Abstract
Spinal decompression is the most common type of spinal surgery carried out in the older patient, and is being performed with increasing frequency. Physiotherapy (rehabilitation) is often prescribed after surgery, although its benefits compared with no formal rehabilitation have yet to be demonstrated in randomised control trials. The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to examine the effects on outcome up to 2 years after spinal decompression surgery of two types of postoperative physiotherapy compared with no postoperative therapy (self-management). Hundred and fifty-nine patients (100 men, 59 women; 65 ± 11 years) undergoing decompression surgery for spinal stenosis/herniated disc were randomised to one of the following programmes beginning 2 months post-op: recommended to “keep active” (CONTROL; n = 54); physiotherapy, spine stabilisation exercises (PT-StabEx; n = 56); physiotherapy, mixed techniques (PT-Mixed; n = 49). Both PT programmes involved 2 × 30 min sessions/week for up to 12 weeks, with home exercises. Pain intensity (0–10 graphic rating scale, for back and leg pain separately) and self-rated disability (Roland Morris) were assessed before surgery, before and after the rehabilitation phase (approx. 2 and 5 months post-op), and at 12 and 24 months after the operation. ‘Intention to treat’ analyses were used. At 24 months, 151 patients returned questionnaires (effective return rate, excluding 4 deaths, 97%). Significant reductions in leg and back pain and self-rated disability were recorded after surgery (P < 0.05). Pain showed no further changes in any group up to 24 months later, whereas disability declined further during the “rehabilitation” phase (P < 0.05) then stabilised, but with no significant group differences. 12 weeks of post-operative physiotherapy did not influence the course of change in pain or disability up to 24 months after decompression surgery. Advising patients to keep active by carrying out the type of physical activities that they most enjoy appears to be just as good as administering a supervised rehabilitation program, and at no cost to the health-care provider.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aalto TJ, Malmivaara A, Kovacs F, Herno A, Alen M, Salmi L, Kroger H, Andrade J, Jimenez R, Tapaninaho A, Turunen V, Savolainen S, Airaksinen O (2006) Preoperative predictors for postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review. Spine 31:E648–663
Adams N, Poole H, Richardson C (2006) Psychological approaches to chronic pain management: part 1. J Clin Nurs 15:290–300
Altman DG (1980) Statistics of ethics in medical research III How large a sample? Br Med J (Clin Res) 281:1336–1338
Amundsen T, Weber H, Lilleas F, Nordal HJ, Abdelnoor M, Magnaes B (1995) Lumbar spinal stenosis. Clinical and radiologic features. Spine 20:1178–1186
Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, Magnaes B, Abdelnoor M, Lilleas F (2000) Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management? A prospective 10-year study. Spine 25:1424–1435
Baumgartner H (1993) Clinical aspects of spinal stenosis. Orthopade 22:211–213
Benoist M (2002) The natural history of lumbar degenerative spinal stenosis. Joint Bone Spine 69:450–457
Bombardier C, Hayden J, Beaton DE (2001) Minimal clinically important difference. Low back pain outcome measures. Pain 28:431–438
Ciol MA, Deyo RA, Howell E, Kreif S (1996) An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations. J Am Geriatr Soc 44:285–290
CIPS - Collegium Internationale Psychiatriae Scalarum (Hrsg) (1986) Internationale Skalen für die Psychiatrie, 3 edn. Beltz, Weinheim
Exner V, Keel P (2000) Erfassung der Behinderung bei Patienten mit chronischen Rückenschmerzen. Schmerz 14:392–400
Fergusson D, Aaron SD, Guyatt G, Hebert P (2002) Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis. BMJ 325:652–654
Ferreira PH, Ferreira ML, Maher CG, Herbert RD, Refshauge K (2006) Specific stabilisation exercise for spinal and pelvic pain: a systematic review. Aust J Physiother 52:79–88
Fritz JM, Erhard RE, Delitto A, Welch WC, Nowakowski PE (1997) Preliminary results of the use of a two-stage treadmill test as a clinical diagnostic tool in the differential diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 10:410–416
Frndak PA, Berasi CC (1991) Rehabilitation concerns following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Sports Med 12:338–346
Gibson JN, Waddell G (2005) Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 19(4):CD001352
Goh KJ, Khalifa W, Anslow P, Cadoux-Hudson T, Donaghy M (2004) The clinical syndrome associated with lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Neurol 52:242–249
Greenough CG, Fraser RD (1991) Comparison of eight psychometric instruments in unselected patients with back pain. Spine 16:1068–1074
Haig AJ, Geisser ME, Michel B, Theisen-Goodvich M, Yamakawa K, Lamphiear R, Legatski K, Smith C, Sacksteder J (2006) The spine team assessment for chronic back pain disability. Part 1 basic protocol and performance in 500 patients. Disabil Rehabil 28:1071–1078
Herno A, Airaksinen O, Saari T, Luukkonen M (1996) Lumbar spinal stenosis: a matched-pair study of operated and non-operated patients. Br J Neurosurg 10:461–465
Herno A, Airaksinen O, Saari T, Pitkänen M, Manninen H, Suomalainen O (1999) Computed tomography findings 4 years after surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 24:2234–2239
Herno A, Partanen K, Talaslahti T, Kaukanen E, Turunen V, Suomalainen O, Airaksinen O (1999) Long-term clinical and magnetic resonance imaging follow-up assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis after laminectomy. Spine 24:1533–1537
Hollis S, Campbell F (1999) What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 319:670–674
Johnsson KE, Redlund-Johnell I, Uden A, Willner S (1989) Preoperative and postoperative instability in lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 14:591–593
Johnsson KE, Rosen I, Uden A (1992) The natural course of lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res:82–86
Jordan K, Dunn KM, Lewis M, Croft P (2006) A minimal clinically important difference was derived for the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for low back pain. J Clin Epidemiol 59:45–52
Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Chang LC, Levine SA, Fossel AH, Liang MH (1996) Seven- to 10-year outcome of decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 21:92–98
Kirkwood B (1988) Essentials of medical statistics. Blackwell Science, Oxford
Koes BW, Bouter LM, Van der Heijden GJMG (1995) Methodological quality of randomized clinical trials on treatment efficacy in low back pain. Spine 20:228–235
Main CJ (1983) The modified somatic perception questionnaire (MSPQ). J Psychosom Res 27:503–514
Main CJ, Waddell G (1984) The detection of psychological abnormality in chronic low back pain using four simple scales. Curr Concepts Pain 2:10–15
Mannion AF, Elfering A, Staerkle R, Junge A, Grob D, Semmer NK, Jacobshagen N, Dvorak J, Boos N (2005) Outcome assessment in low back pain: how low can you go? Eur Spine J 14:1014–1026
Mannion AF, Junge A, Dvorak J, Porchet F, Müntener M, Grob D (2005) Does how well you do depend on how well you think you’ll do? A prospective study of expectations in patients undergoing spinal decompression surgery. Eur Spine J 14(Suppl 1):S17
Mannion AF, Knecht K, Balaban G, Dvorak J, Grob D (2004) A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature, and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature. Eur Spine J 13:122–136
Mayer T, McMahon MJ, Gatchel RJ, Sparks B, Wright A, Pegues P (1998) Socioeconomic outcomes of combined spine surgery and functional restoration in workers’ compensation spinal disorders with matched controls. Spine 23:598–606
Mayer TG, Smith SS, Keeley J, Mooney V (1985) Quantification of lumbar function. Part 2. Sagittal plane trunk strength in chronic low-back pain patients. Spine 10:765–772
McGregor AH, Hughes SP (2002) The evaluation of the surgical management of nerve root compression in patients with low back pain: part 2: patient expectations and satisfaction. Spine 27:1471–1476; discussion 1476–1477
McGregor AH, Hughes SPF (2002) The evaluation of the surgical management of nerve root compression in patients with low back pain. Part 1. The assessment of outcome. Spine 27:1465–1470
Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG (2001) The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 357:1191–1194
Mooney V (1988) The failed back—an orthopaedic view. Int Disabil Stud 10:32–36
Moseley GL (2006) Do training diaries affect and reflect adherence to home programs? Arthritis Rheum 55:662–664
Nachemson AL, La Rocca H (1987) Editorial. Spine 12:427–430
Niggemeyer O, Strauss JM, Schulitz KP (1997) Comparison of surgical procedures for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1975 to 1995. Eur Spine J 6:423–429
O’Sullivan PB, Phyty GD, Twomey LT, Allison GT (1997) Evaluation of specific stabilizing exercise in the treatment of chronic low back pain with radiologic diagnosis of spondylolysis or spondylolisthesis. Spine 22:2959–2967
Ostelo RWJG, de Vet HCW, Waddell G, Kerckhoffs MR, Leffers P, van Tulder M (2003) Rehabilitation following first-time lumbar disc surgery. Spine 28:209–218
Panjabi MM (1992) The stabilizing system of the spine. Part II. Neutral zone and instability hypothesis. J Spinal Disord 5:390–397
Perneger TV (1998) What’s wrong with Bonferroni adjustments. BMJ 316:1236–1238
Quint U, Wilke HJ, Löer F, Claes L (1998) Laminectomy and functional impairment of the lumbar spine: the importance of muscle forces in flexible and rigid instrumented stabilization—a biomechanical study in vitro. Spine 7:229–238
Rackwitz B, de Bie R, Limm H, von Garnier K, Ewert T, Stucki G (2006) Segmental stabilizing exercises and low back pain. What is the evidence? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil 20:553–567
Richardson C, Jull G, Hodges P, Hides J (1999) Therapeutic exercise for spinal segmental stabilization in low back pain. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh
Richardson CA, Jull GA (1995) Muscle control-pain control. What exercises would you prescribe? Man Ther 1:2–10
Roland M, Morris R (1983) A study of the natural history of back pain. Part 1 Development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine 8:141–144
Smeets RJ, Wade D, Hidding A, Van Leeuwen PJ, Vlaeyen JW, Knottnerus JA (2006) The association of physical deconditioning and chronic low back pain: a hypothesis-oriented systematic review. Disabil Rehabil 28:673–693
Solomonow M, Zhou BH, Harris M, Lu Y, Baratta RV (1998) The ligamento-muscular stabilizing system of the spine. Spine 23:2552–2562
Spengler DM (1987) Degenerative stenosis of the lumbar spine (current concepts review). J Bone Joint Surg 69A:305–308
Steffen R, Nolte LP, Pingel TH (1994) Importance of the back muscles in rehabilitation of postoperative segmental lumbar instability—a biomechanical analysis. Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 33:164–170
Truumees E (2005) Spinal stenosis: pathophysiology, clinical and radiologic classification. Instr Course Lect 54:287–302
Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, Deyo R (1992) Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Attempted meta-analysis of the literature. Spine 17:1–8
Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, Somerville D, Main CJ (1993) A fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 52:157–168
Wilke HJ, Wolf S, Claes LE, Arand M, Wiesend A (1995) Stability increase of the lumbar spine with different muscle groups. A biomechanical in vitro study. Spine 20:192–198
Yamashita K, Hayashi J, Ohzono K, Hiroshima K (2003) Correlation of patient satisfaction with symptom severity and walking ability after surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 28:2477–2481
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant no. 32–57123.99) and the Schulthess Klinik Research Funds. We are especially grateful to Renata Heusser, Gordana Balaban and Katrin Knecht for their valuable assistance in managing the study and collecting the data. We also thank Astrid Junge for her help in planning the questionnaires, Maja Husistein and her team for doing the randomisation, Friedrich Bremerich for his medical advice and assistance, Sonja Keller for her help at the start of the study, Arnaldo Benini, Thomas Egloff and Jileli Rhiati for encouraging their patients to participate, and all the physiotherapists who treated the patients and carefully documented their work. We thank Gordon Adam for his assistance in preparing the figures for the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mannion, A.F., Denzler, R., Dvorak, J. et al. A randomised controlled trial of post-operative rehabilitation after surgical decompression of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 16, 1101–1117 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0399-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0399-6