Prehabilitation for spine surgery: A scoping review.

We aimed to identify and describe the current interventions used in preoperative programs ("prehabilitation") for spine surgery. Knowledge gaps in approaches, feasibility, timing, patient experience, clinical outcomes, and health care costs were explored while describing their potential benefits on physical and psychological outcomes. An electronic search was conducted from January 2004 to February 2022 in Ovid Medline, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PEDro to identify studies in English evaluating adults enrolled in prehabilitation before undergoing elective spine surgeries. Studies were uploaded into DistillerSR for systematic screening after removing duplicates. Four reviewers screened nested references for inclusion based on titles and abstracts, followed by their full-text review. Two reviewers subsequently extracted data and summarized the results. The results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Studies were rated for quality using National Health and Medical Research Council criteria. Out of 18,879 potential studies, a total of 23 studies (0.12%) met the eligibility criteria and were included in this scoping review. The prehabilitation programs included general education (n = 6, 26%), exercise (n = 6, 26%), cognitive behavioral therapy (n = 3, 13%), pain neuroscience education (n = 3, 13%), health behavior counseling (n = 3, 13%), and mindfulness (n = 2, 9%). Additional studies are needed to identify optimal patient characteristics, intervention dosage, and whether multimodal approaches using a combination of physical and psychological strategies lead to more favorable outcomes. Although studies on prehabilitation for spine surgery are limited, they seem to demonstrate that prehabilitation programs are feasible, reduce medical expenditures, and improve patients' postoperative pain, disability, self-efficacy, psychological behaviors, and satisfaction with surgical outcomes. The available literature suggests there is an opportunity to improve patient experience, clinical outcomes and reduce medical costs with the use of prehabilitation in spine surgery.

Responsiveness of Outcome Measures in Nonsurgical Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Secondary Analysis From a Randomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis from a randomized controlled trial on nonsurgical interventions for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the responsiveness of the Self-Paced Walking Test (SPWT), Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire (SSS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and determine their minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in nonsurgical LSS patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Limited information is available about the responsiveness of these tests in nonsurgical LSS population. METHODS: A total of 180 participants completed the SPWT, SSS, and ODI at baseline, 2, and 6 months. Responsiveness was assessed by distribution-based method, including effect size and standardized response mean, and anchor-based method, using the patient global index of change (PGIC) as the external anchor to distinguish responders and non-responders. Areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated along with MCIDs for "minimal" and "moderate improvement" subgroups. RESULTS: The following values represent 2- and 6-month analyses of each outcome measure, respectively. Standard effect sizes: 0.48 and 0.50 for SPWT, -0.42 and -0.36 for SSS, and -0.29 and -0.25 for ODI. Spearman correlation coefficients between PGIC and outcomes were: 0.44 and 0.39 for SPWT, -0.53 and -0.55 for SSS, and -0.46 and -0.54 for ODI. MCIDs for the "minimal improvement" subgroup were: 375.9 and 319.3 ms for SPWT, -5.3 and -5.8 points for SSS, and -9.3 and -10.8 points for ODI. AUCs was 0.68 to 0.76. MCIDs for the "moderate improvement" subgroup were: 344.2 and 538.2 m for SPWT, -5.5 and -7.5 points for SSS, and -9.1 and -13.6 points for ODI. AUCs ranged from 0.68 to 0.76. CONCLUSION: The SPWT, SSS, and ODI are responsive outcome measures to assess nonsurgical patients with LSS. This finding, along with the reported MCIDs, can help clinicians to monitor changes in their patients' walking and physical function over time and make clinical decisions. They also provide researchers with reference for future studies in LSS.Level of Evidence: 2.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for fatigue in patients with Sjogren's syndrome: A randomized, double-blind pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) has shown promise to decrease fatigue. However, it has never been examined in primary Sjogren Syndrome (pSS). OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a tDCS protocol on fatigue in patients with pSS. METHODS: This is a parallel, double-blind pilot study (NCT04119128). Women aged 18-65 years, with pSS, on stable pharmacological therapy, with complaints of fatigue for at least three months, and with scores >5 on Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) were included. We randomized 36 participants to receive five consecutive or sham tDCS sessions, with an intensity of 2 mA, for 20 min/day. RESULTS: After five tDCS sessions, fatigue severity assessed by the FSS (primary outcome) demonstrated a mean group difference of -0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.57, -0.13; effect size 0.80] favouring the active group. The active group presented significantly greater reductions in fatigue as measured by the EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index after five tDCS sessions [mean group difference: 1.40; 95%CI -2.33, -0.48; effect size 1.04]. Although there were no between-group differences in the secondary outcomes of sleep, mood and anxiety, within-group comparisons evidenced a small but significant difference in the active group for pain and sleep. There were no significant cortisol changes. All reported adverse events were mild and transitory. CONCLUSION: tDCS seems to be safe and reduce fatigue in pSS. A differential effect on pain and sleep may underlie its effects. Further studies are needed to optimise tDCS treatment strategies in pSS.