Search

To determine whether the reported pain severity changed significantly on the basis of specific types of pain questions posed to patients with spine augmentation.Institutional review board approval and patient consent were obtained for this HIPAA-compliant, prospective study. Patients presenting for consideration of spine augmentation between November 2008 and May 2009 were enrolled. Twenty-four patients were asked at initial presentation and at 30 days to grade their severity of back pain on a 10-point numeric rating scale in response to nine pain questions modified by the relative severity (most vs least severe), by activity (at rest vs with activity), and over time (previous day vs previous week). Statistical analysis included paired t tests to detect any differences in responses to the questions at both time points.Of the 24 patients, 15 (63%) underwent spine augmentation. For patients undergoing spine augmentation, baseline mean numeric rating score for "worst pain with activity over the past week" was 8.9 ± 1.5 (standard deviation), compared with 2.9 ± 2.7 for "least pain at rest over the past day" (P = .001). Interval change between baseline and 30-day assessments was relatively small for all nine questions (mean, 1.6; range, 0.2-2.2); the mean difference for eight of the nine questions did not reach statistical significance. The modifiers worst versus least and with activity versus at rest had a significant impact on the reported severity, while previous week versus previous day had minimal impact.Wide variation in the reported pain can be achieved simply by modifying specific pain questions to patients with spine augmentation.

To determine if operator variability, prior vertebroplasty experience, or acquired vertebroplasty experience affects clinical outcomes.Informed consent was obtained from all patients and all data were handled in a manner consistent with institutional review board guidelines and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Outcomes from 841 vertebroplasties, sorted by operator, were studied; two operators had previous vertebroplasty experience and five were neurointerventionalists who were initially new to the procedure. Objective (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire [RDQ] and analog pain scales) and subjective (mobility, narcotic use) scores were monitored before and after vertebroplasty at specified intervals following treatment. Perioperative cement volume utilization, complications, and number of treated levels were recorded. Random-effects and repeated-measures analyses of variance were used to assess operator differences and variability in clinical outcomes while generalized linear mixed-model regression analyses were used to track changes in clinical outcomes over time.All operators provided similar average durable clinical improvements in postoperative pain and disability with nonsignificant interoperator variability. However, generalized linear model regression suggests that four of five initially novice operators showed significant changes in several procedural measures and clinical outcomes over the study timeframe, including cement volume utilization (reduction of 3.64 to 4.63 cm(3)), 1 week RDQ score (reduction of 4.79 to 8.62 points) and postoperative rest pain (reduction of 1.18 to 2.03 points).Changes over time in measured outcomes suggest the presence of a training effect among novice operators. Cement volume utilization and immediate postprocedural pain decrease with experience but long-term clinical outcomes are insensitive to operator experience.