Clinical outcome analysis in surgical patients enrolled in a Second Opinion Program in spine surgery.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To analyze pain, functional capacity, quality of life, anxiety and depression outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery following use of the Second Opinion Program, and to present disagreements regarding diagnoses and therapeutic indications between the first and second opinions. METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort study with 100 patients enrolled in the Second Opinion Program who underwent lumbar spine surgery. Questionnaires addressing pain intensity, level of disability, quality of life, anxiety and depression were applied prior to and within 1, 3, 6 and 12 months of surgery. Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were performed. The following clinical outcomes were analyzed pain intensity, level of disability, quality of life, anxiety, and depression. RESULTS: In this sample, 88% and 12% out of 100 patients were submitted to lumbar decompression and arthrodesis, respectively. Patients reported improvements in function, pain intensity, and quality of life factors following surgery and were able to attain the minimal clinically important difference relative to the preoperative period. Agreement between the first and second opinions was observed in 44% of diagnoses, and in 27% of therapeutic indications. CONCLUSION: Patients had favorable postoperative outcomes regarding pain, disability, and quality of life. These findings and the high rates of diagnostic and therapeutic indication disagreements corroborate the need of a second opinion in cases of spine disease with surgical indications.