Skip to main content

SRS-22r question 11 is a valid opioid screen and stratifies opioid consumption

Abstract

Purpose

To validate the Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r) question 11 (Q11) response as a measure to assess and quantify opioid consumption.

Methods

A post hoc analysis of a prospective study regarding opioid use during ASD surgery was performed. Data were collected at enrollment and 2-year follow-up including the SRS-22r and a standardized data collection form (CRF) for self-reported opioid consumption. Responses to Q11 of the SS-22r were compared with responses to the opioid consumption CRF (as measured by morphine equivalent dose (MED)). Inter-rater agreement was calculated. Sensitivity and specificity for the Q11 (+) responses were calculated using MED reports as the “true” value.

Results

Cohen’s kappa indicated almost perfect agreement between the MED CRF and Q11 (k = 0.878, p < 0.001). Mean daily MED consumption for patients reporting “Daily Narcotic” use was 62.0 (Median: 38.7, SD 87.5) mg; for patients reporting “Narcotics weekly or less”, mean daily MED consumption was 21.6 (15.0, 29.0) mg. The positive Q11 responses were 96% sensitive and 92% specific for opioid users.

Conclusion

SRS-22r Q11 exhibits almost perfect agreement with an independent questionnaire designed to assess opioid consumption in this cohort. “Daily narcotic” users report nearly three times the mean daily MED of “Weekly or less” users (62.0 ± 87.5 mg vs 21.6 ± 29 mg, p = 0.037). Q11 exhibited excellent sensitivity and specificity for determining opioid users and non-users. Given the need for opioid research in ASD, Q11 may be useful to use existing registries and observational cohorts to design more definitive studies regarding opioid consumption.

Level of evidence

III.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Data availability

Data are not available for sharing.

References

  1. Raja SD, Shetty AP, Subramanian B et al (2019) A prospective randomized study to analyze the efficacy of balanced pre-emptive analgesia in spine surgery. Spine J 19:569–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2018.10.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y et al (2014) Causes and risk factors for 30-day unplanned readmissions after lumbar spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:761–768. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000000270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Armaghani SJ, Lee DS, Bible JE et al (2016) Increased preoperative narcotic use and its association with postoperative complications and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing Spine surgery. Clin Spine Surg 29:E93-98. https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000000109

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dunn LK, Durieux ME, Fernández LG et al (2018) Influence of catastrophizing, anxiety, and depression on in-hospital opioid consumption, pain, and quality of recovery after adult spine surgery. J Neurosurg Spine 28:119–126. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.5.spine1734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brummett CM, Waljee JF, Goesling J et al (2017) New persistent opioid use after minor and major surgical procedures in US adults. JAMA Surg 152:e170504. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0504

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen Q, Larochelle MR, Weaver DT et al (2019) Prevention of prescription opioid misuse and projected overdose deaths in the United States. JAMA Netw Open 2:e187621. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.7621

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ren M, Bryant BR, Harris AB et al (2020) Opioid use after adult spinal deformity surgery: patterns of cessation and associations with preoperative use. J Neurosurg Spine. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.3.spine20111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schoenfeld AJ, Nwosu K, Jiang W et al (2017) Risk factors for prolonged opioid use following spine surgery, and the association with surgical intensity, among opioid-naive patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:1247–1252. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.16.01075

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mendoza-Elias N, Dunbar M, Ghogawala Z et al (2020) Opioid use, risk factors, and outcome in lumbar fusion surgery. World Neurosurg 135:e580–e587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.12.073

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee SW, Shen J, Kim SJ et al (2020) US trends of opioid-use disorders and associated factors among hospitalized patients with spinal conditions and treatment from 2005 to 2014. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 45:124–133. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kelly MP, Lurie JD, Yanik EL et al (2019) Operative versus nonoperative treatment for adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 101:338–352. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.18.00483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bridwell KH, Cats-Baril W, Harrast J et al (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) 30:455–461. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000153393.82368.6b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Asher MA, Lai SM, Glattes RC et al (2006) Refinement of the SRS-22 health-related quality of life questionnaire function domain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:593–597. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000201331.50597.ea

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chapman TM Jr, Baldus CR, Lurie JD et al (2016) Baseline patient-reported outcomes correlate weakly with radiographic parameters: a multicenter, prospective NIH adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis study of 286 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41:1701–1708. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dunn LK, Yerra S, Fang S et al (2018) Incidence and risk factors for chronic postoperative opioid use after major spine surgery: a cross-sectional study with longitudinal outcome. Anesth Analg 127:247–254. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000003338

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Hills JM, Pennings JS, Archer KR et al (2019) Preoperative opioids and 1-year patient-reported outcomes after spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 44:887–895. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000002964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gomes T, Mamdani MM, Dhalla IA et al (2011) Opioid dose and drug-related mortality in patients with nonmalignant pain. Arch Intern Med 171:686–691. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2011.117

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jain A, Lafage V, Kelly MP et al (2016) Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of SRS-7 as an outcomes assessment instrument for operatively treated patients with adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41:1463–1468. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Pugely AJ, Bedard NA, Kalakoti P et al (2018) Opioid use following cervical spine surgery: trends and factors associated with long-term use. Spine J 18:1974–1981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2018.03.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yang S, Werner BC (2019) Risk factors for prolonged postoperative opioid use after spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 39:500–504. https://doi.org/10.1097/bpo.0000000000001139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lacasse A, Ware MA, Bourgault P et al (2016) Accuracy of self-reported prescribed analgesic medication use: linkage between the quebec pain registry and the quebec administrative prescription claims databases. Clin J Pain 32:95–102. https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000000248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Soffin EM, Wetmore DS, Beckman JD et al (2019) Opioid-free anesthesia within an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery: a retrospective matched cohort study. Neurosurg Focus 46:E8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2019.1.focus18645

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

PI, TSC—analyzed data and drafted initial manuscript; SB, JLB, BL—conceived initial study and approved final manuscript; LGL—conceived initial study, assisted with data collection, approved final manuscript; MPK—conceived initial study, collected and analyzed data, critically revised manuscript and approved final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael P. Kelly.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Drs. Inclan, CreveCouer, Line, and Kelly report no conflicts of interest. Dr. Lenke reports being a consultant for Medtronic (money donated to charity); receiving royalties from Medtronic and Quality Medical Publishing; receiving reimbursement for airfare and hotels from Broadwater, the Seattle Science Foundation, Stryker Spine, the Spinal Research Foundation, AOSpine, and the Scoliosis Research Society; receiving grant support from the Scoliosis Research Society (money to his institution), EOS Imaging (money to his institution), the Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation (money to his institution); and receiving grant and fellowship support from AOSpine (money to his institution). Dr. Bess receives royalties from K2M/Stryker; consulting fees from K2M Stryker, Mirus; grants to institution from DePuy Synthes, Medtronic, Globus, K2M Stryker, Nuvasive. Dr. Gum reports Acuity: IP royalties; Paid consultant, American Journal of Orthopedics: Editorial or governing board, Cingulate Therapeutics: Stock or stock Options, DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker, K2M: Paid consultant, MAZOR Surgical Technologies: Paid consultant, Medtronic: Paid consultant, Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant, Stryker: Paid presenter or speaker, The Spine Journal—Reviewer: Editorial or governing board.

Ethical standards

This project was approved by the local Institutional Review Board (IRB #201311105). Paul Inclan: analysis, interpretation, drafting/revising, final approval, agree to accountability. Travis S. CreveCoeur: interpretation, drafting/revising, final approval, agree to accountability. Shay Bess: conception/design, interpretation, drafting/revising, final approval, agree to accountability. Jeffrey L. Gum: conception/design, acquisition of data, interpretation, drafting/revising, final approval, agree to accountability. Breton G. Line: conception/design, interpretation, drafting/revising, final approval, agree to accountability. Lawrence G. Lenke: conception/design, acquisition of data, drafting/revising, final approval, agree to accountability. Michael P. Kelly: conception/design, acquisition of data, analysis, interpretation, drafting/revising, final approval, agree to accountability.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Inclan, P., CreveCoeur, T.S., Bess, S. et al. SRS-22r question 11 is a valid opioid screen and stratifies opioid consumption. Spine Deform 10, 913–917 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00473-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00473-0

Keywords

  • Adult spinal deformity
  • Opioid
  • SRS-22
  • Morphine equivalent dosing
  • Narcotics