Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 6/2017

01-06-2017 | Original Article

Factors affecting the outcome in appearance of AIS surgery in terms of the minimal clinically important difference

Authors: James T. Bennett, Amer F. Samdani, Tracey P. Bastrom, Robert J. Ames, Firoz Miyanji, Joshua M. Pahys, Michelle C. Marks, Baron S. Lonner, Peter O. Newton, Harry L. Shufflebarger, Burt Yaszay, John M. Flynn, Randal R. Betz, Patrick J. Cahill

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 6/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Appearance domain of the SRS-22 questionnaire is an increase ≥1.0 in surgically treated patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, no study has sought to identify the factors associated with an SRS-22 Appearance score increase greater than the MCID at 2 years.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively collected multicenter database of 1020 surgically treated AIS patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were divided into two cohorts: “I” = Improved after surgery (Δ Appearance ≥1.0) and “NI” = Not improved after surgery (Δ Appearance <1.0). Univariate regression was used to find a significant difference between the cohorts for individual measures. Multivariate logistic regression was used to find continuous predictors.

Results

663 (65%) patients were improved greater than the MCID, and 357 were not improved (35%). The improved cohort trended toward a greater percentage of underweight patients (p = 0.074) with lower preoperative SRS Appearance scores (p < 0.001) and larger preoperative trunk shifts (p = 0.033). Postoperatively, those patients with greater percent correction of thoracic (p = 0.021) and lumbar (p = 0.003) Cobb angles, smaller apical lumbar translation (p = 0.006), and a greater correction in trunk shift (p = 0.003) were most likely to attain the MCID.

Conclusion

Several factors influence which patients are most likely to attain the MCID following surgery for AIS. Factors such as preoperative appearance scores and body weight are patient specific; other factors such as percent correction of the thoracic and lumbar Cobb angles, trunk shift, and lumbar apical translation may be influenced by the surgeon.

Level of evidence

II.
Literature
4.
go back to reference Asher MA, Min Lai S, Burton DC (2000) Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:2381–2386CrossRef Asher MA, Min Lai S, Burton DC (2000) Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:2381–2386CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Berven S, Deviren V, Demir-Deviren S, Hu SS, Bradford DS (2003) Studies in the modified Scoliosis Research Society Outcomes Instrument in adults: validation, reliability, and discriminatory capacity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:2164–2169. doi:10.1097/01.BRS.0000084666.53553.D6 discussion 2169 CrossRef Berven S, Deviren V, Demir-Deviren S, Hu SS, Bradford DS (2003) Studies in the modified Scoliosis Research Society Outcomes Instrument in adults: validation, reliability, and discriminatory capacity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:2164–2169. doi:10.​1097/​01.​BRS.​0000084666.​53553.​D6 discussion 2169 CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Bridwell KH, Berven S, Glassman S, Hamill C, Horton WC 3rd, Lenke LG, Schwab F, Baldus C, Shainline M (2007) Is the SRS-22 instrument responsive to change in adult scoliosis patients having primary spinal deformity surgery? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:2220–2225. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e31814cf120 CrossRef Bridwell KH, Berven S, Glassman S, Hamill C, Horton WC 3rd, Lenke LG, Schwab F, Baldus C, Shainline M (2007) Is the SRS-22 instrument responsive to change in adult scoliosis patients having primary spinal deformity surgery? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:2220–2225. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e31814cf120​ CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Bridwell KH, Cats-Baril W, Harrast J, Berven S, Glassman S, Farcy JP, Horton WC, Lenke LG, Baldus C, Radake T (2005) The validity of the SRS-22 instrument in an adult spinal deformity population compared with the Oswestry and SF-12: a study of response distribution, concurrent validity, internal consistency, and reliability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:455–461CrossRef Bridwell KH, Cats-Baril W, Harrast J, Berven S, Glassman S, Farcy JP, Horton WC, Lenke LG, Baldus C, Radake T (2005) The validity of the SRS-22 instrument in an adult spinal deformity population compared with the Oswestry and SF-12: a study of response distribution, concurrent validity, internal consistency, and reliability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:455–461CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Glattes RC, Burton DC, Lai SM, Frasier E, Asher MA (2007) The reliability and concurrent validity of the Scoliosis Research Society-22r patient questionnaire compared with the Child Health Questionnaire-CF87 patient questionnaire for adolescent spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:1778–1784. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3180dc9bb2 CrossRef Glattes RC, Burton DC, Lai SM, Frasier E, Asher MA (2007) The reliability and concurrent validity of the Scoliosis Research Society-22r patient questionnaire compared with the Child Health Questionnaire-CF87 patient questionnaire for adolescent spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:1778–1784. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e3180dc9bb2​ CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, Manna B (2002) Spine deformity correlates better than trunk deformity with idiopathic scoliosis patients’ quality of life questionnaire responses. Stud Health Technol Inform 91:462–464PubMed Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, Manna B (2002) Spine deformity correlates better than trunk deformity with idiopathic scoliosis patients’ quality of life questionnaire responses. Stud Health Technol Inform 91:462–464PubMed
12.
go back to reference Berliner JL, Verma K, Lonner BS, Penn PU, Bharucha NJ (2012) Discriminative validity of the Scoliosis Research Society 22 questionnaire among five curve-severity subgroups of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine J. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2012.10.025 PubMed Berliner JL, Verma K, Lonner BS, Penn PU, Bharucha NJ (2012) Discriminative validity of the Scoliosis Research Society 22 questionnaire among five curve-severity subgroups of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine J. doi:10.​1016/​j.​spinee.​2012.​10.​025 PubMed
14.
go back to reference Verma K, Lonner B, Hoashi JS, Lafage V, Dean L, Engel I, Goldstein Y (2010) Demographic factors affect Scoliosis Research Society-22 performance in healthy adolescents: a comparative baseline for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:2134–2139. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cb474f CrossRef Verma K, Lonner B, Hoashi JS, Lafage V, Dean L, Engel I, Goldstein Y (2010) Demographic factors affect Scoliosis Research Society-22 performance in healthy adolescents: a comparative baseline for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:2134–2139. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e3181cb474f​ CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10:407–415CrossRefPubMed Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10:407–415CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, Berven S, Schuler TC, Carreon LY (2008) Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J 8:968–974. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2007.11.006 CrossRefPubMed Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, Berven S, Schuler TC, Carreon LY (2008) Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J 8:968–974. doi:10.​1016/​j.​spinee.​2007.​11.​006 CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Diab M, Sucato DJ, Sturm PF, Glassman SD (2010) The minimum clinically important difference in Scoliosis Research Society-22 appearance, activity, and pain domains after surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:2079–2083. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c61fd7 CrossRef Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Diab M, Sucato DJ, Sturm PF, Glassman SD (2010) The minimum clinically important difference in Scoliosis Research Society-22 appearance, activity, and pain domains after surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:2079–2083. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e3181c61fd7​ CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Rushton PR, Grevitt MP (2013) What is the effect of surgery on the quality of life of the adolescent with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? A review and statistical analysis of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:786–794. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182837c95 CrossRef Rushton PR, Grevitt MP (2013) What is the effect of surgery on the quality of life of the adolescent with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? A review and statistical analysis of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:786–794. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e3182837c95​ CrossRef
20.
21.
go back to reference Crawford CH 3rd, Glassman SD, Bridwell KH, Berven SH, Carreon LY (2015) The minimum clinically important difference in SRS-22R total score, appearance, activity and pain domains after surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:377–381. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000761 CrossRef Crawford CH 3rd, Glassman SD, Bridwell KH, Berven SH, Carreon LY (2015) The minimum clinically important difference in SRS-22R total score, appearance, activity and pain domains after surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:377–381. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0000000000000761​ CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE (1994) Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 47:81–87CrossRefPubMed Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE (1994) Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 47:81–87CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Bridwell KH, Shufflebarger HL, Lenke LG, Lowe TG, Betz RR, Bassett GS (2000) Parents’ and patients’ preferences and concerns in idiopathic adolescent scoliosis: a cross-sectional preoperative analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:2392–2399CrossRef Bridwell KH, Shufflebarger HL, Lenke LG, Lowe TG, Betz RR, Bassett GS (2000) Parents’ and patients’ preferences and concerns in idiopathic adolescent scoliosis: a cross-sectional preoperative analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:2392–2399CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Pérez-Prieto D, Sánchez-Soler JF, Martínez-Llorens J, Mojal S, Bagó J, Cáceres E, Ramírez M (2015) Poor outcomes and satisfaction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: the relevance of the body mass index and self-image. Eur Spine J 24:276–280. doi:10.1007/s00586-014-3486-5 CrossRefPubMed Pérez-Prieto D, Sánchez-Soler JF, Martínez-Llorens J, Mojal S, Bagó J, Cáceres E, Ramírez M (2015) Poor outcomes and satisfaction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: the relevance of the body mass index and self-image. Eur Spine J 24:276–280. doi:10.​1007/​s00586-014-3486-5 CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Sharma S, Bunger CE, Andersen T, Sun H, Wu C, Hansen ES (2015) Do postoperative radiographically verified technical success, improved cosmesis, and trunk shift corroborate with patient-reported outcomes in Lenke 1C adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Eur Spine J 24:1462–1472. doi:10.1007/s00586-014-3688-x CrossRefPubMed Sharma S, Bunger CE, Andersen T, Sun H, Wu C, Hansen ES (2015) Do postoperative radiographically verified technical success, improved cosmesis, and trunk shift corroborate with patient-reported outcomes in Lenke 1C adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Eur Spine J 24:1462–1472. doi:10.​1007/​s00586-014-3688-x CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Haher TR, Merola A, Zipnick RI, Gorup J, Mannor D, Orchowski J (1995) Meta-analysis of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A 35-year English literature review of 11,000 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20:1575–1584CrossRef Haher TR, Merola A, Zipnick RI, Gorup J, Mannor D, Orchowski J (1995) Meta-analysis of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A 35-year English literature review of 11,000 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20:1575–1584CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Singla A, Bennett JT, Sponseller PD, Pahys JM, Marks MC, Lonner BS, Newton PO, Miyanji F, Betz RR, Cahill PJ, Samdani AF (2014) Results of selective thoracic vs. non-selective fusion in Lenke type 3 curves. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:2034–2041. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000623 CrossRef Singla A, Bennett JT, Sponseller PD, Pahys JM, Marks MC, Lonner BS, Newton PO, Miyanji F, Betz RR, Cahill PJ, Samdani AF (2014) Results of selective thoracic vs. non-selective fusion in Lenke type 3 curves. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:2034–2041. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0000000000000623​ CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Koch KD, Buchanan R, Birch JG, Morton AA, Gatchel RJ, Browne RH (2001) Adolescents undergoing surgery for idiopathic scoliosis: how physical and psychological characteristics relate to patient satisfaction with the cosmetic result. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:2119–2124CrossRef Koch KD, Buchanan R, Birch JG, Morton AA, Gatchel RJ, Browne RH (2001) Adolescents undergoing surgery for idiopathic scoliosis: how physical and psychological characteristics relate to patient satisfaction with the cosmetic result. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:2119–2124CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Factors affecting the outcome in appearance of AIS surgery in terms of the minimal clinically important difference
Authors
James T. Bennett
Amer F. Samdani
Tracey P. Bastrom
Robert J. Ames
Firoz Miyanji
Joshua M. Pahys
Michelle C. Marks
Baron S. Lonner
Peter O. Newton
Harry L. Shufflebarger
Burt Yaszay
John M. Flynn
Randal R. Betz
Patrick J. Cahill
Publication date
01-06-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 6/2017
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4857-x

Other articles of this Issue 6/2017

European Spine Journal 6/2017 Go to the issue