Similar improvements in patient-reported outcomes for non-specific low back pain patients with and without lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms following a structured education and exercise therapy program.

BACKGROUND: People with nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) can also experience overlapping symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), but the impact on treatment outcomes is unknown. This study investigated differences in treatment outcomes for disability, back pain intensity, and leg pain intensity following an education and exercise therapy program for NSLBP patients with and without comorbid LSS symptoms. METHODS: This was a longitudinal analysis of 655 Danish participants in the GLA:D® Back program; an education and exercise therapy program for people with persistent NSLBP. Participants were classified as having comorbid LSS symptoms based on self-report. Linear mixed models were used to assess differences in change in disability (Oswestry Disability Index [0-100]) and back and leg pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale [0-10]) at 3-, 6-, and 12-months between those with and without LSS symptoms. RESULTS: 28% of participants reported LSS symptoms. No certain differences in change in disability or back pain intensity improvement were observed at any time-point between those with and without LSS symptoms. Participants with LSS symptoms had slightly greater improvement in leg pain intensity at 6- (-0.7, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.2) and 12-months (-0.6, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.1). CONCLUSION: Compared to those without LSS symptoms, patients with persistent NSLBP and LSS symptoms can expect similar improvements in disability and back pain intensity, and slightly greater improvements in leg pain intensity with treatment. Therefore, education and exercise therapy programs designed for NSLBP are likely helpful for those also experiencing LSS symptoms.

Surgical trends and regional variation in Danish patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis between 2002 and 2018: a retrospective registry-based study of 83,783 patients.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most common reason for spine surgery in older people. However, surgery rates vary widely both internationally and nationally. This study compared patient and sociodemographic characteristics, geographical location and comorbidity between surgically and non-surgically treated Danish patients diagnosed with LSS from 2002 to 2018 and described variations over time. METHODS: Diagnostic ICD-10 codes identifying patients with LSS and surgical procedure codes for decompression with or without fusion were retrieved from the Danish National Patient Register. Patients ≥ 18 years who had been admitted to private or public hospitals in Denmark between 2002 and 2018 were included. Data on age, sex, income, retirement status, geographical region and comorbidity were extracted. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to calculate the relative risk for surgically versus non-surgically treated LSS patients using the total population and subsequently divided into three time periods. Variations over time were displayed graphically. RESULTS: A total of 83,783 unique patients with an LSS diagnosis were identified, and of these, 38,362 (46%) underwent decompression surgery. Compared to those who did not receive surgery, the surgically treated patients were more likely to be aged 65-74 years, were less likely to have comorbidities, had higher income and were more likely to reside in the northern part of Denmark. Patients aged 65-74 years remained more likely to receive surgery over time, although the difference between age groups eventually diminished, as older patients (aged ≥ 75) were increasingly more likely to undergo surgery. Large variations and differences in the relative risk of surgery were observed within and between the geographical regions. The likelihood of receiving surgery varied up to threefold between regions. CONCLUSION: Danish patients with LSS who receive surgery differ in a number of respects from those not receiving surgery. Patients aged 65 to 74 years were more likely to receive surgery than other age groups, and LSS surgical patients were healthier, more often retired and had higher incomes than those not undergoing surgery. There were considerable variations in the relative risk of surgery between and within geographical regions.

Appropriateness of referrals from primary care for lumbar MRI.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines do not recommend routine imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and seek to guide clinicians only to refer for imaging based on specific indications. Despite this, several studies show an increase in the use of MRI among patients with low back pain (LBP) and an imbalance between appropriate versus inappropriate use of MRI for LBP. This study aimed to investigate to what extent referrals from general practice for lumbar MRI complied with clinical guideline recommendations in a Danish setting, contributing to the understanding and approaches to lumbar MRI for all clinicians managing LBP in the primary sector. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2014 to 2018, all referrals for lumbar MRI were included from general practitioners in the Central Denmark Region for diagnostic imaging at a public regional hospital. A modified version of the American College of Radiology Imaging Appropriateness Criteria for LBP was used to classify referrals as appropriate or inappropriate, based on the unstructured text in the GPs' referrals. Appropriate referrals included fractures, cancer, symptoms persisting for more than 6 weeks of non-surgical treatment, previous surgery, candidate for surgery or suspicion of cauda equina. Inappropriate referrals were sub-classified as lacking information about previous non-surgical treatment and duration. RESULTS: Of the 3772 retrieved referrals for MRI of the lumbar spine, 55% were selected and a total of 2051 referrals were categorised. Approximately one quarter (24.5%) were categorised as appropriate, and 75.5% were deemed inappropriate. 51% of the inappropriate referrals lacked information about previous non-surgical treatment, and 49% had no information about the duration of non-surgical treatment. Apart from minor yearly fluctuations, there was no change in the distribution of appropriate and inappropriate MRI referrals from 2014 to 2018. CONCLUSION: The majority of lumbar MRI referrals (75.5%) from general practitioners for lumbar MRI did not fulfil the ACR Imaging Appropriateness Criteria for LBP based on the unstructured text of their referrals. There is a need for referrers to include all guideline-relevant information in referrals for imaging. More research is needed to determine whether this is due to patients not fulfilling guideline recommendations or simply the content of the referrals.

Categorisation of lumbar spine MRI referrals in Denmark as compliant or non-compliant to international imaging guidelines: an inter-rater reliability study.

BACKGROUND: Managing low back pain (LBP) often involves MRI despite the fact that international guidelines do not recommend routine imaging. To allow us to explore the topic and use this knowledge in further research, a reliable method to review the MRI referrals is needed. Consequently, this study aimed to assess the inter-rater reliability of a method evaluating lumbar spine MRI referrals' appropriateness. METHODS: Four inexperienced students (chiropractic master's students) and a senior clinician (chiropractor) were included as independent raters in this inter-rater reliability study. Lumbar spine MRI referrals from primary care on patients (> 18 years) with LBP with or without leg pain were included. The referrals were classified using a modified version of the American College of Radiology (ACR) imaging appropriateness criteria for LBP. Categories of appropriate referrals included; fractures, cancer, previous surgery, candidate for surgery or suspicion of cauda equina. Inappropriate referrals included lacking information on previous non-surgical treatment, no word on non-surgical treatment duration, or "other reasons" for inappropriate referrals. After two rounds of training and consensus sessions, 50 lumbar spine MRI referrals were reviewed independently by the five raters. Inter-rater reliability was quantified using unweighted Kappa statistics, and the observed agreement was calculated with both a pairwise comparison and an overall five-rater comparison. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability was substantial, with a Kappa value for appropriate vs. inappropriate referrals of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.55-0.89). When six and eight subcategories were evaluated, the Kappa values were 0.77 (95% CI: 0.58-0.91) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.72-0.92), respectively. The overall percentage of agreement for appropriate and inappropriate referrals was 92% and ranged from 88 to 98% for the pairwise comparisons of the five raters' results. For the six and eight subcategories, the overall agreement was 92 and 88%, respectively, ranging from 88 to 98% and 84-92%, respectively, for the pairwise comparisons. CONCLUSION: The inter-rater reliability of the evaluation of the appropriateness of lumbar spine MRI referrals, according to the modified ACR-appropriateness criteria, was found to range from substantial to almost perfect and can be used for research and quality assurance purposes.

Diagnostic Screening for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

PURPOSE: To develop a self-administered diagnostic screening questionnaire for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) consisting of items with high content validity and to investigate the diagnostic value of the questionnaire and the items. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A self-reported diagnostic LSS screening questionnaire was developed based on items from the existing literature describing key symptoms of LSS. The screening questionnaire (index test) was to be tested in a cohort of patients with persistent lumbar and/or leg pain recruited from a Danish publicly funded outpatient secondary care spine clinic with clinicians performing the reference test. However, to avoid unnecessary collection of data if the screening questionnaire proved to be of limited value, a case-control design was incorporated into the cohort design including an interim analysis. Additional cases for the case-control study were recruited at two Danish publicly funded spine surgery departments. Prevalence, sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (OR) were calculated for each individual item, and AUC (area under the curve) was calculated to examine the performance of the full questionnaire. RESULTS: A 13-item Danish questionnaire was developed and tested in 153 cases and 230 controls. The interim analysis was not in favour of continuing the cohort study, and therefore, only results from the case-control study are reported. There was a positive association for all items except the presence of back pain. However, the association was only moderate with ORs up to 3.3. When testing the performance of the whole questionnaire, an AUC of 0.72 was reached with a specificity of 20% for a fixed sensitivity of 95%. CONCLUSION: The items were associated with LSS and therefore have some potential to identify LSS patients. However, the association was not strong enough to provide sufficient accuracy for a diagnostic tool. Additional dimensions of symptoms of LSS need identification to obtain a reliable questionnaire for screening purposes.

Returning to Work Within Two Years After First-Time, Single-Level, Simple Lumbar Discectomy: A Multifactorial, Predictive Model.

Purpose Continued inability to work has societal and individual consequences. Thus, the factors associated with sustained return to work after lumbar discectomy should be identified. Prior studies of the biopsychosocial factors associated with sustained RTW were primarily based on patient-reported outcome data and have shown conflicting results because of small study samples. In patients undergoing first-time, single-level, simple lumbar discectomy, we describe the time to sustained return to work within 2 years after surgery using outcome data from a national database and identify the pre- and peri-operative factors associated with sustained return to work within 2 years by developing and validating a predictive multivariable model. Methods The time to a sustained return to work within the study period was described using a Kaplan-Meier plot. A temporal validated Cox proportional hazards model examined associations between biopsychosocial factors and return to work. Results In the derivation cohort made up by 351 operated patients who were on sick-leave for more than 3 weeks around the time of surgery, 62% returned to work (median 15 weeks). The probability of sustained return to work was associated with a high education level, positive expectations towards future labor market attachment, pre-operative stable labor market attachment, pre-operative higher physical quality of life, and less disability. Conclusions Through the development and validation of a predictive model, this study identifies a number of patient-related factors associated with sustained return to work after lumbar discectomy, while revealing that most disease-related clinical findings were not associated with the outcome.

The Association Between Preoperative MRI Findings and Surgical Revision Within Three Years After Surgery for Lumbar Disc Herniation.

STUDY DESIGN: This cohort study was an analysis of prospectively collected data in the DaneSpine Database. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine whether preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings were associated with the frequency of surgical revision due to recurrent lumbar disc herniation (LDH) within 3 years after first-time, single-level, simple lumbar discectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Because of a risk of poorer outcome in patients receiving revision surgery compared with first-time discectomy, there is a need to identify patients with LDH in risk of surgical revision prior to the primary discectomy. The association between preoperative MRI findings and revision surgery in patients with LDH has not been thoroughly studied. METHODS: Following an interobserver reliability study preoperative MRIs were evaluated. Potential predictive variables for surgical revision were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. Also, a sum-score of the number of MRI findings at the involved level was assessed. RESULTS: In a study population of 451 operated patients, those who had surgical revision were significantly younger and were significantly less likely to have vertebral endplate signal changes Type 2 (OR 0.36 (95% CI 0.15-0.88)) or more than five MRI findings (OR 0.45 (95% CI 0.21-0.95)) at the involved level than the patients not undergoing surgical revision. Surgical revision was not significantly associated with any other MRI findings. CONCLUSIONS: In general, preoperative MRI findings have a limited explanatory value in predicting surgical revision within 3 years after first-time, single-level, simple lumbar discectomy. Both the single variable VESC Type 2 and a sum-score > 5 MRI findings at the operated level were found to be negatively associated with patients undergoing surgical revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

[Lumbar spinal stenosis].

Lumbar spinal stenosis is a clinical diagnosis of pain in the buttocks or lower extremities, with or without back pain. Symptoms increase with walking, and patients find relief when sitting or flexing the spine. Clinical care and research are complicated by the heterogeneity of the condition and high rates of anatomic stenosis on imaging studies in older people, who are completely asymptomatic. In Denmark, most patients with mild to moderate symptoms are treated in primary care. Patients with severe disability and no effect of non-surgical treatment may need referral to secondary care and surgery.