Does back pain catastrophizing influence 60-month surgical outcomes for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis? A Quality Outcomes Database study.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
OBJECTIVE: Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is a common cause of back and leg pain influenced by factors like instability, disc degeneration, facet arthropathy, and psychosocial phenotype. Patients' experience of high-severity pain is complex, with significant implications for surgical planning. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of back pain catastrophizing on long-term outcomes following lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery. METHODS: This study uses the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) lumbar spondylolisthesis dataset and includes prospectively collected data from the 12 highest-enrolling clinical sites participating in the QOD lumbar module. The authors reviewed patients undergoing single-segment surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Severe baseline numeric rating scale for back pain (NRS-BP) scores (≥ 8) were classified as "catastrophizing," and mild to moderate pain scores (< 8) were classified as "non-catastrophizing." Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared for catastrophizing versus non-catastrophizing patients at 60 months. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the impact of catastrophizing on PROs, with multivariate analysis controlling for variables initially reaching a p value < 0.10. RESULTS: Of the 608 patients in this analysis, 260 (42.8%) experienced catastrophizing while 348 (57.2%) did not. Catastrophizing patients were significantly younger (59.9 ± 12.2 years vs 63.9 ± 11.7 years, p < 0.001), less often had ≥ 4 years of college education (31.2% vs 42.5%, p = 0.004), and more often used private insurance (58.8% vs 47.7%, p = 0.01). The catastrophizing cohort also had higher rates of depression (24.6% vs 17.0%, p = 0.02) and back pain predominance (45.4% vs 32.2%, p < 0.001). Surgical and perioperative characteristics did not significantly differ between cohorts. Although catastrophizing patients typically reported worse PRO scores at both baseline and 60 months, they demonstrated significantly greater improvement and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement across almost all PROs at 60 months (p < 0.05). However, North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction scores at 60 months did not differ significantly between cohorts. Multivariate analysis found that catastrophizing significantly predicted 60-month NRS-BP change (β -1.45, 95% CI -1.81 to -1.09; p < 0.001) and MCID achievement (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.52-2.58; p < 0.001) but not mean NRS-BP score or other metrics, including NASS satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Despite presenting with worse baseline symptoms, patients with pain catastrophizing experienced substantial and clinically meaningful improvement following surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Patient satisfaction was comparable between cohorts, reflecting a nuanced balance between greater absolute improvement and persistence of residual symptoms. These findings underscore that catastrophizing should not be viewed as a barrier to surgical success, while pointing to the need for proactive expectation setting and shared decision-making.
