The Impact of the Depression and Anxiety on Prognosis of Cervical Total Disc Replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective clinical study. OBJECTIVE: To identify changes in depression and anxiety after cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) among patients with cervical spondylosis, and to investigate their effects on the prognosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous researches have reported relationships between mood disorders and lumbar surgery. There have been no previous studies on the effects of depressive and anxiety on the CTDR outcome at the 2-year postoperative phase. METHODS: Eighty-five patients with cervical spondylosis who underwent CTDR were included. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 6 postoperative time points, including 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Depression and anxiety were evaluated by using the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale and the Zung Self-Rating Anxiety Scale. Neurological function was evaluated by using the visual analogue scale and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association. The quality of life was assessed by a 36-item Short-Form Health Survey. A Spearman rank correlation analysis was used. RESULTS: All patients had improvements in clinical symptoms and neurological function. Twelve (14.12%) patients had symptoms of depression and 21 (24.71%) patients had symptoms of anxiety. There was a significant difference between the preoperative and the postoperative Zung Self-Rating Anxiety Scale scores, whereas the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale scores were not significantly different over time. For all patients, the visual analogue scale scores and the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey scores were associated with the postoperative level of depression and anxiety but not age or the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score. CONCLUSION: Some patients with cervical spondylosis have preoperative depression and/or anxiety. CTDR may provide some improvements in these psychological symptoms. The presence of depression and/or anxiety may have a negative influence on the patient's prognosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".