Evid Based Spine Care J 2012; 3(4): 13-19
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1328138
Original research
© AOSpine International Stettbachstrasse 6 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland

Patient expectations, outcomes and satisfaction: related, relevant or redundant?

Paul Licina
1   Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
2   Brisbane Private Research Group, Brisbane Private Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
,
Michelle Johnston
1   Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
2   Brisbane Private Research Group, Brisbane Private Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
,
Laura Ewing
1   Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
,
Mark Pearcy
1   Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
21 February 2013 (online)

ABSTRACT

Study design: A prospective case series of patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery.

Objective: Is there a correlation between patients’ expectations before lumbar surgery, postoperative outcomes, and satisfaction levels?

Methods: A prospective study of 145 patients undergoing primary, single-level surgery for degenerative lumbar conditions was conducted. Oswestry Disability Index, back Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and leg VAS were assessed preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. Patients’ expectations were measured preoperatively by asking them to score the level of pain and disability that would be least acceptable for them to undergo surgery and be satisfied. Satisfaction was assessed 6 weeks postoperatively with a Likert scale. Differences in patient expectations between actual and expected improvements were quantified.

Results: Most patients had a clinically relevant improvement, but only about half achieved their expectations. Satisfaction did not correlate with preoperative pain or disability, or with patient expectation of improvement. Instead, satisfaction correlated with positive outcomes.

Conclusions: Patient expectations have little bearing on final outcome and satisfaction.

Final class of evidence-treatment

Study design

 RCT

 Cohort

 Case control

 Case series

Methods

 Concealed allocation (RCT)

 Intention to treat (RCT)

 Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome

 F/U ≥ 85%

 Adequate sample size

 Control for confounding

Overall class of evidence

IV

The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available here.

 
  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Wilson SJ, Saling MM, Lawrence J et al. 1999; Outcome of temporal lobectomy: expectations and the prediction of perceived success. Epilepsy Res 36 (1) 1-14
  • 2 Wheelock I, Peterson C, Buchtel HA. 1998; Presurgery expectations, postsurgery satisfaction, and psychosocial adjustment after epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia 39 (5) 487-494
  • 3 Gepstein R, Arizon Z, Adunsky A et al. 2006; Decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly: preoperative expectations and postoperative satisfaction. Spinal Cord 44 (7) 427-431
  • 4 Gandhi R, Davey JR, Mahomed N. 2008; Patient expectations predict greater pain relief with joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24 (5) 716-721
  • 5 Lutz GK, Butzlaff ME, Atlas SJ et al. 1999; The relation between expectations and outcomes in surgery for sciatica. J Gen Intern Med 14 (12) 740-744
  • 6 Skolasky RL, Albert TJ, Vaccaro AR et al. 2009; Patient satisfaction in the cervical spine research society outcomes study: relationship to improved clinical outcome. Spine J 9 (3) 232-239
  • 7 Toyone T, Tanaka T, Kato D et al. 2005; Patients’ expectations and satisfaction in lumbar spine surgery. Spine 30 (23) 2689-2694
  • 8 Yamashita K, Hayashi J, Ohzono K et al. 2003; Correlation of patient satisfaction with symptom severity and walking ability after surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 28 (21) 2477-2481
  • 9 Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach MD et al. 2008; Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J 8 (6) 968-974