Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Individual factors associated with neck disability in patients with cervical radiculopathy scheduled for surgery: a study on physical impairments, psychosocial factors, and life style habits
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3464-1538
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden .
Ryhov Hospital, Jönköping, Sweden .
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: European spine journal, ISSN 0940-6719, E-ISSN 1432-0932, Vol. 23, no 3, 599-605 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

PURPOSE:

The influence of individual factors on patient-reported outcomes is important in the interpretation of disability and treatment effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to assess how physical impairments, psychosocial factors, and life style habits were associated with neck disability based on the Neck Disability Index (NDI), in patients with cervical radiculopathy scheduled for surgery.

METHODS:

This cross-sectional study included 201 patients (105 men, 96 women; mean age 50 years). Data included self-reported measures and a clinical examination. Multiple linear regressions were performed to identify significant influencing factors.

RESULTS:

Pain, physical impairments in the cervical active range of motion, low self-efficacy, depression, and sickness-related absences explained 73 % of the variance in NDI scores (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION:

Assessments of physical impairments and psychosocial factors in patients with cervical radiculopathy could improve the description of neck disability and the interpretation of treatment outcomes in longitudinal studies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2014. Vol. 23, no 3, 599-605 p.
Keyword [en]
Cervical spine, Radiculopathy, Neck Disability Index, Individual factors, Multiple regression analysis
National Category
Neurology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-105506DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-3066-0ISI: 000332604600018PubMedID: 24154827OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-105506DiVA: diva2:708757
Available from: 2014-03-28 Created: 2014-03-25 Last updated: 2017-12-05Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Neck disability in patients with cervical radiculopathy and evaluation of structured postoperative physiotherapy
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Neck disability in patients with cervical radiculopathy and evaluation of structured postoperative physiotherapy
2015 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Non-surgical and surgical approaches to treatment are used in patients with cervical radiculopathy (CR) due to disc disease. Overall, good effects of surgery have been reported on arm pain and neurological symptoms. However, the effects on neck functioning are more uncertain. Studies have shown persistent activity limitations; participation restrictions; and impairments in neck-related body functions after surgery. Structured physiotherapy combining neck-specific exercises with a behavioural approach has been suggested as treatment before as well as after surgery to improve clinical outcomes in patients with CR. Randomized clinical trials of postoperative physiotherapy to inform evidence-based clinical guidelines for the treatment of patients with CR are lacking.

The overall aim of the thesis was to investigate the additional benefit of structured postoperative physiotherapy combining neck-specific exercises with a behavioural approach compared to standard postoperative approach in patients with CR. A further aim was to evaluate the  contribution of different aspects of neck-related body functions and mental functions on preoperative neck disability in these patients.

A total of 202 patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery were recruited, and randomized preoperatively to either structured postoperative physiotherapy, or standard postoperative approach. Standard postoperative approach was in accordance with Swedish postoperative care, and may have included pragmatic physiotherapy after surgery when needed. Patients were evaluated with a set of questionnaires and clinical examinations before surgery and at 3 and 6 months after surgery. Outcomes included patient-reported measures of pain, neck functioning, global outcome, clinical evaluation of neckrelated body functions, self-efficacy and coping strategies, as well as expectation fulfilment and enablement. Differences between treatment groups were investigated in complete case and per-protocol approaches (Paper III & IV). A sub-sample of patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery were also compared with neck-healthy individuals for assessment of head repositioning accuracy with a cervical range of motion device (Paper I). In patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery, associations between preoperative measures of neck-related body functions, mental functions, and other contextual factors with patientreported neck disability were studied (Paper II).

With the exception of greater expectation fulfilment in patients who received structured postoperative physiotherapy (p = 0.01), there were no differences between the treatment groups in outcomes at 6 months after surgery. There were no differences reported for changes in  outcomes from before surgery to 6 months after surgery between the groups, but all outcomes significantly improved from baseline in both groups (p<0.001) (Paper III & IV). However, global outcome and frequency of neck pain improved during the postoperative period only in patients who received structured postoperative physiotherapy (p< 0.01) (Paper III). Six months after surgery, patients with at least 50% attendance to treatment sessions in the structured postoperative physiotherapy group reported less neck pain frequency (p = 0.05), and greater expectation fulfilment (p = 0.001), and enablement (p = 0.04) than those who received standard postoperative approach. These patients also had larger improvements in neck functioning, arm pain and catastrophizing during the rehabilitation period from 3 to 6 months after surgery (p< 0.03). Sixty-one percent of the patients who received standard postoperative approach reported additional use ofpostoperative physiotherapy. These patients had a worse surgical outcome compared with patients who reported no additional use of postoperative physiotherapy. In patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery, larger errors in head repositioning accuracy were found compared to neck-healthy individuals (Paper I). Preoperative measures of neck-related body functions, mental functions and other contextual factors explained 73% of the variance in Neck Disability Index scores in patients with CR who were scheduled for surgery (Paper II).

The results may suggest a benefit from combining surgery with structured postoperative physiotherapy in patients with CR. Moreover, the results confirm that neck-specific exercises are tolerated by patients with CR after surgery. However, CR is a heterogeneous condition and specific subgroups of patients are likely to benefit from different interventions. More studies are needed to inform evidence-based clinical guidelines for the treatment of patients with CR. A broader preoperative assessment in patients with CR improved the description of patient-reported neck disability.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2015. 95 p.
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 1480
National Category
Physiotherapy Neurology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-122695 (URN)10.3384/diss.diva-122695 (DOI)978-91-7685-959-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2015-12-11, Berzeliussalen, Campus US, Linköping, 09:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2015-11-16 Created: 2015-11-16 Last updated: 2015-11-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(470 kB)452 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 470 kBChecksum SHA-512
847d72f19ddeb5af967d225a9873f3a6a33eb6a34c7ca5a067855ab3aef873e39d9d11753773a245040de4bf60b969af4301627517d5a583e69d4ec86694b7ea
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Wibault, JohannaÖberg, BirgittaZsigmond, PeterPeolsson, Anneli

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wibault, JohannaÖberg, BirgittaZsigmond, PeterPeolsson, Anneli
By organisation
Division of PhysiotherapyFaculty of Health SciencesDivision of NeuroscienceDepartment of Neurosurgery
In the same journal
European spine journal
Neurology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 452 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 285 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf