Rajkishen Narayanan, Alec Kellish, Teeto Ezeonu, Yunsoo A Lee, Jessica Carroll, Timothy Hagan, Emma Hammelef, Eric Teichner, Jose A Canseco, Ian David Kaye, Mark F Kurd, Alan S Hilibrand, Alexander R Vaccaro, Christopher K Kepler, Gregory D Schroeder
{"title":"腰椎融合术后限制与自由活动的比较。","authors":"Rajkishen Narayanan, Alec Kellish, Teeto Ezeonu, Yunsoo A Lee, Jessica Carroll, Timothy Hagan, Emma Hammelef, Eric Teichner, Jose A Canseco, Ian David Kaye, Mark F Kurd, Alan S Hilibrand, Alexander R Vaccaro, Christopher K Kepler, Gregory D Schroeder","doi":"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to explore the impact of different hospital-based ambulation protocols on mobility and surgical outcomes after lumbar fusion surgery.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Previous research has highlighted the value of early ambulation after surgery; still some hospitals choose to adopt a more conservative ambulation approach due to concern for patient safety.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult patients ≥18 years of age who underwent primary posterior lumbar decompression and fusion (PLDF) surgery at a hospital with restricted ambulation and a hospital with a liberal ambulation protocol within the same health system from 2021 to 2022 were identified and matched based on patient demographic characteristics. Surgical outcomes included inpatient complications, length of stay, readmissions, reoperations, and discharge disposition. Mobility outcomes included Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) daily activity score, post-therapy session pain rating, and gait trial distance from the first inpatient physical therapy session.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients within the liberal ambulation protocol cohort had shorter hospital stays ( P <0.001) and were less likely to require reoperation within 1 year of surgery ( P =0.013). Patients within the restricted ambulation protocol were more likely to experience a complication ( P =0.005) and were less likely to be discharged home after surgery ( P =0.020). Patients at the liberal ambulation hospital had higher AM-PAC basic mobility scores ( P <0.001) and achieved further gait distances ( P <0.001). On multivariable regression analysis, a further gait distance at the first inpatient PT session was a significant predictor of decreased odds of inpatient complications ( P =0.010), decreased length of stay ( P =0.005), and increased odds of discharge to home ( P <0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Liberal ambulation protocols are safe and effective postoperative management strategies after PLDF to decrease inpatient complications, length of stay and discharge to a rehabilitation facility. These findings highlight the role that such protocols can play in helping patients to achieve early mobilization and favorable short-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":22193,"journal":{"name":"Spine","volume":" ","pages":"809-815"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Restricted Versus Liberal Postsurgical Ambulation Protocols on Outcomes After Lumbar Fusion Surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Rajkishen Narayanan, Alec Kellish, Teeto Ezeonu, Yunsoo A Lee, Jessica Carroll, Timothy Hagan, Emma Hammelef, Eric Teichner, Jose A Canseco, Ian David Kaye, Mark F Kurd, Alan S Hilibrand, Alexander R Vaccaro, Christopher K Kepler, Gregory D Schroeder\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to explore the impact of different hospital-based ambulation protocols on mobility and surgical outcomes after lumbar fusion surgery.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Previous research has highlighted the value of early ambulation after surgery; still some hospitals choose to adopt a more conservative ambulation approach due to concern for patient safety.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult patients ≥18 years of age who underwent primary posterior lumbar decompression and fusion (PLDF) surgery at a hospital with restricted ambulation and a hospital with a liberal ambulation protocol within the same health system from 2021 to 2022 were identified and matched based on patient demographic characteristics. Surgical outcomes included inpatient complications, length of stay, readmissions, reoperations, and discharge disposition. Mobility outcomes included Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) daily activity score, post-therapy session pain rating, and gait trial distance from the first inpatient physical therapy session.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients within the liberal ambulation protocol cohort had shorter hospital stays ( P <0.001) and were less likely to require reoperation within 1 year of surgery ( P =0.013). Patients within the restricted ambulation protocol were more likely to experience a complication ( P =0.005) and were less likely to be discharged home after surgery ( P =0.020). Patients at the liberal ambulation hospital had higher AM-PAC basic mobility scores ( P <0.001) and achieved further gait distances ( P <0.001). On multivariable regression analysis, a further gait distance at the first inpatient PT session was a significant predictor of decreased odds of inpatient complications ( P =0.010), decreased length of stay ( P =0.005), and increased odds of discharge to home ( P <0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Liberal ambulation protocols are safe and effective postoperative management strategies after PLDF to decrease inpatient complications, length of stay and discharge to a rehabilitation facility. These findings highlight the role that such protocols can play in helping patients to achieve early mobilization and favorable short-term outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22193,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"809-815\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005118\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005118","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Restricted Versus Liberal Postsurgical Ambulation Protocols on Outcomes After Lumbar Fusion Surgery.
Study design: Retrospective cohort study.
Objective: The objective of this study was to explore the impact of different hospital-based ambulation protocols on mobility and surgical outcomes after lumbar fusion surgery.
Summary of background data: Previous research has highlighted the value of early ambulation after surgery; still some hospitals choose to adopt a more conservative ambulation approach due to concern for patient safety.
Methods: Adult patients ≥18 years of age who underwent primary posterior lumbar decompression and fusion (PLDF) surgery at a hospital with restricted ambulation and a hospital with a liberal ambulation protocol within the same health system from 2021 to 2022 were identified and matched based on patient demographic characteristics. Surgical outcomes included inpatient complications, length of stay, readmissions, reoperations, and discharge disposition. Mobility outcomes included Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) daily activity score, post-therapy session pain rating, and gait trial distance from the first inpatient physical therapy session.
Results: Patients within the liberal ambulation protocol cohort had shorter hospital stays ( P <0.001) and were less likely to require reoperation within 1 year of surgery ( P =0.013). Patients within the restricted ambulation protocol were more likely to experience a complication ( P =0.005) and were less likely to be discharged home after surgery ( P =0.020). Patients at the liberal ambulation hospital had higher AM-PAC basic mobility scores ( P <0.001) and achieved further gait distances ( P <0.001). On multivariable regression analysis, a further gait distance at the first inpatient PT session was a significant predictor of decreased odds of inpatient complications ( P =0.010), decreased length of stay ( P =0.005), and increased odds of discharge to home ( P <0.001).
Conclusions: Liberal ambulation protocols are safe and effective postoperative management strategies after PLDF to decrease inpatient complications, length of stay and discharge to a rehabilitation facility. These findings highlight the role that such protocols can play in helping patients to achieve early mobilization and favorable short-term outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store.
Recognized internationally as the leading journal in its field, Spine is an international, peer-reviewed, bi-weekly periodical that considers for publication original articles in the field of Spine. It is the leading subspecialty journal for the treatment of spinal disorders. Only original papers are considered for publication with the understanding that they are contributed solely to Spine. The Journal does not publish articles reporting material that has been reported at length elsewhere.