Cited by 63Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy

Negative beliefs and psychological disturbance in spine surgery patients: a cause or consequence of a poor treatment outcome?

Open access
Havakeshian, S., Mannion, A. F.·2013·European Spine Journal

Abstract

Purpose Chronic musculoskeletal pain is often associated with psychological distress and maladaptive beliefs and these are sometimes reported to have a negative impact on surgical outcome. The influence of a surgical intervention, and in particular its outcome, on the course of change in psychological status is poorly documented. In this prospective study, we sought to examine the dynamic interplay between psychological factors and outcome in patients undergoing decompression surgery for spinal stenosis/herniated disc.Methods Before and 12 months after surgery, 159 patients (100 men, 59 women; 65 ± 11 years) completed a questionnaire booklet containing questions on socio-demographics, medical history, pain characteristics (intensity, frequency, use of medication), psychological disturbance [ZUNG Depression Scale and Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ)], catastrophising (sub-scale of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire) and disability (Roland and Morris questionnaire) and the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire about physical activity (FABQ-PA). The global outcome of surgery was assessed at 12 months using a five-point Likert scale and dichotomised as "good" (operation helped/helped a lot; coded 1) and "poor" (operation helped only little/did not help/made things worse; coded 0).Results Valid questionnaire data were available for 148 patients at 12 months' follow-up: 113 (76.4 %) reported a good outcome and 35 (23.6 %) a poor outcome. In univariate analyses, the following baseline variables each significantly (p < 0.05) predicted a good 12-month global outcome: no involvement in a disability claim, and lower LBP frequency, average LBP in the last week, average score on all pain scales, FABQ-PA and catastrophising. In multiple logistic regression, only lower FABQ-PA scores [OR 0.877 (95 %CI 0.809-0.949), p = 0.001] and lower LBP frequency at baseline [OR 0.340 (1.249-1.783), p < 0.0001] significantly predicted a good outcome at 12 months. A second "explanatory" logistic regression model revealed that a good outcome at 12 months was significantly associated with improvements (from baseline to 12 months) in average score on all the pain intensity scales [OR 1.6879 (1.187-2.398)], general health [OR 1.246 (1.004-1.545)], psychological disturbance [OR 1.073 (1.006-1.144)] and Roland Morris Disability [OR 1.243 (1.074-1.439)].Conclusion In a multivariable prospective (predictive) model, FABQ-PA was the only baseline psychological factor that significantly predicted outcome. Future studies should assess whether pre-operative cognitive-behavioural therapy in patients with maladaptive beliefs improves treatment outcome. Psychological disturbance did not significantly predict outcome, but it improved post-operatively in patients with a good outcome and worsened in those with a poor outcome. Rather than being a risk factor for poor outcome, in this group it appeared to be more a consequence of long-standing, unremitting pain that improved when symptoms resolved after successful surgery.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00586-013-2822-5

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Robust literature supports preoperative psychological distress and fear of movement as significant risk factors for poorer post-surgical outcomes.

    “Robust literature supports preoperative psychological distress and fear of movement as significant risk factors for poorer post-surgical outcomes, 30,[43][44][45][46]”

    From A Conceptual Model for Spine Surgery Recovery: A Qualitative Study of Patients’ Expectations, Experiences, and Satisfaction (2023) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Discussion reports that preoperative fear-avoidance beliefs significantly predicted poor surgical outcome and that many previous studies found a similar association. It also says many, but not all, studies linked preoperative psychological distress to poor outcomes; this study found no predictive power for distress (Discussion; Conclusion). The claim therefore overstates the support for both factors as significant risk factors. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Havakeshian, S., & Mannion, A. F.
Affiliations
Schulthess-Klinik (CH)
Corresponding author
Mannion, A. F.
Venue
European Spine Journal
Published
2013-05-23
Volume
22
Issue
12
Pages
2827-2835
ISSN
  • 0940-6719 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0932
OpenAlex
W1996879446
Cited by
63
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Spine Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (57123)
  • Universität Zürich
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Keywords
spinal surgery, spinal stenosis, disc herniation, fear-avoidance beliefs, psychological distress, pain catastrophizing, low back pain, surgical outcomes, psychological factors, chronic musculoskeletal pain
MeSH terms
Aged, Disability Evaluation, Fear, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Intervertebral Disc Displacement, Male, Pain Measurement, Postoperative Period, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Multivariate Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Low Back Pain, Decompression, Surgical, Catastrophization

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