Display options
Cite
Kimura A, Endo T, Inoue H, et al. Preoperative predictors of patient satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty. Global Spine J. 2014;4(2):77-82doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1366973.
Kimura, A., Endo, T., Inoue, H., & Seichi, A. (2014). Preoperative predictors of patient satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty. Global spine journal, 4(2), 77-82. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1366973
Kimura, Atsushi, et al. "Preoperative predictors of patient satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty." Global spine journal vol. 4,2 (2014): 77-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1366973
Kimura A, Endo T, Inoue H, Seichi A. Preoperative predictors of patient satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty. Global Spine J. 2014 Jun;4(2):77-82. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1366973. Epub 2014 Jan 27. PMID: 25072001; PMCID: PMC4078151.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Global Spine J. 2014 Jun;4(2):77-82. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1366973. Epub 2014 Jan 27.

Preoperative predictors of patient satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty.

Global spine journal

Atsushi Kimura, Teruaki Endo, Hirokazu Inoue, Atsushi Seichi

Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, Japan.

PMID: 25072001 PMCID: PMC4078151 DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1366973

Abstract

Study design Prospective cohort study. Objective The purpose of the present study was to identify the predictors of patient satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty for compressive cervical myelopathy. Methods A cohort of 143 patients with compressive myelopathy who underwent cervical double-door laminoplasty between 2008 and 2011 was studied prospectively. The principal outcome was patient satisfaction with outcome at 1 year after surgery. Patient satisfaction was graded on an ordinal scale from 1 to 7. Subjective health-related quality of life (QOL) and objective disease-specific outcome was measured by Short Form-36 (SF-36) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, respectively, before surgery and at 1-year follow-up. We evaluated the association between patient satisfaction at 1-year follow-up and various baseline parameters, including patient demographics, duration of symptoms, comorbidities, imaging findings, JOA score, and SF-36 scores. Results A total of 116 patients completed subjective and objective follow-up for a minimum of 1 year. Of 116 patients, 95 patients (81.9%) were satisfied with the outcome ("satisfied a little" or more). The unsatisfied group ("neutral" or less) showed significantly lower baseline SF-36 scores in bodily pain (BP), general health perceptions (GH), and vitality (VT) domains compared with the satisfied group. At the 1-year follow-up, SF-36 scores showed significant differences between the groups in all eight domains, whereas the JOA score showed no significant difference. Conclusions Lower baseline QOL measured by SF-36 scores, specifically in BP, GH, and VT domains, are associated with lower satisfaction with outcome after cervical laminoplasty.

Keywords: cervical spine; laminoplasty; myelopathy; outcome; patient satisfaction

References

  1. Med Care. 1988 Apr;26(4):393-402 - PubMed
  2. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Jan 15;37(2):E103-8 - PubMed
  3. J Public Health Med. 1992 Sep;14(3):236-49 - PubMed
  4. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001 Sep 1;26(17):1890-4; discussion 1895 - PubMed
  5. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Mar 1;38(5):392-400 - PubMed
  6. Health Med Care Serv Rev. 1978 Jan-Feb;1(1):1, 3-15 - PubMed
  7. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009 Aug;11(2):112-8 - PubMed
  8. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 May;466(5):1154-61 - PubMed
  9. Eur Spine J. 2015 Apr;24 Suppl 2:236-51 - PubMed
  10. Med Care. 1997 Jul;35(7):714-30 - PubMed
  11. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999 Nov 1;24(21):2229-33 - PubMed
  12. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Oct;56(10):1926-31 - PubMed
  13. Ann Rheum Dis. 1996 Dec;55(12):901-6 - PubMed
  14. Brain. 1972;95(1):87-100 - PubMed
  15. Radiology. 2001 Dec;221(3):789-94 - PubMed
  16. JAMA Surg. 2013 Oct;148(10):986-7 - PubMed
  17. Eur Spine J. 2011 Sep;20(9):1560-6 - PubMed

Publication Types