Trauma Monthly

Published by: Kowsar

Quality of Life and Disability in Candidates for Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery

Rahim Roeintan 1 , Ahmadreza Khoshroo 1 , Alireza Khoshnevisan 2 , * , Alireza Arefidoust 2 and Hamid Reza Rasouli 1
Authors Information
1 Trauma Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Sina Trauma and Surgery Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Article information
  • Trauma Monthly: January 31, 2019, 24 (1); e67090
  • Published Online: September 25, 2018
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: March 10, 2018
  • Revised: May 13, 2018
  • Accepted: June 2, 2018
  • DOI: 10.5812/traumamon.67090

To Cite: Roeintan R, Khoshroo A, Khoshnevisan A, Arefidoust A, Rasouli H R. Quality of Life and Disability in Candidates for Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery, Trauma Mon. 2019 ; 24(1):e67090. doi: 10.5812/traumamon.67090.

Copyright © 2019, Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
  • 1. Mokhtar SA, McCombe PF, Williamson OD, Morgan MK, White GJ, Sears WR. Health-related quality of life: A comparison of outcomes after lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis with large joint replacement surgery and population norms. Spine J. 2010;10(4):306-12. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.01.018. [PubMed: 20362246].
  • 2. Gibson JNA, Grant IC, Waddell G. The cochrane review of surgery for lumbar disc prolapse and degenerative lumbar spondylosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(17):1820-32. [PubMed: 10488513].
  • 3. Gibson JN, Waddell G. Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis: Updated Cochrane Review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30(20):2312-20. [PubMed: 16227895].
  • 4. Phillips FM, Slosar PJ, Youssef JA, Andersson G, Papatheofanis F. Lumbar spine fusion for chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease: A systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(7):E409-22. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182877f11. [PubMed: 23334400].
  • 5. Chapman JR, Norvell DC, Hermsmeyer JT, Bransford RJ, DeVine J, McGirt MJ, et al. Evaluating common outcomes for measuring treatment success for chronic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(21 Suppl):S54-68. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822ef74d. [PubMed: 21952190].
  • 6. Deshpande PR, Rajan S, Sudeepthi BL, Abdul Nazir CP. Patient-reported outcomes: A new era in clinical research. Perspect Clin Res. 2011;2(4):137-44. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.86879. [PubMed: 22145124]. [PubMed Central: PMC3227331].
  • 7. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473-83. [PubMed: 1593914].
  • 8. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry disability index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(22):2940-52. discussion 2952. [PubMed: 11074683].
  • 9. Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, Berven S, Schuler TC, Carreon LY. Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: A choice of methods using the Oswestry disability index, medical outcomes study questionnaire short form 36, and pain scales. Spine J. 2008;8(6):968-74. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.11.006. [PubMed: 18201937].
  • 10. Carragee EJ, Cheng I. Minimum acceptable outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion. Spine J. 2010;10(4):313-20. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.001. [PubMed: 20362247].
  • 11. Pekkanen L, Neva MH, Kautiainen H, Dekker J, Piitulainen K, Wahlman M, et al. Disability and health-related quality of life in patients undergoing spinal fusion: A comparison with a general population sample. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:211. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-211. [PubMed: 23866859]. [PubMed Central: PMC3720565].
  • 12. 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 (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(14):E454-9. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000222141.61424.f7. [PubMed: 16778675].
  • 13. Montazeri A, Goshtasebi A, Vahdaninia M, Gandek B. The short form health survey (SF-36): Translation and validation study of the Iranian version. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(3):875-82. [PubMed: 16022079].
  • 14. Schizas C, Tzinieris N, Tsiridis E, Kosmopoulos V. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: Evaluating initial experience. Int Orthop. 2009;33(6):1683-8. doi: 10.1007/s00264-008-0687-8. [PubMed: 19023571]. [PubMed Central: PMC2899194].
  • 15. Harris EB, Sayadipour A, Massey P, Duplantier NL, Anderson DG. Mini-open versus open decompression and fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with stenosis. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2011;40(12):E257-61. [PubMed: 22268018].
  • 16. Seng C, Siddiqui MA, Wong KP, Zhang K, Yeo W, Tan SB, et al. Five-year outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A matched-pair comparison study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(23):2049-55. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a8212d. [PubMed: 23963015].
  • 17. Ghahreman A, Ferch RD, Rao PJ, Bogduk N. Minimal access versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of spondylolisthesis. Neurosurgery. 2010;66(2):296-304. discussion 304. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000363600.24074.D0. [PubMed: 20087129].

Featured Image:

Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:



Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments