Study Design.: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected registry data. Objective.: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of 30% reduction to established absolute point-change values for measures of disability and pain in patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery. Summary of Background Data.: Recent studies recommend using a proportional change from baseline instead of an absolute point-change value to define minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Methods.: Analyses included 13,179 patients who underwent cervical spine surgery for degenerative disease between April 2013 and February 2018. Participants completed a baseline and 12-month follow-up assessment that included questionnaires to assess disability (Neck Disability Index [NDI]), neck and arm pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS-NP/AP], and satisfaction [NASS scale]). Participants were classified as met or not met 30% reduction from baseline in each of the respective measures. The 30% reduction in scores at 12 months was compared to a wide range of established absolute point-change MCID values using receiver-operating characteristic curves, area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and logistic regression analyses. These analyses were conducted for the entire patient cohort, as well as for subgroups based on baseline severity and surgical approach. Results.: Thirty percent reduction in NDI and NRS-NP/AP scores predicted satisfaction with more accuracy than absolute point-change values for the total population and ACDF and posterior fusion procedures (P < 0.05). The largest AUROC differences, in favor of 30% reduction, were found for the lowest disability (ODI 0–20%: 16.8%) and bed-bound disability (ODI 81%–100%: 16.6%) categories. For pain, there was a 1.9% to 11% and 1.6% to 9.6% AUROC difference for no/mild neck and arm pain (NRS 0–4), respectively, in favor of a 30% reduction threshold. Conclusion.: A 30% reduction from baseline is a valid method for determining MCID in disability and pain for patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. Level of Evidence: 3

Study Design.: This study retrospectively analyzes prospectively collected data. Objective.: Here we aim to develop predictive models for 3-month medical and surgical readmission after elective lumbar surgery, based on a multi-institutional, national spine registry. Summary of Background Data.: Unplanned readmissions place considerable stress on payers, hospitals, and patients. Medicare data reveals a 30-day readmission rate of 7.8% for lumbar-decompressions and 13.0% for lumbar-fusions, and hospitals are now being penalized for excessive 30-day readmission rates by virtue of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program. Methods.: The Quality and Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing elective lumbar surgery for degenerative diseases. The QOD prospectively captures 3-month readmissions through electronic medical record (EMR) review and self-reported outcome questionnaires. Distinct multivariable logistic regression models were fitted for surgery-related and medical readmissions adjusting for patient and surgery-specific variables. Results.: Of the total 33,674 patients included in this study 2079 (6.15%) reported at least one readmission during the 90-day postoperative period. The odds of medical readmission were significantly higher for older patients, males versus females, African Americans versus Caucasion, those with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, diabetes, coronary artery disease, higher numbers of involved levels, anterior only or anterior–posterior versus posterior approach; also, for patients who were unemployed compared with employed patients and those with high baseline Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The odds of surgery-related readmission were significantly greater for patients with a higher body mass index (BMI), a higher ASA grade, female versus male, and African Americans versus Caucasians; also, for patients with severe depression, more involved spinal levels, anterior-only surgical approaches and higher baseline ODI scores. Conclusion.: In this study we present internally validated predictive models for medical and surgical readmission after elective lumbar spine surgery. These findings set the stage for targeted interventions with a potential to reduce unnecessary readmissions, and also suggest that medical and surgical readmissions be treated as distinct clinical events. Level of Evidence: 3

The purpose of this study was to examine the association between goal attainment and patient-reported outcomes in patients who engaged in a 6-session, telephone-based, cognitive-behavioral–based physical therapy (CBPT) intervention after spine surgery. In this secondary analysis of a randomized trial, data from 112 participants (mean age = 63.3 [SD = 11.2] years; 57 [51%] women) who attended at least 2 CBPT sessions (median = 6 [range = 2–6]) were examined. At each session, participants set weekly goals and used goal attainment scaling (GAS) to report goal attainment from the previous session. The number and type of goals and percentage of goals met were tracked. An individual GAS t score was computed across sessions. Participants were categorized based on goals met as expected (GAS t score ≥ 50) or goals not met as expected (GAS t score < 50). Six- and 12-month outcomes included disability (Oswestry Disability Index), physical and mental health (12-Item Short-Form Health Survey), physical function (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System), pain interference (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System), and back and leg pain intensity (numeric rating scale). Outcome differences over time between groups were examined with mixed-effects regression. Participants set a median of 3 goals (range = 1–6) at each session. The most common goal categories were recreational/physical activity (36%), adopting a CBPT strategy (28%), exercising (11%), and performing activities of daily living (11%). Forty-eight participants (43%) met their goals as expected. Participants who met their goals as expected had greater physical function improvement at 6 months (estimate = 3.7; 95% CI = 1.0 to 6.5) and 12 months (estimate = 2.8; 95% CI = 0.04 to 5.6). No other outcome differences were noted. Goal attainment within a CBPT program was associated with 6- and 12-month improvements in postoperative physical functioning. This study highlights goal attainment as an important rehabilitation component related to physical function recovery after spine surgery.