The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Patient Outcomes After Lumbar Spinal Fusions
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine success and complication rates for lumbar spinal fusion surgery, predictors of good outcomes, and whether fusion improves success rates of laminectomy for specific low back disorders. DATA SOURCES: English-language journal articles published from 1966 through April 1991, identified through MEDLINE searching (spinal fusion plus limiting terms), bibliography review, and expert consultation. STUDY SELECTION: Articles were selected only if they reported at least 1 year of follow-up data enabling the classification of clinical outcomes as satisfactory or unsatisfactory for at least 30 patients. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data on patient characteristics, surgical methods, patient outcomes, and quality of study methods. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 47 articles, there were no randomized trials. Four nonrandomized studies compared surgery with and without fusion for herniated disks; three found no advantage for fusion. On average, 68% of patients had a satisfactory outcome after fusion, but the range was wide (16% to 95%), and the satisfactory outcome rate was lower in prospective than in retrospective studies. The most frequently reported complications were pseudarthrosis (14%) and chronic pain at the bone graft donor site (9%). Clinical outcomes did not differ by diagnosis or fusion technique, but were worse in studies with a greater number of previously operated patients. CONCLUSIONS: For several low back disorders no advantage has been demonstrated for fusion over surgery without fusion, and complications of fusions are common. Randomized controlled trials are needed to compare fusion, surgery without fusion, and nonsurgical treatments in rigorously defined patient groups.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases
DEYO, R. (1992) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(92)90133-8 · Cited by 10,452
The Importance of Placebo Effects in Pain Treatment and Research
Turner, J. A. (1994) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1994.03510440069036 · Cited by 874
Self-citationFairbank, J., Frost, H., Wilson-MacDonald, J., Yu, L.-M., Barker, K., & Collins, R. (2005) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38441.620417.8f · Cited by 514
Thomé, C., Zevgaridis, D., Leheta, O., Bäzner, H., Pöckler-Schöniger, C., Wöhrle, J., & Schmiedek, P. (2005) · Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine · doi:10.3171/spi.2005.3.2.0129 · Cited by 371
A Prospective Study of Psychological Predictors of Lumbar Surgery Outcome
Trief, P. M., Grant, W., & Fredrickson, B. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200010150-00012 · Cited by 353
Metadata
- Authors
- Turner, J. A.
- Venue
- JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1992-08-19
- Volume
- 268
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 907
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2037329675
- Cited by
- 525
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patient Outcomes After Lumbar Spinal Fusions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1992.03490070089049
- The paper
- Turner, J. A. (1992). Patient Outcomes After Lumbar Spinal Fusions. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1992.03490070089049
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.