Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2018 / Cilt: 52 - Sayı: 3

Analysis of factors affecting baseline SF-36 Mental Component Summary in Adult Spinal Deformity and its impact on surgical outcomes

Pages
179–184
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/ 4.0/).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: To identify the factors that affect SF-36 mental component summary (MCS) in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) at the time of presentation, and to analyse the effect of SF-36 MCS on clinical outcomes in surgically treated patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Then, the same database for surgically treated patients with a minimum of 1-year follow-up was analysed to see the effect of baseline SF-36 MCS on treatment results.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/ 4.0/).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objectives: To identify the factors that affect SF-36 mental component summary (MCS) in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) at the time of presentation, and to analyse the effect of SF-36 MCS on clinical outcomes in surgically treated patients. Methods: Prospectively collected data from a multicentric ASD database was analysed for baseline pa-rameters. Then, the same database for surgically treated patients with a minimum of 1-year follow-up was analysed to see the effect of baseline SF-36 MCS on treatment results. A clinically useful SF-36 MCS was determined by ROC Curve analysis. Results: A total of 229 patients with the baseline parameters were analysed. A strong correlation be-tween SF-36 MCS and SRS-22, ODI, gender, and diagnosis were found (p < 0.05). For the second part of the study, a total of 186 surgically treated patients were analysed. Only for SF-36 PCS, the un-improved cohort based on minimum clinically important differences had significantly lower mean baseline SF-36 MCS (p < 0.001). SF-36 MCS was found to have an odds ratio of 0.914 in improving SF-36 PCS score (unit by unit) (p < 0.001). A cut-off point of 43.97 for SF-36 MCS was found to be predictive of SF-36 PCS (AUC ¼ 0.631; p < 0.001). Conclusions: The factors effective on the baseline SF-36 MCS in an ASD population are other HRQOL parameters such as SRS-22 and ODI as well as the baseline thoracic kyphosis and gender. This study has also demonstrated that baseline SF-36 MCS does not necessarily have any effect on the treatment results by surgery as assessed by SRS-22 or ODI. Level of evidence: Level III, prognostic study. © 2018 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/ 4.0/).

🔖

Cite This Article

MMOPELWA, T., AYHAN, S., YÜKSEL, S., NABIYEV, V., NIYAZI, A., PELLISÉ, F., ALANAY, A., GRUESO, F. J. S. P., KLEINSTUCK, F., OBEID, I., ACAROĞLU, E. (2018). Analysis of factors affecting baseline SF-36 Mental Component Summary in Adult Spinal Deformity and its impact on surgical outcomes. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 52 - Sayı: 3, 179–184. https://ajindex.com/articles/157227

References (2)

  1. Sullivan MJL, Bishop SR, Pivik J. The pain catastrophizing scale: development and validation. Psychol Assess. 1995;7(4):524e532. 34. Jackson T, Iezzi T, Gunderson J, Nagasaka T, Fritch A. Gender differences in pain perception: the mediating role of self-efficacy beliefs. Sex Roles. 2002;47(11): 561e568. 33. Sullivan MJL, Tripp DA, Santor D. Gender differences in pain and pain behav-iour: the role of catastrophizing. Cognit Ther Res. 2000;24(1):121e134. 32. Emery CF, Frid DJ, Engebretson TO, et al. Gender differences in quality of life among cardiac patients. Psychosom Med. 2004;66(2):190e197. 31. da Rocha NS, Schuch FB, Fleck MP. Gender differences in perception of quality of life in adults with and without chronic health conditions: the role of depressive symptoms. J Health Psychol. 2014;19(6):721e729. 30. Keogh E, Eccleston C. Sex differences in adolescent chronic pain and pain-related coping. Pain. 2006;123(3):275e284. 29. Bartley EJ, Fillingim RB. Sex differences in pain: a brief review of clinical and experimental findings. Br J Anaesth. 2013;111(1):52e58. 28. Unruh AM, Ritchie J, Merskey H. Does gender affect appraisal of pain and pain coping strategies? Clin J Pain. 1999;15(1):31e40. 27. Kothari P, Lee NJ, Leven DM, et al. Impact of gender on 30-day complications after adult spinal deformity surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41(14): 1133e1138. 26. Pochon L, Kleinstuck FS, Porchet F, Mannion AF. Influence of gender on patient-oriented outcomes in spine surgery. Eur Spine J. 2016;25(1):235e246. 25. Acaroglu E, Guler UO, Olgun ZD, et al. Multiple regression analysis of factors affecting health-related quality of life in adult spinal deformity. Spine Deform. 2015;3:360e366. 24. Yuksel S, Ayhan S, Domingo-Sabat M, et al. Minimum Detectable Change (MDC) and Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of Health Related Quality of Life Parameters in Adult Spinal Deformity. In: SRS 52nd Annual Meeting & Course. 2017.
  2. Philadelphia, PA. 23. Obeid I, Boissiere L, Yilgor C, et al. Global tilt: a single parameter incorporating spinal and pelvic sagittal parameters and least affected by patient positioning. Eur Spine J. 2016 Nov;25(11):3644e3649. 22. Walsh TL, Homa K, Hanscom B, Lurie J, Sepulveda MG, Abdu W. Screening for depressive symptoms in patients with chronic spinal pain using the SF-36 Health Survey. Spine J. 2006;6(3):316e320. 21. Longworth L, Rowen D. Mapping to obtain EQ-5D utility values for use in NICE health technology assessments. Value H