Resilience correlates with patient reported outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Do Psychological Factors Explain the Persistence of Symptoms in Individuals With Rotator Cuff-related Shoulder Pain? A Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether psychosocial factors, such as resilience, perceived stress, catastrophizing, anxiety, depression, pain self-efficacy, and social support, explain the persistence of pain and disability in individuals with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain (RCRSP) following an education program.

METHODS

One hundred forty-three individuals with persistent RCRSP were included in this prospective cohort study. At baseline, participants completed self-reported questionnaires related to pain, disability, and psychosocial constructs, including resilience, stress, catastrophizing, anxiety and depressive symptoms, pain self-efficacy, and social support. Thereafter, participants took part in an educational program aimed at promoting self-management of RCRSP that included 2 meetings with a physiotherapist. After 12 and 24 weeks, participants filled out pain and disability questionnaires and, based on their scores, were classified as having persistent shoulder pain or as recovered.

RESULTS

A univariable modified Poisson regression showed that higher perceived stress (RR adjusted : 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04), catastrophizing (RR adjusted : 1.01; 95% CI: 1.01-1.02), symptoms of depression (RR adjusted : 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01-1.06) and anxiety (RR adjusted : 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01-1.06), along with lower resilience (RR adjusted : 0.90; 95% CI: 0.81-1.00), were associated with ongoing RCRSP at 12 weeks. In addition, reduced pain self-efficacy was associated with persistent pain at both 12 weeks (RR adjusted : 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.99) and 24 weeks (RR adjusted : 0.99; 95% CI: 0.98-1.00). Multivariable regression indicated that only pain self-efficacy served as a protective factor against persistent RCRSP (RR adjusted : 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.99).

DISCUSSION

This study sheds light on the impact of psychosocial factors on persistent RCRSP, underscoring the importance of positive beliefs in pain management. Importantly, pain self-efficacy emerges as a key factor in recovery.

Patient Resilience: Current Concepts in Spine Literature

Resilience is a psychological characteristic that has been looked at similarly to mental toughness in the modern medical era, and because of this there has been particular interest in patient resilience in spine surgery. Researchers have shown positive associations between resilience and a variety of measured outcomes in patients with spinal cord injuries, neck and back pain, and postoperative spine patients. Overall, resilience shows great promise for intervention and unknown potential for modification for patients undergoing spine surgery in the future.

Effectiveness of nonoperative treatment in patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a prospective cohort study

Background

There is limited evidence supporting the use of nonoperative strategies in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA). Recent clinical practice guidelines have stated that it is unclear whether nonoperative management of GHOA would produce a clinically important difference in pain or function. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of nonoperative treatment on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and to identify factors that could predict which patients would undergo total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA).

Methods

62 patients with primary GHOA were recruited. Patients could choose to receive or refuse different nonoperative modalities, including physical therapy (PT) and corticosteroid injections, based on their preference. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score were administered at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months to evaluate treatment response. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics were compared between patients who failed and did not fail nonoperative management. Failure was defined as having undergone TSA.

Results

14 (23%) patients who initially attempted nonoperative management underwent TSA at 7.7 months (range, 1.6-25.2 months). In patients who continued nonoperative management, only 19 (31%) patients met the minimum clinical important difference and 26 (42%) patients achieved patient acceptable symptom state. There was no significant difference in the change in ASES score between patients who did and did not undergo PT (P = .524). A lack of belief in PT (HR = 33.6 [95% CI: 5.26-214], P < .001), decrease in ASES score (HR = 6.25 [95% CI: 2.04-20.0], P = .001]), female sex (HR = 5.38 [95% CI: 1.31-22.1], P = .020), and lower resilience (HR = 7.14 [95% CI: 1.78-33.3], P = .006) were independently associated with failure of nonoperative treatment. Patients who received at least one glenohumeral corticosteroid injection (HR = 0.16 [95% CI: 0.04-0.67], P = .012) or had more joint space remaining (HR = 0.22 [95% CI: 0.06-0.80], P = .021) had a decreased risk of failure.

Conclusions

Approximately, 30% of patients with GHOA who chose their nonoperative treatment regimen had clinically meaningful improvements in symptoms. Despite this, patients elected to undergo TSA less than 25% of the time at short-term follow-up. PT was not beneficial in the treatment of GHOA. Screening questionnaires that evaluate a patient's belief in PT and resilience could potentially be used to identify which patients will fail nonoperative treatment.

Resilience and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Orthopedic Hand Surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have examined the impact of resiliency on postoperative outcomes in other orthopedic domains, but none to date have done so for hand surgery.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients undergoing hand surgery at a single institution. We included patients with complete preoperative outcomes scores and 6-month follow-up. All patients completed the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) Score, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH), Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12), and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain. Patients were stratified into high-resiliency (HR) and low-resiliency (LR) groups based on the preoperative BRS score, and outcomes between groups were compared.

RESULTS

We identified 91 patients who underwent hand procedures and completed full preoperative and postoperative outcomes measures. There were no observed preoperative differences between the groups in all outcomes scores except the VR-12 Mental Component Score. Postoperatively, the HR group had superior DASH, QuickDASH, and VR-12 (mental and physical component) scores than the LR group. Postoperative pain, as measured by the NRS, was significantly lower in the HR group despite there being no preoperative difference. A larger percentage of patients in the HR group met the minimal clinically important difference in all outcomes except for the VR-12 Mental Component Scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with high preoperative resilience appear to have significantly better clinical outcomes following hand surgery with superior DASH, QuickDASH, and VR-12 scores at 6-month follow-up.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study/Level IV evidence.

Does Resilience Change in Patients Undergoing Shoulder Surgery? A Retrospective Comparative Study Utilizing the Brief Resilience Scale

BACKGROUND

Resilience refers to the ability to adapt or recover from stress. There is increasing appreciation that it plays an important role in wholistic patient-centered care and may affect patient outcomes, including those of orthopaedic surgery. Despite being a focus of the current orthopaedic evidence, there is no strong understanding yet of whether resilience is a stable patient quality or a dynamic one that may be modified perioperatively to improve patient-reported outcome scores.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does resilience change postoperatively? (2) How do outcome measures change postoperatively in relation to resilience grouping? (3) For patients who do have resilience instability (change in resilience of ≥ 1 SD between any two follow-up points), how were patient-level factors, surgical characteristics, and outcome measures associated with instability?

METHODS

In this single-surgeon, retrospective, comparative study, we identified all patients who underwent shoulder surgery between March 2021 and March 2023 from the medical records of one US military teaching hospital, resulting in 144 initial patients. Data on resilience (measured by the Brief Resilience Scale) and outcomes (assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE]) were collected for all patients and maintained in a longitudinal outcomes score database. Patients younger than 18 years of age (1% [1 of 144]) who underwent surgery for fracture, acute tendon rupture (8% [11 of 144]), or revision surgery (3% [4 of 144]); had concomitant shoulder conditions (such as, instability or rotator cuff tear) (1% [2 of 144]); or had incomplete follow-up data (4% [5 of 144]) were excluded, leaving 84% (121 of 144) of the original sample size for analysis. Among the patients, 12% (15 of 121) were women, the mean age was 41 ± 15 years, and the most common indication for surgery was instability (40% [48 of 121]) followed by rotator cuff repair (29% [35 of 121]). Based on their preoperative Brief Resilience Scale and its deviation from the mean, patients were stratified into low (> 1 SD below mean), intermediate (within 1 SD above and below mean), and high (> 1 SD above mean) resilience groups. Preoperatively, 19% (23 of 121) of patients were classified as low resilience, 62% (75 of 121) as intermediate resilience, and 19% (23 of 121) as high resilience. The mean ± SD preoperative Brief Resilience Scale score was 25 ± 4. The Brief Resilience Scale is a six-item scale with a calculated summary score ranging from 6 to 30. A higher score is suggestive of greater perceived resilience. There were no differences in the preoperative Brief Resilience Scale score with regard to age, gender, type of surgery performed, or outcome measures. Patient resilience was followed during the postoperative period for a minimum of 6 months, and instability in the scale was evaluated. Instability in resilience was defined as change in Brief Resilience Scale score by > 1 SD from one follow-up time point to another. Perioperative NRS and SANE outcomes, in addition to demographic data, were utilized to evaluate the relationship between resilience and patient-level factors.

RESULTS

Brief Resilience Scale groups across all time points remained consistent with no change in grouping or crossover in groups except for patients with low resilience who had an increase in mean ± SD Brief Resilience Scale score by the final follow-up (18 ± 3 versus 20 ± 4; p < 0.05). Regardless of resilience group, there was a decrease in mean ± SD NRS (4.4 ± 2.2 versus 2.4 ± 2.3; p < 0.001) and an improvement in mean ± SD SANE (46 ± 19 versus 69 ± 21; p < 0.001) scores during the postoperative period. At the 1- to 2-month follow-up and the 6- to 10-month follow-up visits, patients with high resilience were more likely to have lower NRS scores than patients with intermediate resilience (1.8 ± 1.0 versus 3.8 ± 2.3; p = 0.003) and low resilience (1.5 ± 1.8 versus 3.3 ± 2.4; p < 0.001), respectively. No relationship was observed between resilience groups and SANE scores, surgical category, and percentage of patients meeting the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of the NRS or the SANE. Regarding resilience instability, 46% (56 of 121) of patients were categorized as having a Brief Resilience Scale change of ≥ 1 SD from baseline during the postoperative period. Gender (r = 0.03; p = 0.21), age (p = 0.81), and surgical category (r = 0.01; p = 0.88) were not associated with the likelihood of resilience instability. Individuals whose resilience increased had a lower starting Brief Resilience Scale score than those whose resilience stayed the same (22 ± 4 versus 25 ± 4, respectively; p < 0.001) or those whose resilience decreased (22 ± 4 versus 26 ± 3, respectively; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

When evaluated by resilience group, the trait appears static; however, at the individual level, resilience appears dynamic and complex. Patients with high resilience may have less postoperative pain. Identification of patients with low resilience may indicate patients who experience more dynamic change in this psychometric property.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Same patient but different worlds: A state-of-the-art review translating best practice psychosocial care from musculoskeletal care to the orthopaedic context

BACKGROUND

Individuals with chronic musculoskeletal conditions experience persistent pain and disability that has deleterious impacts on physical function, psychological health, social engagement, relationships, and work participation. This impact is greater in people with psychosocial risk factors, and best practice musculoskeletal care recommends a biopsychosocial approach to management. Orthopaedic surgery is often an effective management approach for chronic musculoskeletal conditions, but research has only recently explored the links between differing patient outcomes after orthopaedic surgery and psychosocial risk factors. Implementing biopsychosocial approaches to musculoskeletal care has taken great strides in the primary care setting however, implementation of the biopsychosocial approach in orthopaedic surgery brings complexity as the context changes from primary care to hospital based secondary care. The aim of this review therefore is to explore implementation of psychosocial care in the elective orthopaedic surgery context, informed by evidence in musculoskeletal care.

ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF PSYCHOSOCIAL FACTORS

Several composite screening tools for psychosocial factors or 'yellow flags' are recommended for use in primary care for musculoskeletal conditions alongside a comprehensive patient interview. However, in the orthopaedic surgery context, composite measures have focused on discharge destination, and there is not a universal approach to comprehensive patient interview incorporating a biopsychosocial approach. A range of biopsychosocial approaches to musculoskeletal conditions have been developed for the primary care setting, yet few have been explored in the context of orthopaedic surgery.

IMPLEMENTATION OF PSYCHOSOCIAL CARE

Implementing best practice psychosocial care into the orthopaedic context has enormous potential for all stakeholders, but several barriers exist at the level of the individual patient and practitioner, workforce, health service and society. We have discussed key considerations for implementation including workforce composition, patient-centred care and shared decision making, health literacy, continuity of care, and consideration of preferences for women and culturally diverse communities.

CONCLUSION

This review considers current literature exploring implementation of psychosocial care into the orthopaedic surgery context, informed by current research in musculoskeletal care. This presents a critical opportunity for orthopaedic surgery to provide optimised, equitable, high-value, patient-centred care.

Posteroinferior glenosphere positioning is associated with improved range of motion following reverse shoulder arthroplasty with a 135° inlay humeral component and lateralized glenoid

BACKGROUND

Optimal glenosphere positioning in a lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) to maximize functional outcomes has yet to be clearly defined. Center of rotation (COR) measurements have largely relied on anteroposterior radiographs, which allow assessment of lateralization and inferior position, but ignore scapular Y radiographs, which may provide an assessment of the posterior and inferior position relative to the acromion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the COR in the sagittal plane and assess the effect of glenosphere positioning with functional outcomes using a 135° inlay stem with a lateralized glenoid.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on a prospectively maintained multicenter database on patients who underwent primary RSA from 2015 to 2021 with a 135° inlay stem. The COR was measured on minimum 2-year postoperative sagittal plain radiographs using a best-fit circle fit method. A best-fit circle was made on the glenosphere and the center was marked. From there, 4 measurements were made: (1) center to the inner cortex of the coracoid, (2) center to the inner cortex of the anterior acromion, (3) center to the inner cortex of the middle acromion, and (4) center to the inner cortex of the posterior acromion. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate any association between the position of the COR relative to bony landmarks with functional outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 136 RSAs met the study criteria. There was no relation with any of the distances with outcome scores (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, visual analog scale). In regard to range of motion (ROM), each distance had an effect on at least 1 parameter. The COR to coracoid distance had the broadest association with ROM, with improvements in forward flexion (FF), external rotation (ER0), and internal rotation with the arm at 90° (IR90) (P < .001, P = .031, and P < .001, respectively). The COR to coracoid distance was also the only distance to affect the final FF and IR90. For every 1-mm increase in this distance, there was a 1.8° increase in FF and 1.5° increase in IR90 (β = 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-2.72, P < .001, and β = 1.53, 95% CI 0.65-2.41, P < .001; respectively).

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of the COR following RSA in the sagittal plane suggests that a posteroinferior glenosphere position may improve ROM when using a 135° inlay humeral component and a lateralized glenoid.

The Effect of Patient Resilience on Postoperative Scores After One- and Two-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between resilience and outcomes of pain and neck-related disability after single- and double-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

Patients who underwent single- or double-level ACDF were sent a survey between 6 months and 2 years after surgery. The survey included the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ-2). Patients completed the VAS and NDI twice, once describing preoperative pain and disability and once describing current pain and disability. Respondents were classified as high resilience (HR), medium resilience (MR), or low resilience (LR). Demographics, PSEQ-2 scores, pre- and postoperative VAS and NDI scores, and change in VAS (ΔVAS) and NDI (ΔNDI) scores were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients comprised the HR group, 273 patients comprised the MR group, and 47 patients comprised the LR group. All groups demonstrated postoperative improvement in VAS and NDI scores that exceeded previously established MCID values. The HR group demonstrated greater improvement in pain compared with the LR group (ΔVAS: -5.8 for HR vs. -4.4 for LR, P = 0.05). Compared with the MR group, the LR group demonstrated greater postoperative pain (VAS: 3.2 for LR vs. 2.5 for MR, P = 0.02) and disability (NDI: 11.9 for LR vs. 8.6 for MR, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients demonstrated improvement in pain and neck-related disability after single- and double-level ACDF, regardless of resilience score. Patients with greater resilience may be expected to demonstrate more improvement in pain after ACDF.

Association Between Preoperative Patient Resilience and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Rotator Cuff Repair

Background

Mental and emotional health can affect outcomes after orthopaedic surgery, and patient resilience has been found to be significantly related to postoperative functional outcomes.

Purpose

To evaluate the relationship between preoperative patient resilience and 2-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes after rotator cuff repair (RCR). It was hypothesized that patients with low preoperative resilience will have worse patient-reported outcomes at 2 years after RCR versus those with high resilience.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Patients who underwent primary arthroscopic RCR in 2020 at a single institution and completed the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) preoperatively were identified. Other inclusion criteria were American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores at the 2-year follow-up. Outcomes were compared in patients as divided into low resilience (BRS score >1 SD below the mean), normal resilience (BRS score ≤1 SD of the mean), and high resilience (BRS score >1 SD above the mean) groups.

Results

Overall, 100 patients (52 male, 48 female; mean age, 60 ± 9 years) were included in this study. Mean BRS scores did not change significantly from preoperative to 2-year follow-up (3.8 ± 0.7 vs 3.9 ± 0.8, P = .404). All patients had preoperative ASES scores. Low-resilience patients (n = 17) had significantly lower preoperative ASES scores compared with normal (n = 64) and high resilience (n = 19) patients (35 vs 42 vs 54, respectively; P = .022). There were no significant group differences in postoperative outcomes (revision rate, ASES score, ASES score improvement from preoperative to 2-year follow-up, or SANE score). Multivariate analysis indicated that preoperative resilience was not significantly associated with ASES score improvement (β estimate = -5.64, P = .150), while resilience at 2-year follow-up was significantly related to ASES score improvement (β estimate = 6.41, P = .031).

Conclusion

Patient-reported outcomes at 2-year follow-up did not differ based on preoperative patient resilience for arthroscopic RCR patients. Multivariate analysis also showed that preoperative resilience was not associated with improvement in ASES scores; however, resilience at 2-year follow-up was associated with ASES score improvement.

Beyond the joint: Exploring the interplay between mental health and shoulder arthroplasty outcomes

Considering the fact that mental health illnesses increase with age, and that shoulder arthroplasty procedures are often indicated in the older population, exploring the relationship between mental health and shoulder arthroplasty outcomes can have pivotal implications for shoulder surgeons and patients worldwide. The literature has shown that patients with poor mental health report lower patient-reported outcomes, higher peri-operative complications (such as anemia, infection, delirium, and others), lengthier hospital stays, and higher readmission rates than the normal patient. Employing a holistic approach when managing shoulder arthroplasty patients is necessary for optimizing outcomes and setting up recovery expectations.

Anatomic shoulder arthroplasty: the correlation between patient resilience, mental health, and outcome

BACKGROUND

Recovery from anatomic shoulder arthroplasty may be enhanced in patients with good mental health and the resilience to participate in the prescribed postoperative rehabilitation program. To test this concept, we utilized validated and reliable scales in determining whether resilience and mental health are associated with the outcome of anatomic arthroplasty.

METHODS

Three hundred ninety-nine patients (195 ream and run [RnR] and 204 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty [aTSA]) were surveyed at a mean follow-up of 6.3 ± 3.3 years. Preoperative variables included age, sex, body mass index, history of prior shoulder surgery, diabetes, visual analog scale for pain, Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores, and Veteran's RAND 12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS). Outcomes collected included the SST, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, revision rate, and patient satisfaction. Resilience was documented using the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale 10 (CD-RISC 10) at latest follow-up. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to identify factors significantly associated with follow-up postoperative SST, ASES, and satisfaction.

RESULTS

In the univariable analysis, CD-RISC 10 was positively correlated with postoperative SST, ASES, and satisfaction after both RnR and aTSA. The mean CD-RISC 10 scores were higher in the RnR cohort (34.3 ± 4.8 vs. 32.5 ± 6.2 for aTSA, P < .001). Male sex and lower preoperative visual analog scale for pain were correlated with higher ASES after RnR; VR-12 MCS was positively correlated with all outcomes except SST after RnR. In the multivariable linear regression analysis, CD-RISC 10 was independently associated with postoperative SST, ASES and satisfaction scores in aTSA patients. In the RnR cohort, CD-RISC 10 was only correlated with satisfaction. VR-12 MCS was correlated with ASES and satisfaction after RnR.

DISCUSSION

In this study of anatomic arthroplasties, increased resilience and better mental health were correlated with better outcomes. RnR patients had higher resilience than aTSA patients. Greater resilience was associated with better outcomes after aTSA. Better mental health was associated with superior outcomes after the ream and run procedure.

Preoperative Resilience and Improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Lumbar Spinal Fusion

BACKGROUND

It is incompletely understood how preoperative resilience affects 1-year postoperative outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

Patients undergoing open lumbar spinal fusion at a single-center institution were identified between November 2019 and September 2022. Preoperative resilience was assessed using the Brief Resilience Scale. Demographic data at baseline including age, gender, comorbidities, and body mass index (BMI) were extracted. Patient-reported outcome measures including Oswestry Disability Index, PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) Global Physical Health, PROMIS Global Mental Health (GMH), and EuroQol5 scores were collected before the surgery and at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively. Bivariate correlation was conducted between Brief Resilience Scale scores and outcome measures at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients had baseline and 1 year outcome data. Compared with patients with high resilience, patients in the low-resilience group had a higher percentage of females (69.4% vs. 43.9%; P = 0.02), a higher BMI (32.7 vs. 30.1; P = 0.03), and lower preoperative Global Physical Health (35.8 vs. 38.9; P = 0.045), GMH (42.2 vs. 49.2; P < 0.001), and EuroQol scores (0.56 vs. 0.61; P = 0.01). At 3 months postoperatively, resilience was moderately correlated with GMH (r = 0.39) and EuroQol (r = 0.32). Similarly, at 1 year postoperatively, resilience was moderately correlated with GMH (r = 0.33) and EuroQol (r = 0.34). Comparable results were seen in multivariable regression analysis controlling for age, gender, number of levels fused, BMI, Charlson Comorbidity Index, procedure, anxiety/depression, and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Low preoperative resilience can negatively affect patient-reported outcomes 1 year after lumbar spinal fusion. Resiliency is a potentially modifiable risk factor, and surgeons should consider targeted interventions for at-risk patient groups.

Increased patient resilience scores are related to positive postoperative outcomes in rotator cuff repairs

HYPOTHESIS

We sought to determine whether patients' preoperative resilience scores predict postoperative outcomes in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively enrolled and underwent data collection preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Data collected included demographic characteristics and the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) score, visual analog scale score, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey scores (mental component [VR-12M] and physical component [VR-12P]), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score.

RESULTS

In total, 131 patients had complete 1- or 2-year postoperative outcome measures. Female patients comprised 56.5% of our sample, and the average age was 57.6 years. Between the low, normal, and high resilience groups, there were significant differences in the VR-12M scores at 0, 12, and 24 months postoperatively (P < .01 for all). The VR-12P scores at 12 months were 44.2, 47.4, and 49.8 in the low, normal, and high resilience groups, respectively, showing a trend upward, but this failed to reach the level of significance (P = .08). The SST scores of the low, normal, and high resilience groups at 12 months were 69.1, 79.9, and 85.1, respectively, again showing a trend upward, but this failed to reach the level of significance (P = .07). The SST scores at 0 and 24 months did not differ between groups. There were no significant differences in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, visual analog scale, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores at 0, 12, or 24 months postoperatively. We found a significant positive correlation between the BRS score and SST score at 12 months (R = 0.18), VR-12M score at 12 months (R = 0.38), VR-12M score at 24 months (R = 0.31), and VR-12P score at 12 months (R = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides evidence that BRS scores in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair are related to postoperative outcomes, measured through the VR-12M and SST scores at 2-year follow-up.

Analyzing Resilience in the Orthopedic Sports Medicine Patient Population

Little research has been done to compare resilience, as measured by the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), across common sports medicine patient populations. Our purpose was to investigate resilience levels across sports medicine patient populations. All patients who underwent reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACLR), partial meniscectomy (PM), meniscal repair (MR), rotator cuff repair (RCR), or shoulder stabilization (SS) between January 1 and June 30, 2020, were screened for inclusion. At our institution, BRS scores are routinely collected during the preoperative period. Patients with preoperative BRS scores available were included for analysis. Patients who were eligible on the basis of ACLR who underwent concomitant PM or MR were included in the ACL group. A total of 655 patients with a median age of 49 years were included in analysis. The median preoperative resilience score across all patients was 3.83 (interquartile range, 3.50-4.17), and the highest scores were seen in the ACLR group (median, 4.00; interquartile range, 3.67-4.17). On multivariate regression, scores were significantly and independently lower in the PM and RCR groups. Male patients were found to have significantly higher scores than female patients overall (P=.028), but in subgroup analysis by pathology, this effect was only seen in the SS and PM groups. Psychological factors are important to consider when surgically treating patients, and resilience specifically may play a role in predicting treatment success. Patients undergoing PM and RCR tend to report lower resilience scores than patients undergoing ACLR at preoperative baseline. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(2):95-100.].

Low Preoperative Brief Resilience Scale Scores Are Associated With Inferior Preoperative and Short-Term Postoperative Patient Outcomes Following Primary Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Purpose

To assess preoperative Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) scores as they relate to postoperative patient outcomes following primary autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

Methods

All patients who underwent primary autograft ACLR from 2016 to 2021 and had a patient-reported follow-up of 1 year and a clinical follow-up of 6 months were included in final data analysis. Patients completed validated PROMs pre- and postoperatively. All patients were objectively assessed with range of motion (ROM) and KT-1000 arthrometer testing. Return to sport (RTS) data were obtained for all applicable patients. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on ± ½ the standard deviation for the mean preoperative BRS score.

Results

In total, 170 patients who underwent primary autograft ACLR with a mean age of 20.1 years (range, 13-57 years) and a mean final follow-up time of 2.9 years (range, 1.0-5.8 years) were included in the final analysis. The mean preoperative BRS scores for the high-resilience (HR, n = 67), average-resilience (AR, n = 42), and low-resilience (LR, n = 61) groups were 28.1 (95% CI, 27.8-28.9), 24.5 (95% CI, 24.3-24.6), and 21.1 (95% CI, 20.5-21.7), respectively (P < .001). The HR group demonstrated significantly higher preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared to the AR and LR groups, with more differences seen with the LR group. The HR group demonstrated better knee extension in postoperative month 3 compared to the LR group (0.6° [95% CI, -1.2° to 0.1°] vs -2.3° [95% CI, -3.3° to -1.3°], P = .006). The HR group demonstrated a faster RTS time compared to the LR group (6.4 months [95% CI, 6.1-6.7] vs 7.6 months [95% CI, 7.1-8.1], P = .002). No differences were seen in RTS rate, knee flexion, or KT-1000 arthrometer measurements between the 3 groups.

Conclusions

Low preoperative BRS scores were associated with inferior PROMs preoperatively and in the short-term postoperative period compared to those with higher preoperative BRS scores. Additionally, patients with lower preoperative BRS scores demonstrated a higher degree of knee extension loss 3 months postoperatively as well as a slower RTS.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Psychometric Properties of Patient-reported Outcome Measures to Assess Resilience in Individuals with Musculoskeletal Pain or Rheumatic Conditions: A COSMIN-based Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess resilience in individuals with musculoskeletal and rheumatic conditions.

METHODS

Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) were searched. Studies assessing any measurement property in the target populations were included. Two reviewers independently screened all studies and assessed the risk of bias using the COSMIN checklist. Thereafter, each measurement property of each PROM was classified as sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent based on the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties.

RESULTS

Four families of PROMs [Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS); Resilience Scale (RS-18); Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2); and Pain Resilience Scale (PRS-14 and PRS-12)] were identified from the 9 included studies. Even if no PROM showed sufficient evidence for all measurement properties, the PRS and CD-RISC had the most properties evaluated and showed the best measurement properties, although responsiveness still needs to be assessed for both PROMs. Both PROMs showed good levels of reliability (intraclass coefficient correlation 0.61 to 0.8) and good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.70). Minimal detectable change values were 24.5% for PRS and between 4.7% and 29.8% for CD-RISC.

DISCUSSION

Although BRCS, RS-18, CD-RISC, and PRS have been used to evaluate resilience in individuals with musculoskeletal and rheumatic conditions, the current evidence only supports the use of PRS and CD-RISC in this population. Further methodological studies are therefore needed and should prioritize the assessment of reliability and responsiveness.

Novel Tools to Approach and Measure Outcomes in Patients with Fractures

Upper extremity fractures are prevalent and pose a great burden to patients and society. In the US alone, the annual incidence of upper extremity fractures is 67.6 fractures per 10,000 persons. While the majority of patients with upper extremity fractures demonstrate satisfactory outcomes when treated appropriately (the details of which are discussed in prior articles), the importance of follow-up and outcome measurement cannot be understated. Outcome measurement allows for accountability and improvement in clinical outcomes and research. The purpose of this article is to describe recent advances in methods and tools for assessing clinical and research outcomes in hand and upper extremity care. Three specific advances that are broadly changing the landscape of follow-up care of our patients include: 1) telemedicine, 2) patient-reported outcome measurement, and 3) wearables/remote patient monitoring.

Patients With Low Resilience Scores Have Significantly Worse Postoperative Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Than Patients With Normal or High Resilience Scores

Purpose

To evaluate the relationship between patient resilience and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) after primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

Methods

Patients who underwent an ACL reconstruction by a single surgeon between January 2012 and June 2020 were identified by an institutional query using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Patients were included if they (1) underwent a primary ACL reconstruction and (2) had a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. Data were retrospectively collected regarding demographics, surgical details, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and 12-item short form survey (SF-12) scores. Resilience scores were obtained via the Brief Resilience Scale questionnaire. Stratification into low (LR), normal (NR), and high resilience (HR) was based on standard deviation from mean Brief Resilience Scale score to determine differences in PROMS between groups.

Results

One-hundred eighty-seven patients were identified by the institutional query. Of the 187 patients, 180 met inclusion criteria. Seven patients underwent revision ACL reconstruction and were excluded from the study. One-hundred three patients (57.2%) completed the postoperative questionnaire and were included. Patients in the NR group and HR group had significantly greater postoperative SF-12 scores (P < .001) and lower postoperative VAS pain scores (P < .001) when compared with those of the LR group. This trend was again shown with breakdown of the SF-12 into physical and mental aspects, each of which were significantly greater in either the NR group or HR group when compared with the LR group (P < .001). Overall, 97.9% and 99.0% of patients had changes in their SF-12 total and VAS pain scores respectively that exceeded the minimal clinically important difference for the cohort.

Conclusions

Patients with lower resilience scores have worse PROMs and increased pain than patients with greater resilience at a minimum of 2-year follow-up after ACL reconstruction.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, prognostic case series.

Association of anxiety, depression and resilience with overall health and functioning in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA): a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the association between anxiety, depression and resilience with overall health and functioning in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional evaluation of baseline data from a prospective cohort study, with recruitment from January 2018 to March 2021.

SETTING

Outpatient clinic in a tertiary hospital in Singapore.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 21 years and above who were diagnosed with axSpA.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used for assessing anxiety and depression, 10-item Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10) for resilience, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) for disease activity, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) for functional limitation and Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society Health Index (ASAS HI) for overall health and functioning. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to assess the association between anxiety, depression and resilience with health and functioning.

RESULTS

We included 296 patients in this study. The median (IQR) score for HADS-Anxiety was 5.0 (2.0-8.0), with 13.5% and 13.9% having borderline abnormal and abnormal anxiety, respectively. The median (IQR) score for HADS-Depression was 3.0 (1.0-7.0), with 12.8% and 8.4% having borderline abnormal and abnormal depression, respectively. The median (IQR) CD-RISC-10 score was 29.0 (23.0-32.0) while the median (IQR) ASAS HI score was 4.0 (2.0-7.0). Apart from BASDAI, BASFI and disease duration, anxiety and depression were associated with overall health and functioning (β: 0.12, 95% CI 0.03, 0.20; β: 0.20, 95% CI 0.09, 0.31) in the multivariable linear regression. Level of resilience was not associated with health and functioning.

CONCLUSION

Anxiety and depression, but not resilience, were associated with poorer health and functioning. Clinicians could consider routinely screening for anxiety and depression in their patients, especially in patients with more severe symptoms.

Economic and educational disparities are associated with an increased risk of revision surgery following shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

There is limited literature exploring how nonmedical factors such as social determinants of health (SDOHs) are associated with postoperative outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort review of the Pearl Diver Database was used to capture patients undergoing either primary anatomic total or reverse shoulder arthroplasty from the fourth quarter of 2015 to the third quarter of 2019 with at least 1 year of active longitudinal follow-up. Patients with proximal humeral fractures, stress fractures, or septic arthritis were excluded. The included patients were then divided into 2 cohorts based on the presence of current SDOHs or a history of SDOHs. The SDOH cohort comprised 4 non-mutually exclusive categories: economic, educational, social, and environmental disparities. Subsequently, a control cohort was matched at a 1:1 ratio to the SDOH cohort. Primary outcome measures were assessed using a logistic regression and consisted of the following 90-day postoperative complications: minor and major medical complications and infection. Emergency department (ED) visits and readmissions for any cause were also assessed. Additionally, the following 1-year outcomes were assessed: aseptic loosening, instability, and revision arthroplasty. Surgical costs and 90-day postoperative costs were collected using averaged insurance reimbursements for both the control and SDOH cohorts.

RESULTS

There were 5190 patients in each cohort. Economic disparities made up the largest portion of the SDOH cohort (n = 4631, 89.2%), followed by social (n = 741, 14.3%), environmental (n = 417, 8.0%), and educational (n = 99, 1.9%) disparities. Compared with the control cohort, SDOHs were associated with an increased risk of major complications (2.3% vs. 1.4%; odds ratio [OR], 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-1.87; P < .001), minor complications (5.7% vs. 3.8%; OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.21-1.95; P = .001), readmissions (4.3% vs. 2.8%; OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.26-1.84; P < .001), and ED visits (15.2% vs. 11.0%; OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.29-1.63; P < .001) within 90 days following surgery. Additionally, SDOHs were associated with an increased risk of aseptic loosening (1.1% vs. 0.6%; OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.20-2.65; P = .006), instability (4.0% vs. 2.2%; OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.43-2.28; P < .001), and ipsilateral revision (9.2% vs. 7.6%; OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.43; P < .001) at 1 year postoperatively compared with the control cohort.

CONCLUSION

SDOHs are associated with increased rates of adverse outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty including revision surgery, ED visits, length of stay, and overall cost compared with matched controls without SDOHs. Specifically, economic and educational disparities are associated with increased rates of adverse outcomes following surgery including revision surgery, ED visits, length of stay, and overall cost.

Associating Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy With Patient Resilience

Background

Higher patient resilience has been shown to be associated with improved patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 6 months after hip arthroscopy.

Purpose

To examine the relationship between patient resilience and PROMs at minimum 2 years after hip arthroscopy.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Included were 89 patients (mean age, 36.9 years; mean follow-up, 4.6 years). Patient demographics, surgical details, and preoperative International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were collected retrospectively. Postoperative variables were collected via a survey and included the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), Patient Activation Measure-13 (PAM-13), Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire-2 (PSEQ-2), VAS satisfaction, and postoperative iHOT-12, and VAS pain scores. Based on the number of standard deviations from the mean BRS score, patients were stratified as having low resilience (LR; n = 18), normal resilience (NR; n = 48), and high resilience (HR; n = 23). Differences in PROMs were compared between the groups, and a multivariate regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between pre- to postoperative change (Δ) in PROMs and patient resilience.

Results

There were significantly more smokers in the LR group compared with the NR and HR groups (P = .033). Compared with the NR and HR groups, patients in the LR group had significantly more labral repairs (P = .006), significantly worse postoperative iHOT-12, VAS pain, VAS satisfaction, PAM-13, and PSEQ-2 scores (P < .001 for all), and significantly lower ΔVAS pain and ΔiHOT-12 scores (P = .01 and .032, respectively). Regression analysis showed significant associations between ΔVAS pain and NR (β = -22.50 [95% CI, -38.81 to -6.19]; P = .008) as well as HR (β = -28.31 [95% CI, -46.96 to -9.67; P = .004) and between ΔiHOT-12 and NR (β = 18.94 [95% CI, 6.33 to 31.55]; P = .004) as well as HR (β = 20.63 [95% CI, 6.21 to 35.05]; P = .006). Male sex was a significant predictor of ΔiHOT-12 (β = -15.05 [95% CI, -25.42 to -4.69]; P = .006).

Conclusion

The study results indicate that lower postoperative resilience scores were associated with significantly worse PROM scores, including pain and satisfaction, at 2 years after hip arthroscopy.

Does glenohumeral offset affect clinical outcomes in a lateralized reverse total shoulder arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) exhibits high rates of success and low complication rates. rTSA has undergone numerous design adaptations over recent years, and lateralization of implant components provides theoretical and biomechanical benefits in stability and range of motion (ROM) as well as decreased rates of notching. However, the magnitude of implant lateralization and its effect on these outcomes is less well understood. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how increasing glenohumeral offset affects outcomes after rTSA, specifically in a lateralized humerus + medialized glenoid implant model.

METHODS

Primary rTSA using a lateralized humeral + medialized glenoid implant model performed at a single academic institution between 2012 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) parameters and clinical outcomes including ROM were evaluated both pre- and postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were analyzed for measurement of glenohumeral offset, defined as the acromial-tuberosity offset (ATO) distance on the anteroposterior radiograph.

RESULTS

A total of 130 rTSAs were included in the analysis, with a mean follow-up of 35 mo. The mean postoperative absolute ATO was 16 mm, and the mean delta ATO (difference from pre- to postoperatively) was 4.6 mm further lateralized. Among all study patients, improvements in all ROM parameters and all PROs were observed from pre- to postoperative assessments. When assessing for the effects of lateralization on these outcomes, multivariate analysis failed to reveal a significant effect from the absolute postoperative ATO or the delta ATO on any outcome parameter.

CONCLUSIONS

rTSA using a lateralized humeral + medialized glenoid implant model exhibits excellent clinical outcomes in ROM and PROs. However, the magnitude of lateralization as measured radiographically by the ATO did not significantly affect these outcomes; patients exhibited universally good outcomes irrespective of the degree of offset restoration.

Does reverse shoulder arthroplasty improve emotional status and quality of life in patients with rotator cuff insufficiency? Prospective sequential follow-up study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate sequential changes of emotional status and quality of life after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for rotator cuff insufficiency and to determine the predictors that can affect postoperative clinical outcomes. This study was conducted to prove the hypothesis that RSA would improve emotional status and quality of life.

METHODS

Fifty patients undergoing RSA for rotator cuff insufficiency were prospectively included. Evaluation using the visual analog scale pain score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, subjective shoulder value, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Abbreviated scale of World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF) was performed before surgery and at 1.5, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The mean visual analog scale pain score, HADS-depression score, and HADS-anxiety score showed a significant decrease from 6.6, 13.3, and 13.9 before surgery to 1.5, 3.9, and 3.7 after 12 months after surgery, respectively (all P < .001). The mean ASES score, WHOQOL-BREF score, and subjective shoulder value showed a significant improvement from 28.5, 32.3, and 23.6% to 81.3, 79.1, and 78.4%, respectively (all P < .001). All outcome measurements showed a significant improvement from 6 weeks after RSA. In multivariate analysis, age was an independent predictor of the final ASES score and WHOQOL-BREF score (P = .037 and .004, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study showed a sequential improvement of emotional status and quality of life as well as functional recovery with pain relief from 6 weeks after RSA in patients with rotator cuff insufficiency. Especially, younger patients had better postoperative functional ability and quality of life. These findings suggest that RSA for rotator cuff insufficiency provides a rapid improvement of emotional status and quality of life.

Can the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) be used as a stand-alone outcome instrument in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

There is no consensus as to which patient-determined shoulder outcome scores should be considered when analyzing patient outcomes for either clinical or research purposes. Use of multiple patient-determined outcomes may be redundant and cause increased responder burden. To date, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) has not been widely accepted as a stand-alone shoulder-specific outcome measure. The hypothesis of this study was that the SANE would correlate with and be equal or superior in responsiveness to other outcome measures that have been used in a stand-alone fashion in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES], Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder [WOOS], and Simple Shoulder Test [SST] scores). In addition, it was hypothesized that the SANE would be more relevant to each patient than the ASES assessment, further supporting the use of the SANE as a stand-alone shoulder-specific outcome measure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a database of patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty was performed, in which the SANE score was recorded simultaneously with the ASES, WOOS, and/or SST score. Correlations were determined using the Pearson coefficient. Subgroup analysis was performed to determine whether correlations differed in (1) preoperative outcome and (2) postoperative outcome determinations. Responsiveness was determined by calculating the standardized response mean and the effect size of all scores. The relevance of the SANE and ASES assessments was examined using the scores of 150 consecutive patients to determine the number of questions on each assessment that were not answered.

RESULTS

Correlation was excellent for the SANE score and the ASES score (n = 1447, r = 0.82, P < .0001), WOOS score (n = 1514, r = 0.83, P < .0001), and SST score (n = 1095, r = 0.81, P < .0001). The correlation of preoperative scores was moderate and that of postoperative scores was strong-moderate when the SANE score was compared with all 3 other scores. All scores were highly responsive, with standardized response mean values of 2.2 for the SANE score, 2.3 for the ASES score, 1.4 for the WOOS score, and 1.6 for the SST score. The effect size of the SANE score was 2.9; ASES score, 2.9; WOOS score, 2.9; and SST score, 2.3. One hundred percent of the SANE questions were answered completely compared with 61% of the ASES questions (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty, the SANE score highly correlated with the WOOS, ASES, and SST scores, which have been used as stand-alone shoulder-specific outcome measures. The SANE score may provide the same information as the WOOS, ASES, and SST score regarding outcomes with a significant reduction in responder burden. It is logical that the SANE can be used as a stand-alone instrument for patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty.

Assessment of intraoperative bleeding in reverse shoulder arthroplasty - with or without a stem

INTRODUCTION

The functional results of stemless reverse shoulder prostheses are similar to those with stems. However, the operative time and the bleeding appear less significant because of the absence of humeral reaming. To date, the data amongst the literature regarding this subject is limited. Thus, we report a retrospective evaluation on these 2 types of prostheses by assessing their respective intraoperative blood loss.

HYPOTHESIS

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty without a stem leads to less blood loss, compared to arthroplasty with a stem.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-three patients underwent an operation for a stemless prosthesis, while 37 patients had a prosthesis with a stem. The hemoglobin was measured preoperatively, as well as postoperatively. Drainage of the operative site was maintained for two to three days. In the stem group, the preoperative hemoglobin was 14g/dL (11.7-16.6), while it was 13.1g/dL (11-15.8) in the stemless group.

RESULTS

The intraoperative bleeding reached 223cm³ (80-530), with an operative duration of 81minutes (40-110) in the stemless group, compared to 260cm³ (50-1000) and 92minutes (33-110) in the stem group. On the first day postoperatively, 333cm³ (20-570) of blood had been collected by drainage for the stemless group, compared to 279cm³ (40-550) in the stem group. The amount decreased the second day, with 139cm³ (20-510) and 129cm³ (0-750) respectively. There was no difference between the two groups regarding the postoperative hemoglobin level (11g/dL).

DISCUSSION

There is no significant difference concerning the blood loss between reverse shoulder replacements with and without stems.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III Retrospective case control study.

Preoperative Resilience and Early Postoperative Outcomes following Lumbar Spinal Fusion

BACKGROUND

Previous studies identified a correlation between preoperative resilience scores and patient reported outcome measures in several surgical subspecialities. No previous studies, to our knowledge, have analyzed preoperative resilience and patient reported outcomes in lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

Patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion completed the brief resilience scale preoperatively, in addition to measures of disability (Oswestry Disability index (ODI)), quality of life (PROMIS global physical and mental health scales and EuroQOL5], and leg and back pain (VAS) at pre- and 3-months postoperatively. The 3-month follow-up was selected due to the association with return to work. Multiple linear regression evaluated relationships between resilience and postoperative changes in outcomes measures, controlling for baseline values and body mass index, age, number of levels fused, and severity of comorbidities.

RESULTS

Ninety-five participants (mean age = 58 years, 56% male) completed the BRS preoperatively and outcome measures before and 3-months after lumbar fusion. On average, participants reported significant postoperative improvements on all outcome measures (p<.001). Higher preoperative resilience scores related to greater postoperative improvements in back and leg pain, global mental and physical health and EuroQol scores (p<0.05), after controlling for baseline values and other covariates. Resilience scores did not significantly correlate with postoperative changes in ODI (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative resilience is associated with improvement in pain, physical and mental health quality of life during the early postoperative period following lumbar spinal fusion. Additional research is needed to determine if improvements are maintained beyond this interval and whether resilience can be modified to optimize outcomes.