Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Feb 1;30(3):365-8.

Reliability of retrospective clinical data to evaluate the effectiveness of lumbar fusion in chronic low back pain.

Author information

  • 1Unitat de Cirurgia del Raquis, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 24361fpu@comb.es

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN:

Patients in whom a posterior spinal fusion instrumentation had been performed to treat low back pain were asked to recall their preoperative clinical status by retrospectively filling out the same 3 self-evaluation scales they had completed before surgery in a prospective fashion.

OBJECTIVES:

To evaluate the impact of recollection error and compare outcomes using retrospective versus prospective methodologies among a cohort of patients treated with posterior spinal fusion instrumentation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:

Literature on spine surgery from 1990 to 2000 shows a greater increase in retrospective studies as compared to randomized controlled trials and other prospective studies. Cross-sectional studies evaluate therapeutic effectiveness by comparing the current condition with the recalled (retrospectively recorded) pretreatment condition. There are no studies analyzing the characteristics of recalled data in a cohort of patients with chronic low back pain treated with posterior spinal fusion instrumentation.

METHODS:

The preoperative clinical status of 58 patients, 33 women and 25 men, with a mean age of 48.3 years (22-84 years) was assessed prospectively with 3 self evaluation questionnaires and retrospectively at a mean of 37.5 months (2-58 months) after surgery using the same questionnaires. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare prospective and retrospective preoperative data and to compare prospective outcomes with outcomes determined from cross-sectional data. Agreement between prospective and retrospective measures was estimated with intraclass correlation coefficients for absolute agreement and consistency.

RESULTS:

Comparisons between prospective and recalled data showed significant differences, demonstrating a worse preoperative situation when using retrospective data. Assessment of treatment effectiveness showed that cross-sectional evaluation significantly improved the real surgical outcome. Both absolute agreement and consistency intraclass correlation coefficients showed poor agreement between prospective and cross-sectional data, revealing no systematic bias. Follow-up, age, and gender did not modify agreement and cross-sectional overestimation.

CONCLUSIONS:

Relying on a patient's recall of preoperative clinical status is not an accurate method to evaluate surgical outcome after posterior spinal fusion instrumentation. Cross-sectional studies may overestimate the effectiveness of surgery.

PMID:
15682021
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk