MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2666539798 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000002292

Early Impact of Postoperative Bracing on Pain and Quality of Life After Posterior Instrumented Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Conditions

2017· article· en· W2666539798 on OpenAlexaff
Hany Abdel Gawwad Soliman, Soraya Barchi, Stefan Parent, Gilles Maurais, Alain Jodoin, Jean‐Marc Mac‐Thiong

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOswestry Disability IndexVisual analogue scalePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)LumbarStatistical significanceLow back painSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether bracing after posterior spinal instrumented fusion (PSIF) can improve pain relief and quality of life (QoL) 6 weeks and 3 months postoperatively. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Braces are commonly prescribed after PSIF in patients with lumbar degenerative conditions with the aim of improving pain relief and QoL. However, there is a lack of evidence on the indication for postoperative bracing, as surgeons use braces mainly based on their experience and training. METHODS: A randomized blinded and controlled trial of 43 patients with PSIF for lumbar degenerative conditions were recruited. The caregivers were blinded but not the orthotist in the present study. There were 25 patients in the brace group and 18 patients in the control group with similar baseline characteristics. All patients completed the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the short form (SF)-12v2 General Health Survey and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain preoperatively, at 6 weeks and 3 months follow-up. Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test and a level of significance of 0.05 were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable demographic characteristics, and preoperative SF-12v2, ODI, and VAS scores. The ODI, SF-12v2, and VAS for back pain were improved in comparison to preoperative scores. The improvement was significant at 3 months follow-up regarding ODI and VAS for both groups and significant only for the control group regarding SF-12v2 scores. The improvement in ODI, SF-12v2, and VAS was significantly greater for control group at 3 months postoperatively. Moreover, larger proportion of patients in the control group reached minimum clinically important difference as compared to brace group at 6 weeks and 3 months. CONCLUSION: Postoperative bracing did not result in better improvement in QoL or pain relief up to 3 months after PSIF in patients with lumbar degenerative conditions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207