Search

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most common reason for spine surgery in older people. However, surgery rates vary widely both internationally and nationally. This study compared patient and sociodemographic characteristics, geographical location and comorbidity between surgically and non-surgically treated Danish patients diagnosed with LSS from 2002 to 2018 and described variations over time., Methods: Diagnostic ICD-10 codes identifying patients with LSS and surgical procedure codes for decompression with or without fusion were retrieved from the Danish National Patient Register. Patients ≥ 18 years who had been admitted to private or public hospitals in Denmark between 2002 and 2018 were included. Data on age, sex, income, retirement status, geographical region and comorbidity were extracted. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to calculate the relative risk for surgically versus non-surgically treated LSS patients using the total population and subsequently divided into three time periods. Variations over time were displayed graphically., Results: A total of 83,783 unique patients with an LSS diagnosis were identified, and of these, 38,362 (46%) underwent decompression surgery. Compared to those who did not receive surgery, the surgically treated patients were more likely to be aged 65-74 years, were less likely to have comorbidities, had higher income and were more likely to reside in the northern part of Denmark. Patients aged 65-74 years remained more likely to receive surgery over time, although the difference between age groups eventually diminished, as older patients (aged ≥ 75) were increasingly more likely to undergo surgery. Large variations and differences in the relative risk of surgery were observed within and between the geographical regions. The likelihood of receiving surgery varied up to threefold between regions., Conclusion: Danish patients with LSS who receive surgery differ in a number of respects from those not receiving surgery. Patients aged 65 to 74 years were more likely to receive surgery than other age groups, and LSS surgical patients were healthier, more often retired and had higher incomes than those not undergoing surgery. There were considerable variations in the relative risk of surgery between and within geographical regions., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background and Purpose: Over the last decades, many countries have shown increased surgery rates for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), but little information is available from Denmark. We describe the development in diagnosis and surgery of LSS in Denmark between 2002 and 2018., Patients and Methods: We collected diagnostic ICD10-codes and surgical procedure codes from private and public hospitals in Denmark from the Danish National Patient Register. Patients diagnosed with LSS and those with surgical procedure codes for decompression surgery with or without fusion were identified. Annual surgery rates were stratified by age, sex, and type of surgery., Results: During these 17 years, 132,138 patients diagnosed with LSS and 43,454 surgical procedures for LSS were identified. The number of surgical procedures increased by 144%, from 23 to 56 per 100,000 inhabitants. The proportion of patients diagnosed with LSS who received surgery was about 33%, which was almost stable over time. Decompression without fusion increased by 128% from 18 to 40 per 100,000 inhabitants and decompression with fusion increased by 199%, from 5 to 15 per 100,000., Interpretation: Both the prevalence of LSS diagnoses and LSS surgery rates more than doubled in Denmark between 2002 and 2018. However, the proportion of patients diagnosed with LSS who received surgery remained stable. Decompression surgery with fusion increased at a higher rate than decompression without fusion, although recent evidence suggests no advantage of decompression plus fusion over decompression alone.

Study Design: Registry-based repeated-measures psychometric validation of the Danish Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)., Objective: The goal was to use classical and modern psychometric validation methods to assess the measurement properties and the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of the ODI in a Danish cohort of patients with chronic low back pain being treated with spinal surgery., Summary of Background Data: Scores for the ODI, EQ-5D, SF-36, leg pain, back pain, and a general rating of pain item from 800 patients with chronic low back pain were extracted from the National Danish Spine Registry (DaneSpine) at baseline and 1-year postspine surgery., Methods: Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) models were used to assess the psychometric properties of the ODI. MCID was also calculated based on generic legacy PROMs (EQ-5D and SF-36) and follow-up pain scores., Results: While ODI did not fit a Rasch model, adequate fit to a confirmatory factor analysis and a two-parameter item response theory model was found when accounting for differential item functioning across diagnostic subgroups (degenerative spondylolisthesis, spondylosis, spinal stenosis, and herniated intervertebral disc). In addition, each group exhibited substantially different MCID values., Conclusion: The Danish version of the ODI is valid and responsive, but only within each of the four major diagnosis subgroups: degenerative spondylolisthesis, spondylosis, spinal stenosis, and herniated intervertebral disc., Level of Evidence: 4.

Purpose: To summarize the recommendations from the national clinical guideline published by the Danish Health Authority regarding surgical and nonsurgical interventions in treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in patients above the age of 65 years., Methods: A multidisciplinary working group formulated recommendations based on the GRADE approach., Results: Seven of the recommendations were based on randomized controlled trials and three on professional consensus. The guideline recommends surgical decompression for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Supervised exercise and postsurgical supervised exercise are recommended due to the general beneficial effects of training on general health, even though there was no evidence on an effect on neurogenic pain. The guideline does not recommend manual therapy, paracetamol, NSAIDs, opioids, neurogenic pain medication, muscle relaxants, and decompression combined with instrumented fusion as there was no evidence of the beneficial effect., Conclusion: The recommendations are based on low to very low quality of evidence or professional consensus as well as patient preferences and positive or harmful effects of the intervention. The true treatment effect may therefore be different from the estimated effects, which is why the results should be interpreted with caution. The working group recommends intensified research in relation to all aspects of management of lumbar spinal stenosis. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Introduction: Lumbar spinal stenosis is a common cause of low back and leg pain in the elderly and affects both physical activity and quality of life. First-line treatments are non-surgical options but if unsuccessful, surgery is advocated. The literature is not clear as to the outcome of surgery compared with non-surgical treatment, and the optimal time for surgery is not explicit. This observational study is designed to investigate the course of treatment, compare effectiveness of surgical and non-surgical management in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and identify prognostic factors for outcome in the context of current clinical practice., Materials and Analysis: Prospectively registered data on treatment, outcome and patient characteristics are collected from nationwide registers on health and social issues, a clinical registry of people with chronic back pain and hospital medical records. Primary outcome is change in physical function measured by the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are changes in symptom severity, pain-related function, health-related quality of life and general self-efficacy. Outcomes are assessed at baseline and 6 and 12 months. Outcomes at 12 months will be compared for patients who undergo surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis and patients managed non-surgically, using different analytical approaches. Prespecified prognostic factors of interest at baseline include treatment allocation, back and leg pain intensity, comorbidity, duration of symptoms, pretreatment function, self-rated health, income, general self-efficacy and MRI-graded severity of central stenosis., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has been evaluated by the Regional Committees on Health Research for Southern Denmark (S-20172000-200) and notified to the Danish Data Protection Agency (18/22336). All participants provide consent. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and presented at national and international conferences according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Prognosis Research Strategy statements. Potential sources of bias will be addressed using Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions., Trial Registration Number: NCT03548441; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: TM and BS-C have nothing to disclose. HAB reports unrestricted grants from the University of Southern Denmark, the Region of Southern Denmark, the University College of Southern Denmark and non-financial support from Spine Centre of Southern Denmark, during the conduct of the study. RC reports non-financial support from Board membership, grants from Consultancy (AbbVie, Amgen, Axellus A/S, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cambridge Weight Plan, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, MSD, Norpharma, Novartis, Orkla Health, Pfizer, Roche, Sobi, Takeda), personal fees from Employment (Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy, Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark), non-financial support from Expert testimony, grants from grants/grants pending (Axellus A/S, AbbVie, Cambridge Weight Plan, Janssen, MSD, Mundipharma, Novartis and Roche), grants from payment for lectures including service on speakers bureaus (Abbott, Amgen, Axellus, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Biogen Idec, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cambridge Weight Plan, Ipsen, Janssen, Laboratoires Expanscience, MSD, Mundipharma, Norpharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Rottapharm-Madaus, Sobi and Wyeth), grants from payment for manuscript preparation (Axellus, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Cambridge Weight Plan, Aleris-Hamlet (via Norpharma)), non-financial support from Patents (planned, pending or issued), non-financial support from Royalties, grants from payment for development of educational presentations (Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer), non-financial support from stock/stock options, grants from travel/accommodations/meeting expenses unrelated to activities listed (Abbott, AbbVie, Axellus, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cambridge Weight Plan, Celgene, Laboratoires Expanscience, Norpharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Rottapharm-Madaus and Wyeth), non-financial support from Other (err on the side of full disclosure), outside the submitted work and is involved in many healthcare initiatives and research that could benefit from wide uptake of this publication (including Cochrane, OMERACT, IDEOM, RADS and the GRADE Working Group). Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute is grateful for the financial support received from public and private foundations, companies and private individuals over the years. The Parker Institute is supported by a core grant from the Oak Foundation; The Oak Foundation is a group of philanthropic organisations that, since its establishment in 1983, has given grants to not-for-profit organisations around the world., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)