Minor effect of loss to follow-up on outcome interpretation in the Swedish spine register
Background and purpose Loss to follow-up in observational studies may skew results and hamper study reliability. We evaluated the importance of loss to follow-up in the Swedish spine register. Patients Patients operated in the lumbar spine and scheduled for a postal questionnaire follow-up during pa...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European spine journal 2020-02, Vol.29 (2), p.213-220 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 220 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 213 |
| container_title | European spine journal |
| container_volume | 29 |
| creator | Endler, P. Ekman, P. Hellström, F. Möller, H. Gerdhem, P. |
| description | Background and purpose
Loss to follow-up in observational studies may skew results and hamper study reliability. We evaluated the importance of loss to follow-up in the Swedish spine register.
Patients
Patients operated in the lumbar spine and scheduled for a postal questionnaire follow-up during part of 2016 were identified. Out of the 351 patients, 203 had responded. After multiple attempts, 115 of the 148 non-responders were reached; 68 returned the complete questionnaire; and 47 answered a brief questionnaire by phone. Analyses were made with the Chi-square test, analysis of covariance or logistic regression. Some analyses were adjusted.
Results
At baseline, the non-responders were younger than the responders (55 vs 61 years,
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00586-019-06181-0 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_475297</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2362700078</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-bd0c968bc3ce6c1e8c5d8321775bc0779d30f69f8cb745f37b45d59529b235c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9v1DAQxS0EotvCF-CALHHhYhjb8b8jqgpFKuIAHDhZiTNpXbJxsBOt-PZ42W0rIcHJ1vj33oznEfKCwxsOYN4WAGU1A-4YaG45g0dkwxspGDgpHpMNuAaYNtydkNNSbgG4cqCfkhPJjeVWNxvy_VOcUqY4DBgWmgY6plLokuiQxjHt2DrTNNG0LiFtkcZpwTxnXNol1nKc6HKD9MsO-1huaJnjhDTjdSwVe0aeDO1Y8PnxPCPf3l98Pb9kV58_fDx_d8WCArOwrofgtO2CDKgDRxtUb6XgxqgugDGulzBoN9jQmUYN0nSN6pVTwnVCqmDlGWEH37LDee38nOO2zb98aqM_ln7UG_rGVJGpvPsnP-fUP4juhLwRDVhleNW-Pmgr-HPFsvhtLAHHsZ0wrcULKUAarcy-zau_0Nu05qluolJaGKgJ7ocXByrkuveMw_04HPw-ZH8I2deQ_Z-QPVTRy6P12m2xv5fcpVoBefxifZquMT_0_o_tb_Y3swM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2362700078</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Minor effect of loss to follow-up on outcome interpretation in the Swedish spine register</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Endler, P. ; Ekman, P. ; Hellström, F. ; Möller, H. ; Gerdhem, P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Endler, P. ; Ekman, P. ; Hellström, F. ; Möller, H. ; Gerdhem, P.</creatorcontrib><description>Background and purpose
Loss to follow-up in observational studies may skew results and hamper study reliability. We evaluated the importance of loss to follow-up in the Swedish spine register.
Patients
Patients operated in the lumbar spine and scheduled for a postal questionnaire follow-up during part of 2016 were identified. Out of the 351 patients, 203 had responded. After multiple attempts, 115 of the 148 non-responders were reached; 68 returned the complete questionnaire; and 47 answered a brief questionnaire by phone. Analyses were made with the Chi-square test, analysis of covariance or logistic regression. Some analyses were adjusted.
Results
At baseline, the non-responders were younger than the responders (55 vs 61 years,
p
< 0.001) and had higher Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (54 vs 48,
p
= 0.003), lower SF-36 physical component summary score (PCS) (36 vs 40,
p
= 0.011) and lower EQ-5D (0.17 vs 0.27,
p
= 0.018). Mean back pain, leg pain, ODI, EQ-5D, SF-36 mental component summary score (MCS) improved significantly in both groups (all
p
< 0.001). SF-36 PCS did not improve in the non-responder group (
p
= 0.063). Non-responders perceived less improvement in back pain (global assessment back 60% vs 72%,
p
= 0.002). At follow-up, there were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures between the groups (all
p
≥ 0.06), with the exception of a lower SF-36 MCS among the non-responders (
p
= 0.015).
Interpretation
After surgery for lumbar spine degenerative disorders, non-responders achieve similar outcome as responders in the Swedish spine register, with the exception of a lower mental health and less perceived improvement in back pain.
Graphic abstract
These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0940-6719</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1432-0932</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-0932</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00586-019-06181-0</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31781864</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Back pain ; Bone surgery ; Medicin och hälsovetenskap ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Neurosurgery ; Original Article ; Pain ; Questionnaires ; Spine (lumbar) ; Surgical Orthopedics</subject><ispartof>European spine journal, 2020-02, Vol.29 (2), p.213-220</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019</rights><rights>European Spine Journal is a copyright of Springer, (2019). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-bd0c968bc3ce6c1e8c5d8321775bc0779d30f69f8cb745f37b45d59529b235c83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-bd0c968bc3ce6c1e8c5d8321775bc0779d30f69f8cb745f37b45d59529b235c83</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8681-028X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00586-019-06181-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00586-019-06181-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27922,27923,41486,42555,51317</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31781864$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://kipublications.ki.se/Default.aspx?queryparsed=id:142408571$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Endler, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ekman, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hellström, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Möller, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerdhem, P.</creatorcontrib><title>Minor effect of loss to follow-up on outcome interpretation in the Swedish spine register</title><title>European spine journal</title><addtitle>Eur Spine J</addtitle><addtitle>Eur Spine J</addtitle><description>Background and purpose
Loss to follow-up in observational studies may skew results and hamper study reliability. We evaluated the importance of loss to follow-up in the Swedish spine register.
Patients
Patients operated in the lumbar spine and scheduled for a postal questionnaire follow-up during part of 2016 were identified. Out of the 351 patients, 203 had responded. After multiple attempts, 115 of the 148 non-responders were reached; 68 returned the complete questionnaire; and 47 answered a brief questionnaire by phone. Analyses were made with the Chi-square test, analysis of covariance or logistic regression. Some analyses were adjusted.
Results
At baseline, the non-responders were younger than the responders (55 vs 61 years,
p
< 0.001) and had higher Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (54 vs 48,
p
= 0.003), lower SF-36 physical component summary score (PCS) (36 vs 40,
p
= 0.011) and lower EQ-5D (0.17 vs 0.27,
p
= 0.018). Mean back pain, leg pain, ODI, EQ-5D, SF-36 mental component summary score (MCS) improved significantly in both groups (all
p
< 0.001). SF-36 PCS did not improve in the non-responder group (
p
= 0.063). Non-responders perceived less improvement in back pain (global assessment back 60% vs 72%,
p
= 0.002). At follow-up, there were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures between the groups (all
p
≥ 0.06), with the exception of a lower SF-36 MCS among the non-responders (
p
= 0.015).
Interpretation
After surgery for lumbar spine degenerative disorders, non-responders achieve similar outcome as responders in the Swedish spine register, with the exception of a lower mental health and less perceived improvement in back pain.
Graphic abstract
These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.</description><subject>Back pain</subject><subject>Bone surgery</subject><subject>Medicin och hälsovetenskap</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Neurosurgery</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Spine (lumbar)</subject><subject>Surgical Orthopedics</subject><issn>0940-6719</issn><issn>1432-0932</issn><issn>1432-0932</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU9v1DAQxS0EotvCF-CALHHhYhjb8b8jqgpFKuIAHDhZiTNpXbJxsBOt-PZ42W0rIcHJ1vj33oznEfKCwxsOYN4WAGU1A-4YaG45g0dkwxspGDgpHpMNuAaYNtydkNNSbgG4cqCfkhPJjeVWNxvy_VOcUqY4DBgWmgY6plLokuiQxjHt2DrTNNG0LiFtkcZpwTxnXNol1nKc6HKD9MsO-1huaJnjhDTjdSwVe0aeDO1Y8PnxPCPf3l98Pb9kV58_fDx_d8WCArOwrofgtO2CDKgDRxtUb6XgxqgugDGulzBoN9jQmUYN0nSN6pVTwnVCqmDlGWEH37LDee38nOO2zb98aqM_ln7UG_rGVJGpvPsnP-fUP4juhLwRDVhleNW-Pmgr-HPFsvhtLAHHsZ0wrcULKUAarcy-zau_0Nu05qluolJaGKgJ7ocXByrkuveMw_04HPw-ZH8I2deQ_Z-QPVTRy6P12m2xv5fcpVoBefxifZquMT_0_o_tb_Y3swM</recordid><startdate>20200201</startdate><enddate>20200201</enddate><creator>Endler, P.</creator><creator>Ekman, P.</creator><creator>Hellström, F.</creator><creator>Möller, H.</creator><creator>Gerdhem, P.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8681-028X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200201</creationdate><title>Minor effect of loss to follow-up on outcome interpretation in the Swedish spine register</title><author>Endler, P. ; Ekman, P. ; Hellström, F. ; Möller, H. ; Gerdhem, P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-bd0c968bc3ce6c1e8c5d8321775bc0779d30f69f8cb745f37b45d59529b235c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Back pain</topic><topic>Bone surgery</topic><topic>Medicin och hälsovetenskap</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Neurosurgery</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Spine (lumbar)</topic><topic>Surgical Orthopedics</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Endler, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ekman, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hellström, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Möller, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerdhem, P.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><jtitle>European spine journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Endler, P.</au><au>Ekman, P.</au><au>Hellström, F.</au><au>Möller, H.</au><au>Gerdhem, P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Minor effect of loss to follow-up on outcome interpretation in the Swedish spine register</atitle><jtitle>European spine journal</jtitle><stitle>Eur Spine J</stitle><addtitle>Eur Spine J</addtitle><date>2020-02-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>213</spage><epage>220</epage><pages>213-220</pages><issn>0940-6719</issn><issn>1432-0932</issn><eissn>1432-0932</eissn><abstract>Background and purpose
Loss to follow-up in observational studies may skew results and hamper study reliability. We evaluated the importance of loss to follow-up in the Swedish spine register.
Patients
Patients operated in the lumbar spine and scheduled for a postal questionnaire follow-up during part of 2016 were identified. Out of the 351 patients, 203 had responded. After multiple attempts, 115 of the 148 non-responders were reached; 68 returned the complete questionnaire; and 47 answered a brief questionnaire by phone. Analyses were made with the Chi-square test, analysis of covariance or logistic regression. Some analyses were adjusted.
Results
At baseline, the non-responders were younger than the responders (55 vs 61 years,
p
< 0.001) and had higher Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (54 vs 48,
p
= 0.003), lower SF-36 physical component summary score (PCS) (36 vs 40,
p
= 0.011) and lower EQ-5D (0.17 vs 0.27,
p
= 0.018). Mean back pain, leg pain, ODI, EQ-5D, SF-36 mental component summary score (MCS) improved significantly in both groups (all
p
< 0.001). SF-36 PCS did not improve in the non-responder group (
p
= 0.063). Non-responders perceived less improvement in back pain (global assessment back 60% vs 72%,
p
= 0.002). At follow-up, there were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures between the groups (all
p
≥ 0.06), with the exception of a lower SF-36 MCS among the non-responders (
p
= 0.015).
Interpretation
After surgery for lumbar spine degenerative disorders, non-responders achieve similar outcome as responders in the Swedish spine register, with the exception of a lower mental health and less perceived improvement in back pain.
Graphic abstract
These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>31781864</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00586-019-06181-0</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8681-028X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0940-6719 |
| ispartof | European spine journal, 2020-02, Vol.29 (2), p.213-220 |
| issn | 0940-6719 1432-0932 1432-0932 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_475297 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Back pain Bone surgery Medicin och hälsovetenskap Medicine Medicine & Public Health Neurosurgery Original Article Pain Questionnaires Spine (lumbar) Surgical Orthopedics |
| title | Minor effect of loss to follow-up on outcome interpretation in the Swedish spine register |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T10%3A54%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Minor%20effect%20of%20loss%20to%20follow-up%20on%20outcome%20interpretation%20in%20the%20Swedish%20spine%20register&rft.jtitle=European%20spine%20journal&rft.au=Endler,%20P.&rft.date=2020-02-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=213&rft.epage=220&rft.pages=213-220&rft.issn=0940-6719&rft.eissn=1432-0932&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00586-019-06181-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_swepu%3E2362700078%3C/proquest_swepu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2362700078&rft_id=info:pmid/31781864&rfr_iscdi=true |