Decision regret in adult spinal deformity surgery: a comparison of SRS-22r outcomes and the Decision Regret Scale.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Daniel R Rubio, John C F Clohisy, Munish C Gupta, Lawrence G Lenke, Michael P Kelly
{"title":"Decision regret in adult spinal deformity surgery: a comparison of SRS-22r outcomes and the Decision Regret Scale.","authors":"Daniel R Rubio, John C F Clohisy, Munish C Gupta, Lawrence G Lenke, Michael P Kelly","doi":"10.3171/2025.3.FOCUS2575","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Decision Regret Scale (DRS) is a valid instrument evaluating the \"correctness\" of a treatment decision from the patient perspective. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is proposed as a threshold for patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) improvement success. The relationship between decision regret and failure to achieve clinical success in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeries is not known. The authors sought to examine the relationships between the DRS and outcomes, as measured by the Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r), in ASD surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ASD patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up completed the DRS and SRS-22r questionnaires. Records were reviewed for complications and revision surgeries. SRS-22r domain scores were dichotomized as successful or not by MCID values. Patients with DRS scores of 0-20 were defined as having no decision regret. Relationships between DRS and SRS-22r domain scores were explored, as were relationships between DRS and complication/revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 46 patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 64 years, and the average follow-up was 4.3 years (range 2.0-15.5 years). The mean DRS score was 7.6 with a median score of 0; 15% (7/46) expressed decision regret. Worse SRS-22r pain (p = 0.049), function (p = 0.03), and satisfaction (p = 0.006) were associated with higher DRS scores. Rates of decision regret were not different between those achieving MCID and those who did not (pain, p = 0.1; function, p = 0.1; self-image, p = 0.4; and subscore p = 0.09). There was no difference in the number of patients with decision regret in terms of postoperative complications or patients requiring revision surgery and those who did not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Decision regret after ASD surgeries was uncommon despite complications, reoperations, and failure to achieve MCID changes in SRS-22r domains. Worse SRS-22r pain, function, and satisfaction scores were associated with more decision regret, however.</p>","PeriodicalId":19187,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical focus","volume":"58 6","pages":"E3"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.3.FOCUS2575","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The Decision Regret Scale (DRS) is a valid instrument evaluating the "correctness" of a treatment decision from the patient perspective. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is proposed as a threshold for patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) improvement success. The relationship between decision regret and failure to achieve clinical success in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeries is not known. The authors sought to examine the relationships between the DRS and outcomes, as measured by the Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r), in ASD surgery.

Methods: ASD patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up completed the DRS and SRS-22r questionnaires. Records were reviewed for complications and revision surgeries. SRS-22r domain scores were dichotomized as successful or not by MCID values. Patients with DRS scores of 0-20 were defined as having no decision regret. Relationships between DRS and SRS-22r domain scores were explored, as were relationships between DRS and complication/revision surgery.

Results: A total of 46 patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 64 years, and the average follow-up was 4.3 years (range 2.0-15.5 years). The mean DRS score was 7.6 with a median score of 0; 15% (7/46) expressed decision regret. Worse SRS-22r pain (p = 0.049), function (p = 0.03), and satisfaction (p = 0.006) were associated with higher DRS scores. Rates of decision regret were not different between those achieving MCID and those who did not (pain, p = 0.1; function, p = 0.1; self-image, p = 0.4; and subscore p = 0.09). There was no difference in the number of patients with decision regret in terms of postoperative complications or patients requiring revision surgery and those who did not.

Conclusions: Decision regret after ASD surgeries was uncommon despite complications, reoperations, and failure to achieve MCID changes in SRS-22r domains. Worse SRS-22r pain, function, and satisfaction scores were associated with more decision regret, however.

成人脊柱畸形手术中的决策后悔:SRS-22r结果与决策后悔量表的比较
目的:决策后悔量表(DRS)是一种从患者角度评估治疗决策“正确性”的有效工具。最小临床重要差异(MCID)被提议作为患者报告的结果测量(PROM)改善成功的阈值。成人脊柱畸形(ASD)手术中决策后悔与临床失败之间的关系尚不清楚。作者试图检查DRS和结果之间的关系,由脊柱侧凸研究协会-22r (SRS-22r)测量,在ASD手术中。方法:ASD患者至少随访2年完成DRS和SRS-22r问卷调查。回顾了并发症和翻修手术的记录。通过MCID值将SRS-22r域评分分为成功或不成功。DRS评分0-20分的患者被定义为无决策后悔。探讨DRS与SRS-22r结构域评分之间的关系,以及DRS与并发症/翻修手术之间的关系。结果:46例患者符合纳入标准。平均年龄64岁,平均随访4.3年(2.0 ~ 15.5年)。DRS平均评分为7.6,中位评分为0;15%(7/46)对决定表示后悔。更严重的SRS-22r疼痛(p = 0.049)、功能(p = 0.03)和满意度(p = 0.006)与更高的DRS评分相关。决策后悔率在达到MCID的人和没有达到MCID的人之间没有差异(疼痛,p = 0.1;函数,p = 0.1;自我形象,p = 0.4;子得分p = 0.09)。就术后并发症或需要翻修手术的患者而言,决定后悔的患者数量与不需要翻修手术的患者数量没有差异。结论:尽管有并发症、再手术和未能实现SRS-22r结构域的MCID改变,但ASD手术后的决定后悔并不常见。然而,更差的SRS-22r疼痛、功能和满意度得分与更多的决策后悔相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurosurgical focus
Neurosurgical focus CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
261
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信