P.176 Perioperative factors predict two year trajectories of pain and disability following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A subset of patients experience poor outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Our study aimed to identify postoperative trajectories of disability, neck/arm pain and determine baseline measures that predict subgroup membership. Methods: Patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy undergoing ACDF are presented. Prognostic factors comprised demographic, health and surgery-related variables. Study outcomes were trajectories of neck disability index scores, numeric rating scales for neck/arm pain modeled with latent-class growth analysis. Associations were explored using robust Poisson models and reported with risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Patients (N = 352; mean (SD) age = 50.9(9.5) years, 43.8% female) identified trajectories for disability (excellent=45.3%,fair=39.2%,poor=15.5%),arm pain (excellent=24.5%,good=52.0%,poor=23.5%),and neck pain (excellent=13.7%,good=63.1%,poor=23.2%). Greater physical and mental health-related quality of life were associated with a reduced risk of poor outcome(per SD,0.40[0.30,0.53]-0.80[0.65,0.99]), while higher risk for depression (per SD, 1.36[1.12,1.65]-2.26[1.84,2.78]), longer wait time(per 90 days, 1.31[1.05,1.63]-1.64[1.20,2.24]), and longer procedure time (per 30 min,1.07[1.03,1.10]-1.08[1.05,1.12]) were associated with an increased risk of poor outcome for all outcomes. Poor disability was increased with self-reported depression(3.03[1.76,5.21]), greater neck-to-arm pain ratio (2.63 [1.28 to 5.40]), ASA score > 2(2.26[1.33,3.83]), and preoperative opiates (2.05[1.18,3.56]), while preoperative physiotherapy (0.51[0.30, 0.88]), spinal injections (0.48[0.23 to 0.98]), and regular exercise (0.44 [0.24, 0.79]) decreased risk. Receiving compensation and smoking were associated with poor outcome for neck pain. Remaining candidate prognostic factors were not associated with clinical outcome. Conclusions: Perioperative factors were shown to decrease risk of poor outcomes for pain and disability two years following ACDF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".