Prevalence and Severity of Preoperative Disabilities in Iranian Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER

Authors

1 Orthopedic Research Center, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Imam Reza Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

2 Orthopedic Research Center Department of Orthopedic Surgery Imam Reza Hospital, Faculty of Medicine Mashhad University of Medical Science, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

 
Background:
Literature recommends that refractory cases with lumbar disc herniation and appropriate indications are better to be treated surgically, but do all the patients throughout the world consent to the surgery with a same disability and pain threshold? We aim to elucidate the prevalence and severity of disabilities and pain in Iranian patients with lumbar disc herniation who have consented to the surgery.
 
Methods:
In this case series study, we clinically evaluated 194 (81 female and 113 male) admitted patients with primary, simple, and stable L4-L5 or L5-S1 lumbar disc herniation who were undergoing surgical discectomy. The mean age of the patients was 38.3±11.2 (range: 18-76 years old). Disabilities were evaluated by the items of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire and severity of pain by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Chi-square test was used to compare the qualitative variables.
Results:
Severe disability (39.2%) and crippled (29.9%) were the two most common types of disabilities. Mean ODI score was 56.7±21.1 (range: 16-92). Total mean VAS in all patients was 6.1±1.9 (range: 0-10). Sex and level of disc herniation had no statistical effect on preoperative ODI and VAS. The scale of six was the most frequent scale of preoperative VAS in our patients.
Conclusion:
Iranian patients with lumbar disc herniation who consented to surgery have relatively severe pain or disability. These severities in pain or disabilities have no correlation with sex or level of disc herniation and are not equal with developed countries.

Keywords

References

  1. Walker BF. The prevalence of low back pain: a systematic review of the literature from 1966 to 1998. J Spinal Disord. 2000; 13: 205-17.

  2. Mousavi SJ, Akbari ME, Mehdian H, Mobini B, Montazeri A, Akbarnia B, et al. Low back pain in Iran: a growing need to adapt and implement evidence-based practice in developing countries. Spine. 2011; 36: 638-46.

  3. Frymoyer JW. Back pain and sciatica. N Engl J Med. 1988; 318: 291-300.

  4. de Schepper EI, Damen J, van Meurs JB, Ginai AZ, Popham M, Hofman A, et al. The association between lumbar disc degeneration and low back pain: the influence of age, gender, and individual radiographic features. Spine. 2010; 35: 531-6.

  5. Hughes SP, Freemont AJ, Hukins DW, McGregor AH, Roberts S. The pathogenesis of degeneration of the intervertebral disc and emerging therapies in the management of back pain. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012; 94: 1298-304.

  6. Salzberg L. The physiology of low back pain. Prim Care. 2012; 39: 487-98.

  7. Karppinen J, Shen FH, Luk KD, Andersson GB, Cheung KM, Samartzis D. Management of degenerative disk disease and chronic low back pain. Orthop Clin North Am. 2011; 42: 513-28.

  8. Allen RT, Rihn JA, Glassman SD, Currier B, Albert TJ, Phillips FM. An evidence-based approach to spine surgery. Am J Med Qual. 2009; 24: 15-24.

  9. Storm PB, Chou D, Tamargo RJ. Surgical management of cervical and lumbosacral radiculopathies: indications and outcomes. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2002; 13: 735-59.

  10. Krämer J, Ludwig J. Surgical treatment of lumbar intervertebral disk displacement. Indications and methods. Orthopade.1999; 28: 579-84.

  11. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine. 2000; 25: 2940-52.

  12. Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health.1990; 13: 227-36.

  13. Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, Mehdian H, Montazeri A, Mobini B. The Oswestry Disability Index, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: translation and validation studies of the Iranian versions. Spine. 2006; 31: 454-9.

  14. Okoro T, Sell P. A short report comparing outcomes between L4/L5 and L5/S1 single-level discectomy surgery. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2010; 23: 40-2.

  15. Dewing CB, Provencher MT, Riffenburgh RH, Kerr S, Manos RE. The outcomes of lumbar microdiscectomy in a young, active population: correlation by herniation type and level. Spine. 2008; 33: 33-8.

  16. Carragee EJ, Han MY, Suen PW, Kim D. Clinical outcomes after lumbar discectomy for sciatica: the effects of fragment type and anular competence. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85: 102-8.

  17. Lurie JD, Faucett SC, Hanscom B, Tosteson TD, Ball PA, Abdu WA, et al. Lumbar discectomy outcomes vary by herniation level in the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90: 1811-9.

The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery
Volume 1, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
December 2013
Pages 78-81

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 01 October 2013
  • Revise Date: 05 November 2013
  • Accept Date: 15 December 2013

Share

How to cite

Statistics