Exercise treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and intervention component analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the components used in exercise interventions for people with symptoms of neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis and identify components associated with successful interventions. DATA SOURCES: Eligible papers published up to April 2023 from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and trial registry websites. REVIEW METHODS: Literature searches were performed by an Information Specialist. We searched for randomised trials evaluating exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication symptoms (the primary symptom of lumbar spinal stenosis). Two authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool Version 2 and the TIDieR checklist for intervention reporting. Details of intervention components were extracted, tabulated, and synthesised using an intervention component analysis approach. RESULTS: We found thirteen trials reporting 23 exercise interventions delivered to 1440 participants. These featured 60 different components. Most exercise interventions included supervision and flexion-based exercises. Balance exercises were rarely included. Exercise components featured more frequently in successful interventions included stretches, strength or trunk muscle exercises, fitness exercises, especially cycling, and psychologically informed approaches. Interpretation is limited by low study numbers and heterogeneity. No conclusions could be drawn about exercise supervision or dose. DISCUSSION: Exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication typically feature multiple components. Common features such as supervision, lumbar flexion, and aerobic fitness exercises and also less common features such as stretches, strengthening exercises, and psychologically informed approaches warrant consideration for inclusion when designing and optimising exercise interventions for people with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Pre-operative prognostic factors for walking capacity after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) reduces walking and quality of life. It is the main indication for spinal surgery in older people yet 40% report walking disability post-operatively. Identifying the prognostic factors of post-operative walking capacity could aid clinical decision-making, guide rehabilitation and optimise health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To synthesise the evidence for pre-operative mutable and immutable prognostic factors for post-operative walking in adults with LSS. DESIGN: Systematic review with narrative synthesis. METHODS: Electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, OpenGrey) were searched for observational studies, evaluating factors associated with walking after surgery in adults receiving surgery for LSS from database inception to January 2020. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias (Quality in Prognosis Studies). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method was used to determine level of evidence for each factor. RESULTS: 5526 studies were screened for eligibility. Thirty-four studies (20 cohorts, 9,973 participants, 26 high, 2 moderate, 6 low risk of bias) were included. Forty variables (12 mutable) were identified. There was moderate quality of evidence that pre-operative walking capacity was positively associated with post-operative walking capacity. The presence of spondylolisthesis and the severity of stenosis were not associated with post-operative walking capacity. All other factors investigated had low/very low level of evidence. CONCLUSION: Greater pre-operative walking is associated with greater post-operative walking capacity but not spondylolisthesis or severity of stenosis. Few studies have investigated mutable prognostic factors that could be potentially targeted to optimise surgical outcomes.

Prediction of walking ability following posterior decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.

PURPOSE: Following surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) up to 40% of people report persistent walking disability. This study aimed to identify pre-operative factors that are predictive of walking ability post-surgery for LSS. METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted using data from the British Spine Registry (2017-2018) of adults (≥ 50 years) with LSS, who underwent ≤ 2 level posterior lumbar decompression. Patients receiving fixation or who had previous lumbar surgery were excluded. Walking ability was assessed by a single item on the Oswestry Disability Index and dichotomised into poor/good outcome. Multivariable regression models were performed. RESULTS: 14,485 patients were identified. Pre-operatively 30% patients reported poor walking ability, this decreased to 8% at 12 months follow-up. Predictors associated with poor walking ability at 12 months were: increasing age (≥ 75 years OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.07, 2.18), BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.00, 2.30), severity of leg pain (OR 1.10, CI 95% 1.01, 1.21), disability (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01, 1.02) and quality of life (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56, 0.89). Pre-operative maximum walking distance (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05, 1.25) and higher education (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80, 0.96) were associated with reduced risk of poor walking ability at 12 months; p < 0.05. Depression, fear of movement and symptom duration were not associated with risk of poor outcome. CONCLUSION: Older age, obesity, greater pre-operative pain and disability and lower quality of life are associated with risk of poor walking ability post-operatively. Greater pre-operative walking and higher education are associated with reduced risk of poor walking ability post-operatively. Patients should be counselled on their risk of poor outcome and considered for rehabilitation so that walking and surgical outcomes may be optimised.

Does low-back pain improve after decompressive spinal surgery? A prospective observational study from the British Spine Registry.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar spine decompression surgery, in the form of laminectomy or discectomy, is known to be effective in improving symptoms of radiculopathy and neurogenic claudication. However, it is less clear how it impacts coexisting low-back pain (LBP). The aim of this study was to quantify the change in LBP after lumbar decompression. METHODS: This study analyzed data from the British Spine Registry on patients who underwent lumbar decompression surgery. LBP severity was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), and the primary outcome was the change in VAS score at 1 year, with secondary outcomes measuring the change in score at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 2 years. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as a 30% reduction in pain. RESULTS: Of the 25,349 patients included in the study, 92.2% reported significant back pain at baseline. Of the entire cohort, 12,951 (55.4%) patients had follow-up data for 6 weeks, 9066 (38.8%) for 6 months, 7926 (33.9%) for 1 year, and 5517 (23.6%) for 2 years; 17,304 (68.3%) patients had follow-up data for at least one time point. Sixty-two percent of patients attained the MCID (VAS score ≥ 30%) in back pain reduction, with 51% reporting a substantial improvement (VAS score ≥ 50%). This improvement was observed by 6 weeks postoperation and was mostly maintained at 2 years. Patients with back pain predominance were more likely to attain the MCID compared with those with leg pain predominance (63.6% vs 60.1%; OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.34; p = 0.0291). Severity of baseline back pain did not reduce the proportion attaining the MCID. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of pain presentation, LBP improves in approximately 62% of patients who undergo lumbar decompressive surgery, with 51% experiencing substantial improvement. Patients undergoing lumbar decompression can be advised on the chance of a meaningful improvement in back pain postsurgery.

The experiences and acceptability of a novel multimodal programme for the management of fibromyalgia: A qualitative service evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Fibromyalgia guidelines recommend multi-modal, non-pharmacological interventions but there is limited evidence on the optimal programme. The Fibromyalgia Active Management and Exercise programme (FAME) aimed to improve function and quality of life. It consisted of 12 sessions delivered by a multidisciplinary team and incorporated education, exercise, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy and mindfulness approaches. This qualitative service evaluation explored the experience and acceptability of FAME from the perspective of the patients' and healthcare practitioners' (HCP). METHODS: All patients and HCP involved in the first FAME programme were invited to attend either one audio-recorded focus group or an individual semi-structured interview. Topic guides were developed a priori. Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Thirteen participants (six HCP (three physiotherapists, two nurses, one psychologist)) and seven patients (mean age 46 (7.5) years, all female,) were enroled. FAME was acceptable to HCP participants but not to all patient participants. Where patient participants understood and anticipated the aims of FAME, the programme was found to be acceptable. Whereas, patient participants who did not fully understand the aims of the programme reported lower acceptability. Three themes were generated: expectations and preparation for FAME, the value of social support, and FAME as a learning opportunity. The themes could be explained by five constructs of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. CONCLUSION: FAME was acceptable to HCPs but not to all patient participants. Patient and HCP participants valued social support and regarded this as central to their learning. Further adaptation of FAME is required to optimise acceptability.

Conservative Management of Type II Odontoid Fractures in Older People: A Retrospective Observational Comparison of Osseous Union Versus Nonunion.

BACKGROUND: Type II odontoid fractures are a common cervical fracture in older people. Lower osseous-union rates are reported in those treated conservatively compared to surgically; however, the clinical relevance of a nonunion is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare pain, disability, and quality of life in older people following conservative management of type II odontoid fractures demonstrating osseous-union and nonunion. METHODS: Electronic records were searched from 2008 to 2018 for adults ≥65 yr with type II odontoid fracture, managed in a semi-rigid collar. Clinical and demographic data were retrieved from electronic patient notes. Surviving patients were invited to complete questionnaires to assess pain, disability, and quality of life. Ethical approval was granted. RESULTS: A total of 125 patients were identified: 36 (29%) demonstrated osseous-union, 89 (71%) had nonunion, of which 33 (40%) had radiological instability. Mean age at fracture was 84 yr (osseous-union 83 yr; nonunion 84 yr). A total of 53 had deceased (41 nonunion). Median length of survival was 77 mo for osseous-union vs 50 mo for nonunion; P = .02. No patient developed myelopathy during the follow-up period. Questionnaire response rate was 39 (58%). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of pain, disability, or quality of life (P > .05). Both groups reported mild disability and pain but low quality of life. CONCLUSION: Management with a semi-rigid collar in older people with type II odontoid fracture is associated with low levels of pain and disability without statistically significant differences between those demonstrating osseous-union or stable or unstable nonunions. Conservative management appears to be a safe treatment for older people with type II fractures.