) 72.2 minutes (30.0) vs open 93.5 (40.9)), estimated blood loss (MIS 37.9 mL (36.7) vs open 76.8 (71.4)), length of stay in hospital (MIS 73% same-day discharge vs open 40%), rates of incidental durotomy (MIS 4% vs open 8%), and wound-related complications (MIS 3% vs open 9%); but not for overall rates of reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Open and MIS techniques yielded similar improvements of leg pain and disability at up to 12 months of follow-up, but MIS patients were less likely to experience improvement of associated back pain. Small differences favored MIS for operating time, blood loss, and adverse events but may have limited clinical importance.

Cognitive Processes during Recovery: Moving toward Personalized Spine Surgery Outcomes.

This paper focuses on a novel application of personalized medicine: the ways one thinks about health (i.e., appraisal processes) as relevant predictors of spine-surgery response. This prospective longitudinal cohort study (n = 235) investigated how appraisal processes relate to outcomes of spinal decompression and/or fusion surgery, from pre-surgery through one-year post-surgery. Patient-reported outcomes assessed spine-specific disability (Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)), mental health functioning (Rand-36 Mental Component Score (MCS)), and cognitive appraisal processes (how people recall past experiences and to whom they compare themselves). Analysis of Variance examined the appraisal-outcomes association in separate models at pre-surgery, 3 months, and 12 months. We found that appraisal processes explained less variance at pre-surgery than later and were differentially relevant to health outcomes at different times in the spine-surgery recovery trajectory. For the ODI, recall of the seriousness of their condition was most prominent early in recovery, and comparing themselves to positive standards was most prominent later. For the MCS, not focusing on the negative aspects of their condition and/or on how others see them was associated with steady improvement and higher scores at 12 months. Appraisal processes are relevant to both spine-specific disability and mental-health functioning. Such processes are modifiable objects of attention for personalizing spine-surgery outcomes.

Appraisal and patient-reported outcomes following total hip arthroplasty: a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a successful procedure that provides pain relief, restores function, and improves quality of life (QOL) for patients with advanced arthritis in their hip joint. To date, little research has examined the role of cognitive appraisal processes in THA outcomes. This study examined the role of cognitive appraisal processes in THA outcomes in the first year post-surgery. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study collected data at pre-surgery, 6 weeks post-surgery, 3 months post-surgery, and 12 months post-surgery. Adults (n = 189) with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis were consecutively recruited from an active THA practice at a Canadian academic teaching hospital. Measures included the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), the Mental Component Score (MCS) of the Rand-36, and the Brief Appraisal Inventory (BAI). Analysis of Variance examined the association between BAI items and the HOOS or MCS scores. Random effects models investigated appraisal main effects and appraisal-by-time interactions for selected BAI items. RESULTS: HOOS showed great improvement over the first 12 months after THA, and was mitigated by three appraisal processes in particular: focusing on problems with healthcare or living situation, and preparing one's family for health changes. MCS was stable and low over time, and the following appraisal processes were implicated by very large effect sizes: not comparing themselves to healthier people, focusing on money problems, preparing their family for their health changes, or trying to shed responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS: Appraisal processes are relevant to health outcomes after THA, with different processes coming into play at different points in the recovery trajectory.

The efficacy of primary sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain caused by sacroiliac joint pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Conduct a systematic review to quantify the effect of primary sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) for the treatment of sacroiliac (SI) joint pathology on patient reported outcomes. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus databases were searched prior to August 18th, 2020 for all English-Language studies involving the treatment of SIJ pathology through SIJF and/or conservative management (CM). The quality of included studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcome measure was the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for low back pain. Secondary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the incidence of adverse reactions. RESULTS: A total of 564 patients and six studies were included. The overall quality of evidence analyzed by this review was low (GRADE = 0). Five out of the six studies were industry funded. The VAS standardized mean difference (SMD) between SIJF and CM at three months and six months follow-up was - 1.4 [95% confidence interval - 2.3, - 0.6] and - 1.5 [95% CI - 1.8, - 1.1]. The ODI SMD between SIJF and CM scores at three months and 6 months follow-up was - 0.9 [95% CI - 1.1, - 0.7] and - 1.1 [95% CI - 1.6, - 0.5]. The odds ratio of adverse reactions due to SIJF compared to CM was 1.9 [95% CI 0.1, 42.8]. CONCLUSION: Based on the limited number of independent trials with long-term follow-up, SIJF shows potential as a surgical treatment option for SIJ pathology. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42020206149 (25th September 2020).

Fulfillment of Patient Expectations After Spine Surgery is Critical to Patient Satisfaction: A Cohort Study of Spine Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator used to monitor quality of care and outcomes after spine surgery. OBJECTIVE: To examine the complex relationship between preoperative expectations, fulfillment of expectations, postsurgical outcomes, and satisfaction after spine surgery. METHODS: In this national study of patients undergoing elective surgery for degenerative spinal conditions from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Registry, we used logistic regression to examine the relationships between patient satisfaction with surgery (1-5 scale), preoperative expectation score (0 = none to 100 = highest), fulfillment of expectations, and disability and pain improvement. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of patients were extremely satisfied, and 3% were extremely dissatisfied. Expectations were variable and generally high (mean 79.5 of 100) while 17.3% reported that none of their expectations were met, 49.8% reported that their most important expectation was met, and 32.9% reported that their most important expectation was not met but others were. The results from the fully adjusted ordinal logistic model for satisfaction indicate that satisfaction was higher among patients with higher preoperative expectations (odds ratio [OR] [95% CI]: 1.11, [1.04-1.19]), reporting important improvements in disability (OR [95% CI]: 2.52 [1.96-3.25]) and pain (OR [95% CI]: 1.64 [1.25-2.15]) and reporting that expectations were fulfilled (OR = 80.15, for all expectations were met). The results were similar for lumbar and cervical patients. CONCLUSION: Given the dominant impact of expectation fulfillment on satisfaction level, there is an opportunity for improving overall patient satisfaction by specifically assessing and mitigating the potential discrepancies between patients' preoperative expectations and likely surgical outcomes. The findings are likely relevant across elective surgical populations.

"Looking Under the Hood" of Anchor-Based Assessment of Clinically Important Change: A Machine Learning Approach.

OBJECTIVES: The Global Assessment of Change (GAC) item has facilitated the interpretation of change in patient-reported outcomes, providing an anchor for computing minimally important differences. Construct validity has been documented via disease-specific patient-reported outcomes change. We examined what domains, sociodemographic characteristics, attributions of change, and cognitive-appraisal processes are reflected in GAC ratings. METHODS: This secondary analysis examined data from 1,481 chronically ill patients and caregivers surveyed at baseline and 17 months. Items queried change since baseline in overall disease symptoms (GAC) and in physical, emotional, and social functioning. Candidate predictors included sociodemographic factors, health-related quality-of-life domains, change attributions, and quality-of-life appraisal processes. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and bootstrapping tested 77 predictors' effectiveness and stability. RESULTS: GAC worsening was notably associated with being disabled (ß = -0.24) and having difficulty paying bills (ß = -0.13). GAC was better explained by the physical domain than the emotional or social (ß = 0.67, 0.10, and 0.03, respectively; R2adj = 0.63) after sociodemographic-covariate adjustment. In a separate model (R2adj = 0.18), GAC variance was explained by attributions about changing health and changing response of one's health team, goals related to solving healthcare problems and maintaining activities, and appraisal about things getting better (ß = -0.14, 0.08, -0.07, 0.05, 0.21, respectively; prange ~0.0005-0.05) after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: The GAC primarily reflects the physical domain, and the GAC reflects attributions, goals, and patterns of emphasis related to change in health and healthcare. Commonly unmeasured factors have some bearing on GAC scores and can facilitate the interpretation of change.

Moving toward better health: exercise practice is associated with improved outcomes after spine surgery in people with degenerative lumbar conditions.

Background: Recovery and rehabilitation following surgery can take many months. Understanding what patients can do to facilitate recovery would be beneficial for spinal surgeons. This study sought to evaluate the impact of exercise practice, before and after surgery, on long-term outcomes of spine surgery in a robust clinical sample. Methods: This prospective longitudinal cohort study included adult patients undergoing spinal surgery for degenerative spinal conditions. Patients were administered a survey that included preoperative and postoperative exercise practices and the following patient-reported outcome measures: the physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Survey (Rand-36), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score for pain and the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference Short Form score. Random effects models investigated the relationship of exercise, follow-up time and their interaction in predicting each patient-reported outcome measure over time, with and without sociodemographic covariates. Results: There were 168 patients in the study sample with up to 12 months of follow-up data. Analysis revealed modest significant main effects of exercise on PCS, MCS, ODI and PROMIS scores and main effects of time on all outcomes. The exercise-by-time interaction was significant in predicting the trajectories of the ODI and MCS scores. When full models were adjusted for education and employment status, interaction effects were no longer significant, but exercise main effects remained significant for ODI score. Conclusion: Patients who engage in exercise before and after spine surgery have better mental health and spine-specific recovery trajectories than those who do not. All health care providers should encourage patients to exercise while they are waiting for surgery within preoperative limitations and as soon as they are able after surgery and to continue this over the long term.

Contexte: Le rétablissement et la réadaptation postopératoires s'échelonnent parfois sur plusieurs mois. Comprendre ce que les patients peuvent faire pour faciliter leur rétablissement serait utile aux spécialistes de la chirurgie de la colonne vertébrale. Cette étude a voulu évaluer l'impact de la pratique d'exercices avant et après une chirurgie de la colonne vertébrale sur son issue à long terme dans un solide échantillon clinique. Méthodes: Cette étude de cohorte longitudinale prospective a regroupé des patients adultes qui devaient subir une chirurgie de la colonne vertébrale pour des maladies dégénératives. Les patients ont été invités à répondre à un questionnaire qui portait entre autre sur la pratique d'exercices pré- et postopératoires et sur les paramètres autorapportés suivants : scores aux composantes physique (PCS) et mentale (MCS) du questionnaire SF-36 (Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Survey [Rand-36]), à l'échelle d'incapacité d'Oswestry (ODI), à une échelle d'évaluation numérique (ÉÉN) de la douleur et au questionnaire court PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System) sur l'interférence de la douleur. Des modèles à effets aléatoires ont permis d'analyser les liens entre l'exercice, la durée du suivi et leur interaction pour ce qui est de prédire chacun des paramètres autorapportés au fil du temps, avec et sans les covariables sociodémographiques. Résultats: L'étude a regroupé 168 patients et les données pour un suivi allant jusqu'à 12 mois. L'analyse a fait état d'effets majeurs significatifs modestes de l'exercice sur les paramètres PCS, MCS, ODI et PROMIS et d'effets majeurs du temps sur tous les paramètres. L'interaction entre exercices et durée du suivi a été significative pour prédire la trajectoire des scores ODI et MCS. Lorsque les modèles intégraux ont été ajustés pour tenir compte du niveau de scolarité et du statut professionnel, les effets de l'interaction n'étaient plus significatifs, mais les effets majeurs de l'exercice sont demeurés significatifs pour le score ODI. Conclusion: Les patients qui ont fait des exercices avant et après une chirurgie de la colonne vertébrale ont présenté des trajectoires plus favorables au plan de la santé mentale et du rétablissement de leur colonne vertébrale comparativement à ceux qui n'avaient pas fait d'exercices. Tous les professionnels de la santé devraient encourager les patients à faire des exercices pendant qu'ils attendent leur chirurgie en tenant compte de leurs limites préopératoires, à les reprendre le plus rapidement possible après la chirurgie et à les maintenir à long terme.

Patient factors that matter in predicting spine surgery outcomes: a machine learning approach.

OBJECTIVE: There is an increasing recognition of the importance of predictive analytics in spine surgery. This, along with the addition of personalized treatment, can optimize treatment outcomes. The goal of this study was to examine the value of clinical, demographic, expectation, and cognitive appraisal variables in predicting outcomes after surgery. METHODS: This prospective longitudinal cohort study followed adult patients undergoing spinal decompression and/or fusion surgery for degenerative spinal conditions. The authors focused on predicting the numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain, based on past research finding it to be the most responsive of the spine patient-reported outcomes. Clinical data included type of surgery, adverse events, comorbidities, and use of pain medications. Demographics included age, sex, employment status, education, and smoking status. Data on expectations related to pain relief, ability to do household and exercise/recreational activities without pain, preventing future disability, and sleeping comfort. Appraisal items addressed 22 cognitive processes related to quality of life (QOL). LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) and bootstrapping tested predictors hierarchically to determine effective predictive subsets at approximately 10 months postsurgery, based on data either at baseline (model 1) or at approximately 3 months (model 2). RESULTS: The sample included 122 patients (mean age 61 years, with 53% being female). For model 1, analysis revealed better outcomes with patients expecting to be able to exercise or do recreational activities, focusing on recent events, and not focusing on how others see them (mean bootstrapped R2 [R2boot] = 0.12). For model 2, better outcomes were predicted by expecting symptom relief, focusing on the positive and on one's spinal condition (mean R2boot = 0.38). Bootstrapped analyses documented the stability of parameter estimates despite the small sample. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 40% of the variance in spine outcomes was accounted for by cognitive factors, after adjusting for clinical and demographic factors. Different expectations and appraisal processes played a role in long- versus short-range predictions, suggesting that cognitive adaptation is important and relevant to pain relief outcomes after spine surgery. These results underscore the importance of addressing how people think about QOL and surgery outcomes to maximize the benefits of surgery.

Patient Factors That Matter in Predicting Hip Arthroplasty Outcomes: A Machine-Learning Approach.

BACKGROUND: Despite the success of total hip arthroplasty (THA), approximately 10%-15% of patients will be dissatisfied with their outcome. Identifying patients at risk of not achieving meaningful gains postoperatively is critical to pre-surgical counseling and clinical decision support. Machine learning has shown promise in creating predictive models. This study used a machine-learning model to identify patient-specific variables that predict the postoperative functional outcome in THA. METHODS: A prospective longitudinal cohort of 160 consecutive patients undergoing total hip replacement for the treatment of degenerative arthritis completed self-reported measures preoperatively and at 3 months postoperatively. Using four types of independent variables (patient demographics, patient-reported health, cognitive appraisal processes and surgical approach), a machine-learning model utilizing Least Absolute Shrinkage Selection Operator (LASSO) was constructed to predict postoperative Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) at 3 months. RESULTS: The most predictive independent variables of postoperative HOOS were cognitive appraisal processes. Variables that predicted a worse HOOS consisted of frequent thoughts of work (ß = -0.34), frequent comparison to healthier peers (ß = -0.26), increased body mass index (ß = -0.17), increased medical comorbidities (ß = -0.19), and the anterior surgical approach (ß = -0.15). Variables that predicted a better HOOS consisted of employment at the time of surgery (ß = 0.17), and thoughts related to family interaction (ß = 0.12), trying not to complain (ß = 0.13), and helping others (ß = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: This clinical prediction model in THA revealed that the factors most predictive of outcome were cognitive appraisal processes, demonstrating their importance to outcome-based research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level 1.

Responsiveness of standard spine outcome tools: do they measure up?

OBJECTIVE: Over the past 2 decades, spine outcome research has become more standardized in response to recommendations from Deyo and others. By using the same generic and condition-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures across studies, results are more easily compared. Given the challenges of maintaining high-quality data in clinical research studies, it would be important to evaluate the contribution of each PRO to confirm that it merits the respondent burden. This study aimed to examine the spine PROs' association with clinically important change and relative responsiveness in explaining variance in patients' global assessment of change (GAC). METHODS: This prospective longitudinal cohort study included adults recruited from 4 active spine surgery practices at a Toronto-based hospital. Patients were diagnosed with a degenerative lumbar spinal condition and underwent spinal decompression and/or fusion surgery. Participants completed the RAND-36 (to generate the physical component score [PCS] and mental component score [MCS]), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference, and a GAC item. Random-effects models were used to investigate the sensitivity of PROs to the GAC and their responsiveness over time (i.e., PRO main effects and PRO-by-time interactions, respectively). RESULTS: The study sample included 168 patients (mean age 61 years, 50% female) with preoperative and up to 12 months of postoperative data. Random-effects models revealed significant main effects for all PROs. Significant time-by-PRO interactions were detected for the PCS, PROMIS, ODI, and NRS (p < 0.0005 in all cases), but not for the MCS. Further examination revealed different sensitivity of the PROs to the GAC at different times. The NRS, PROMIS, and PCS showed higher sensitivity early after surgery, and the PCS evinced a marked drop in sensitivity to the GAC at about 8 months postsurgery. CONCLUSIONS: All PROs currently included in the spine outcome core measures are associated with patients' subjective assessment of a clinically important change, and all but the MCS scores are responsive to such change. Based on these findings, the core spine PROs could be reduced to include fewer estimates of pain. The authors suggest replacing the less responsive measures with tools that help to characterize factors that are driving the patients' subjective assessment of change and that meaningfully address some of the higher levels in the hierarchy of quality-of-life outcomes.

Cortical Bone Trajectory Screws for Fixation Across the Cervicothoracic Junction: Surgical Technique and Outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical case series describing a novel surgical technique. OBJECTIVE: Stabilization across the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) poses technical difficulties which make this procedure challenging. The transition from cervical lordosis to thoracic kyphosis and the orientation of the lateral masses of the cervical spine compared with the pedicles of the thoracic spine create the need to accommodate for 2 planes of alignment when placing instrumentation. A novel surgical technique for instrumentation across the cervicothoracic junction is described. METHODS: The use of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) technique for pedicle fixation in the upper thoracic spine is described in combination with cervical lateral mass or pedicle screws. The application in our first 12 patients for stabilization across the CTJ is described. Two case presentations illustrate the technique. RESULTS: All the patients had rod screw constructs without the need to skip levels, there was no requirement for transverse connectors and only 1 plane of contouring was required. CONCLUSIONS: The use of CBT technique has not been described for the upper thoracic spine. This technique avoids many technical problems associated with posterior instrumentation of the CTJ. The facility of their use in this application arises from the similar coronal plane entry points as the cervical lateral mass screws compared with the more lateral starting point of traditional thoracic pedicle screws. The technique has clinical equipoise to traditional thoracic pedicle screw insertion but with the benefits of an easier ability to perform the instrumentation and saving levels of fusion.

Patient-reported outcomes in spine surgery: past, current, and future directions.

The purpose of this article is to review the current state of outcome measurement in spine surgery, with an emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The commonly used generic and disease-specific outcome measures used in spinal surgery and research will be discussed. The authors will introduce the concepts of response shift and appraisal processes, which may affect the face validity of PROMs, as well as their interpretation over time. It is not uncommon for there to be a discrepancy between the observed and expected outcome, which is not wholly explainable by objective measures. Current work on understanding how appraisal affects outcome measurement will be discussed, and future directions will be suggested to facilitate the continued evolution of PROMs.There has been an evolution in the way clinicians measure outcomes following spinal surgery. In moving from purely physical, objective measures to a growing emphasis on the patient's perspective, spine surgery outcomes are better able to integrate the impact at multiple levels of relevant change. Appraisal concepts and methods are gaining traction as ways to understand the cognitive processes underlying PROMs over time. Measurement of appraisal is a valuable adjunct to the current spine outcome tools.

Reconsidering the minimally important difference: evidence of instability over time and across groups.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Underlying cognitive factors have been found to influence patients' symptom experience. Current evidence suggests that concomitant changes in appraisal must be taken into account to accurately interpret change as measured by standard spine patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PURPOSE: To investigate changes in patients' minimally important differences (MID) over recovery from spinal surgery; whether and how cognitive appraisal processes are implicated in the change trajectories. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Longitudinal cohort study with up to 12 months follow-up. PATIENT SAMPLE: Surgical patients (n = 167) with a diagnosis of disc herniation or spinal stenosis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Standard spine patient-reported PROs were used (Rand-36, Oswestry Disability Index, Numerical Rating Scale for pain, PROMIS Pain Impact). METHODS: This study was funded by the Feldberg Chair in Spinal Research, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and the authors have no conflicts of interest. MID used an anchor technique and was computed by global assessment of change (GAC) grouping. Participants were binned into groups based on their GAC response patterns at all time points: Consistently better post-surgery, consistently worse post-surgery, and bouncers, whose GAC ratings fluctuate (ie, better-then-worse-then-better; or vice versa). Individuals' longitudinal quality of life (QOL) and appraisal slope scores were computed. QOL-appraisal slopes' correlations were computed by GAC group. Fisher's Z transformation tested the hypothesis that GAC groups differed in the QOL-appraisal relationship over time. RESULTS: Moderate to large changes are recognized as clinically important in the early stages of recovery (ie, 6 weeks post-surgery), and over time smaller and smaller changes become important. The three pattern groups emphasized and deemphasized different standards of comparison over time, with the Better group emphasizing personal goals and the Worse and Bouncers deemphasizing doctors' input. These group differences translated to differential relationships between PRO change and appraisal changes over time. CONCLUSIONS: The MID reflects increasingly subtle change over time in PROs. Appraisal may influence how patients experience the same (MID) change over time, with better outcomes associated with emphasizing long-term goals. PRO change seems to be driven by different standards of comparison. Potential avenues for clinical intervention are discussed.