Introduction: Posterior cervical fusion (PCF) has been shown to be an effective treatment for cervical spondylosis, but is associated with a 9% complication rate and high costs. To limit such complications and costs, it is imperative that proper selection of surgical candidates occur for those most likely to do well with the surgery. Affective disorders, such as depression, are associated with worsened outcomes following lumbar surgery; however, this effect has not been evaluated in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. Our goal was to assess the predictive value of preoperative depression and health state on 1-year quality of life outcomes after PCF.

Methods: 88 patients who underwent PCF for cervical spondylosis were reviewed. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative health outcomes were assessed based on the Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Questionnaire. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess for preoperative predictors of 1-year change in health status. No funding was received in support of this study and no relevant conflicts of interest were present.

Results: Compared with preoperative health states, the PCF cohort showed statistically significant improved PDQ (87.8 vs. 73.6), PHQ-9 (7.7 vs. 6.6), and EQ-5D (0.50 vs. 0.60) scores at 1 year postoperatively. Only 10/88 (11%) of patients achieved or surpassed the minimum clinically important difference for the PHQ-9 (5). Multiple linear and logistic regression analyses showed that increasing PHQ-9 and EQ-5D preoperative scores were associated with reduced 1-year postoperative improvement in health status (EQ-5D Index).

Conclusions: Of patients that undergo PCF, those with a greater degree of preoperative depression have lower improvements in postoperative QOL compared to those with less depression. Additionally, patients with better preoperative health states also attain lower 1-year QOL improvements.

Patient Care: In order to maximize the success of surgery and reduce complications and poor outcomes, patient selection of surgical candidates is imperative. Better understanding of the preoperative predictors of postoperative outcomes will improve patient selection for these elective procedures, and enable targeted strategies for patients at higher risk.

Learning Objectives: By the conclusion of this session, participants should be able to: 1) Describe the importance of depression, anxiety, and other psychosocial factors on postoperative quality of life outcomes after PCF and 2) Differentiate between statistical significance and clinical significance as measured by the minimum clinically important difference (MCID).

References: 1. McAllister BD, Rebholz BJ, Wang JC. Is posterior fusion necessary with laminectomy in the cervical spine? Surg Neurol Int. 2012;3:S225-31. 2. Rao RD, Madom IA. Wang JC, editor. Cervical laminectomy and fusion. Advanced Reconstruction Spine. American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. 2011:97–104. 3. Scioscia T, Crowl AC. Wang JC, editor. Posterior subaxial cervical fusion. Advanced Reconstruction Spine. American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. 2011:89–95. 4. Anderson PA, Matz PG, Groff MW, Heary RF, Holly LT, Kaiser MG, et al. Laminectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical degenerative myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11:150–6. 5. Ebersold MJ, Pare MC, Quast LM. Surgical treatment for cervical spondylitic myelopathy. J Neurosurg. 1995;82:745–51. 6. Hamanishi C, Tanaka S. Bilateral multilevel laminectomy with or without posterolateral fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: Relationship to type of onset and time until operation. J Neurosurg. 1996;85:447–51. 7. Highsmith, Jason M., Dhall, Sanjay S., Haid Jr., Regis W., Rodts Jr., Gerald E., Mummaneni, Praveen V. Treatment of cervical stenotic myelopathy: a cost and outcome comparison of laminoplasty versus laminectomy and lateral mass fusion. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine 2011;14:619-625. 8. Komotar RJ, Mocco J, Kaiser MG. Surgical management of cervical myelopathy: Indications and techniques for laminectomy and fusion. Spine J. 2006;6:252S–67. 9. Heller JG, Silcox DH, 3rd, Sutterlin CE., 3rd Complications of posterior cervical plating. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:2442–8. 10. Kaptain GJ, Simmons NE, Replogle RE, Pobereskin L. Incidence and outcome of kyphotic deformity following laminectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg. 2000;93:199–204. 11. Kato Y, Iwasaki M, Fuji T, Yonenobu K, Ochi T. Long-term follow-up results of laminectomy for cervical myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Neurosurg. 1998;89:217–23. 12. Yonenobu K, Fuji T, Ono K, Okada K, Yamamoto T, Harada N. Choice of surgical treatment for multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1985;10:710–6. 13. Yonenobu K, Okada K, Fuji T, Fujiwara K, Yamashita K, Ono K. Causes of neurologic deterioration following surgical treatment of cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1986;11:818–23. 14. Eubanks JD, Thorpe SW, Cheruvu VK, Braly BA, Kang JD. Does smoking influence fusion rates in posterior cervical arthrodesis with lateral mass instrumentation? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;4693:696-701. 15. Shamji MF, Cook C, Tackett S, Brown C, Isaacs RE. Impact of preoperative neurological status on perioperative morbidity associated with anterior and posterior cervical fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2008;9:10–16. 16. Adogwa O, Parker SL, Shau DN, et al. Preoperative Zung depression scale predicts patient satisfaction independent of the extent of improvement after revision lumbar surgery. Spine J. 2013;13:501-6. 17. Adogwa O, Parker SL, Shau DN, et al. Preoperative Zung Depression Scale predicts outcome after revision lumbar surgery for adjacent segment disease, recurrent stenosis, and pseudarthrosis. Spine J. 2012;12:179-85. 18. Trief PM, Grant W, Fredrickson B. A prospective study of psychological predictors of lumbar surgery outcome. Spine 2000;25:2616–2621. 19. LaCaille RA, DeBerard MS, Masters KS, Colledge AL, Bacon W. Presurgical biopsychosocial factors predict multidimensional patient: outcomes of interbody cage lumbar fusion. Spine J. 2005;5:71–78. 20. Vaccaro AR, Ring D, Scuderi G, Cohen DS, Garfin SR. Predictors of outcome in patients with chronic back pain and low-grade spondylolisthesis. Spine 1997;22:2030–2034. 21. Aalto TJ, Malmivaara A, Kovacs F, et al. Preoperative predictors for postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review. Spine 2006;31:E648-63. 22. Gatchel RJ, Mayer TG, Theodore BR. The pain disability questionnaire: relationship to one-year functional and psychosocial rehabilitation outcomes. JOccupRehabil 2006;16:75-94. 23. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW. Patient Health Questionnaire Study Group. Validity and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ Primary Care Study. JAMA. 1999;282:1737–44. 24. Spitzer RL, Williams JBW, Kroenke K, et al. Validity and utility of the Patient Health Questionnaire in assessment of 3000 obstetric-gynecologic patients: the PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire Obstetrics-Gynecology Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:759–69. 25. Johnson JA, Coons SJ, Ergo A, Szava-Kovats G: Valuation of EuroQOL (EQ-5D) health states in an adult US sample. Pharmacoeconomics 1998;13:421-433. 26. Badia X, Diaz-Prieto A, Gorriz MT, et al: Using the EuroQol-5D to measure changes in quality of life 12 months after discharge from an intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med. 2001;27:1901-1907. 27. Jansson KA, Nemeth G, et al: Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) before and one year after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:210-216. 28. Wilson HD. Minimum clinical important differences of health outcomes in a chronic pain population: Are they predictive of poor outcomes? UT Arlington Dissertation, 2008. 29. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Vavruch L, Oberg B. Predictive factors for the outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Eur Spine J. 2003;12:274-80. 30. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Oberg B. Predictive factors for arm pain, neck pain, neck specific disability and health after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2006;148:167-73. 31. Peolsson A, Peolsson M. Predictive factors for long-term outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a multivariate data analysis. Eur Spine J. 2008;17:406-14. 32. Epstein, N.E. Laminectomy for cervical myelopathy. Spinal Cord 2003;41:317-327. 33. Stoffman MR, Roberts MS, King JT Jr. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy, depression, and anxiety: a cohort analysis of 89 patients. Neurosurgery 2005;57:307-13. 34. Goldberg EJ, Singh K, Van U, Garretson R, An HS. Comparing outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in workman's versus non-workman's compensation population. Spine J. 2002;2:408-14. 35. George SZ, Fritz JM, Erhard RE. A comparison of fear-avoidance beliefs in patients with lumbar spine pain and cervical spine pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26:2139-45. 36. Celestin J, Edwards RR, Jamison RN. Pretreatment psychosocial variables as predictors of outcomes following lumbar surgery and spinal cord stimulation: a systematic review and literature synthesis. Pain Med. 2009;10:639-53. 37. Mannion AF, Elfering A. Predictors of surgical outcome and their assessment. Eur Spine J. 2006;15:S93-S108. 38. Junge A, Dvorak J, Ahrens S. Predictors of bad and good outcomes of lumbar disc surgery. A prospective clinical study with recommendations for screening to avoid bad outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:460-8. 39. Nygaard OP, Kloster R, Solberg T. Duration of leg pain as a predictor of outcome after surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective cohort study with 1-year follow up. J Neurosurg. 2000;92:131-4. 40. Atkinson JH, Slater MA, Patterson TL, Grant I, Garfin SR. Prevalence, onset, and risk of psychiatric disorders in men with chronic low back pain: a controlled study. Pain 1991;45:111-21.