Physiotherapy after anterior cervical spine surgery for cervical disc disease: study protocol of a prospective randomised study to compare internet-based neck-specific exercise with prescribed physical activity

Anneli Peolsson, Gunnel Peterson, Anna Hermansen, Maria Landén Ludvigsson, Åsa Dedering, Håkan Löfgren, Anneli Peolsson, Gunnel Peterson, Anna Hermansen, Maria Landén Ludvigsson, Åsa Dedering, Håkan Löfgren

Abstract

Introduction: Patients suffering from remaining disability after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) surgery for cervical disc disease may be prescribed physical activity (PPA) or neck-specific exercises (NSEs). Currently, we lack data for the success of either approach. There is also a knowledge gap concerning the use of internet-based care for cervical disc disease. The scarcity of these data, and the high proportion of patients with various degrees of incapacity following ACDF, warrant increased efforts to investigate and improve cost-effective rehabilitation. The objective is to compare the effectiveness of a structured, internet-based NSE programme, versus PPA following ACDF surgery.

Methods and analysis: This is a prospective, randomised, multicentre study that includes 140 patients with remaining disability (≥30% on the Neck Disability Index, NDI) following ACDF for radiculopathy due to cervical disc disease. Patient recruitment occurs following attendance at routine clinical appointments, scheduled at 3 months postsurgery. Patients are then randomised to one of two groups (70 patients/group) for a 3-month treatment programme/period of either internet-based NSE or PPA. Questionnaires on background data, pain and discomfort, physical and mental capacity, satisfaction with care, and health and workplace factors are completed, along with physical measures of neck-related function conducted by independent test leaders blinded to randomisation. Measures are collected at inclusion, after the 3-month treatments (end of treatment) and at a 2-year follow-up. Radiography will be completed at the 2-year follow-up. Preoperative data will be collected from the Swedish Spine Registry. Data on healthcare consumption, drug use and sick leave will be requested from the relevant national registers.

Ethical considerations: This study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Linköping Ref. 2016/283-31 and 2017/91- 32. The scientists are independent with no commercial ties. Patients are recruited after providing written informed consent. Patient data are presented at group level such that no connection to any individual can be made. All data are anonymised when reported, and subject to the Swedish Official Secrets Health Acts. The test leaders are independent and blinded for randomisation. Exercises, both general and neck-specific, have been used extensively in clinical practice and we anticipate no harm from their implementation other than a risk of muscle soreness. Both randomisation groups will receive care that is expected to relieve pain, although the group receiving NSE is expected to demonstrate a greater and more cost-effective improvement versu s the PPA group. Any significant harm or unintended effects in each group will be collected by the test leaders. All questionnaires and test materials are coded by the research group, with code lists stored in locked, fireproof file cabinets, housed at the university in a room with controlled (card-based) access. Only individuals in receipt of a unique website address posted by the researchers can access the programme; patients can neither communicate with each other nor with caregivers via the programme.Study participation might lead to improved rehabilitation versus non-participation, and might therefore be of benefit. The results of this study should also contribute to more effective and flexible rehabilitation, shorter waiting times, lower costs and the possibility to implement our findings on a wider level.

Dissemination: If effective, the protocols used in this study can be implemented in existing healthcare structures. The results of the study will be presented in scientific journals and popular science magazines of relevance to health. The findings will also be presented at local, regional, national and international conferences and meetings, as well as in the education of university students and at public lectures. Information about the results will be communicated to the general population in cooperation with patient organisations and the media.

Trial registration: NCT03036007.

Keywords: rehabilitation medicine; spine.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials schedule of enrolment, interventions and assessments.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials flow diagram for ‘Physiotherapy after anterior cervical spine surgery for cervical disc disease’.

References

    1. Löfgren H. Outcome and bone grafts in surgical treatment of cervical disc disease. Linköping University Medical Dissertations, Sweden. 2000. ISSN 0345-0082;6212000, ISBN:91-7219-578-9 .
    1. Epstein NE. A review of laminoforaminotomy for the management of lateral and foraminal cervical disc herniations or spurs. Surg Neurol 2002;57:226–33. 10.1016/S0090-3019(02)00644-4
    1. Hacker RJ, Cauthen JC, Gilbert TJ, et al. . A prospective randomized multicenter clinical evaluation of an anterior cervical fusion cage. Spine 2000;25:2646–55. 10.1097/00007632-200010150-00017
    1. Peolsson A, Kjellman G. Neck muscle endurance in nonspecific patients with neck pain and in patients after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2007;30:343–50. 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.04.008
    1. Peolsson A. Investigation of clinically important benefit of anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Eur Spine J 2007;16:507–14. 10.1007/s00586-006-0271-0
    1. Zoëga B, Kärrholm J, Lind B. Outcome scores in degenerative cervical disc surgery. Eur Spine J 2000;9:137–43. 10.1007/s005860050224
    1. Peolsson A, Peolsson M. Predictive factors for long-term outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a multivariate data analysis. Eur Spine J 2008;17:406–14. 10.1007/s00586-007-0560-2
    1. Peolsson A, Söderlund A, Engquist M, et al. . Physical function outcome in cervical radiculopathy patients after physiotherapy alone compared with anterior surgery followed by physiotherapy: a prospective randomized study with a 2-year follow-up. Spine 2013;38:300–7. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826d2cbb
    1. Hermansen A, Hedlund R, Vavruch L, et al. . A comparison between the carbon fiber cage and the cloward procedure in cervical spine surgery: a ten- to thirteen-year follow-up of a prospective randomized study. Spine 2011;36:919–25. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e8e4a3
    1. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Hedlund R. Long-term randomised comparison between a carbon fibre cage and the Cloward procedure in the cervical spine. Eur Spine J 2007;16:173–8. 10.1007/s00586-006-0067-2
    1. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Oberg B. Can the results 6 months after anterior cervical decompression and fusion identify patients who will have remaining deficit at long-term? Disabil Rehabil 2006;28:117–24. 10.1080/09638280500163752
    1. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Öberg B. Disability after anterior decompression and fusion for cervical disc disease. Adv Physiother 2002;4:111–24. 10.1080/140381902320387531
    1. Persson LC, Carlsson CA, Carlsson JY. Long-lasting cervical radicular pain managed with surgery, physiotherapy, or a cervical collar. A prospective, randomized study. Spine 1997;22:751–8.
    1. Ellenberg MR, Honet JC, Treanor WJ. Cervical radiculopathy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:342–52. 10.1016/0003-9993(94)90040-X
    1. Murphy DR, Hurwitz EL, Gregory A, et al. . A nonsurgical approach to the management of patients with cervical radiculopathy: a prospective observational cohort study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2006;29:279–87. 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.03.005
    1. Saal JS, Saal JA, Yurth EF. Nonoperative management of herniated cervical intervertebral disc with radiculopathy. Spine 1996;21:1877–83. 10.1097/00007632-199608150-00008
    1. Engquist M, Löfgren H, Öberg B, et al. . Surgery versus nonsurgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy: a prospective, randomized study comparing surgery plus physiotherapy with physiotherapy alone with a 2-year follow-up. Spine 2013;38:1715–22. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31829ff095
    1. Engquist M, Löfgren H, Öberg B, et al. . A 5- to 8-year randomized study on the treatment of cervical radiculopathy: anterior cervical decompression and fusion plus physiotherapy versus physiotherapy alone. J Neurosurg Spine 2017;26:19–27. 10.3171/2016.6.SPINE151427
    1. Peolsson A, Öberg B, Wibault J, et al. . Outcome of physiotherapy after surgery for cervical disc disease: a prospective randomised multi-centre trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014;15:34 10.1186/1471-2474-15-34
    1. Wibault J, Öberg B, Å D, et al. . Structured postoperative physiotherapy in patients with cervical radiculopathy: outcomes at 6 months in a randomized clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine Accepted 2017.
    1. Wibault J, Öberg B, Dedering Å, et al. . Neck-related physical function, self-efficacy, and coping strategies in patients with cervical radiculopathy: a randomized clinical trial of postoperative physiotherapy. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2017;40:330–9. 10.1016/j.jmpt.2017.02.012
    1. Cuijpers P, van Straten A, Andersson G. Internet-administered cognitive behavior therapy for health problems: a systematic review. J Behav Med 2008;31:169–77. 10.1007/s10865-007-9144-1
    1. Sjöström M, Umefjord G, Stenlund H, et al. . Internet-based treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a randomised controlled study with focus on pelvic floor muscle training. BJU Int 2013;112:362–72. 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11713.x
    1. Revenäs Å, Opava CH, Ahlén H, et al. . Mobile internet service for self-management of physical activity in people with rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation of a test version. RMD Open 2016;2:e 000214 10.1136/rmdopen-2015-000214
    1. Andersson G. Using the Internet to provide cognitive behaviour therapy. Behav Res Ther 2009;47:175–80. 10.1016/j.brat.2009.01.010
    1. Garg S, Garg D, Turin TC, et al. . Web-based interventions for chronic back pain: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2016;18:e139 10.2196/jmir.4932
    1. Shukla H, Nair SR, Thakker D. Role of telerehabilitation in patients following total knee arthroplasty: Evidence from a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare 2017;23:339–46. 10.1177/1357633X16628996
    1. Bring A, Åsenlöf P, Söderlund A. What is the comparative effectiveness of current standard treatment, against an individually tailored behavioural programme delivered either on the Internet or face-to-face for people with acute whiplash associated disorder? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 2016;30:441–53. 10.1177/0269215515581503
    1. Lelieveld OT, Armbrust W, Geertzen JH, et al. . Promoting physical activity in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis through an internet-based program: results of a pilot randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Care Res 2010;62:697–703. 10.1002/acr.20085
    1. Vernon H, Mior S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991;14:409–15.
    1. MacDermid JC, Walton DM, Avery S, et al. . Measurement properties of the neck disability index: a systematic review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2009;39:400–C12. 10.2519/jospt.2009.2930
    1. Ludvigsson ML, Peterson G, Dedering Å, et al. . One- and two-year follow-up of a randomized trial of neck-specific exercise with or without a behavioural approach compared with prescription of physical activity in chronic whiplash disorder. J Rehabil Med 2016;48:56–64. 10.2340/16501977-2041
    1. Ludvigsson ML, Peterson G, O’Leary S, et al. . The effect of neck-specific exercise with, or without a behavioral approach, on pain, disability, and self-efficacy in chronic whiplash-associated disorders: a randomized clinical trial. Clin J Pain 2015;31:294–303. 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000123
    1. Gross AR, Paquin JP, Dupont G, et al. . Exercises for mechanical neck disorders: a cochrane review update. Man Ther 2016;24:25–45. 10.1016/j.math.2016.04.005
    1. Sarig-Bahat H. Evidence for exercise therapy in mechanical neck disorders. Man Ther 2003;8:10–20. 10.1054/math.2002.0480
    1. Kay TM, Gross A, Goldsmith CH, et al. . Exercises for mechanical neck disorders. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012:CD004250 10.1002/14651858.CD004250.pub4
    1. Gross AR, Goldsmith C, Hoving JL, et al. . Conservative management of mechanical neck disorders: a systematic review. J Rheumatol 2007;34:1083–102.
    1. Miller J, Gross A, D’Sylva J, et al. . Manual therapy and exercise for neck pain: a systematic review. Man Ther 2010;15:334–54. 10.1016/j.math.2010.02.007
    1. Geneen LJ, Moore RA, Clarke C, et al. . Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane reviews (review).
    1. Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment (SBU). Back pain, Neck pain. An evidence based review. (In Swedish) (Ont i ryggen, ont i nacken: en evidensbaserad kunskapssammanställning. Stockholm: SB Offsett AB, 2000. Nr 145/2, chapter 14–17.
    1. Final Report. The Whiplash commission final report.
    1. Kallings LV, Leijon ME, Kowalski J, et al. . Self-reported adherence: a method for evaluating prescribed physical activity in primary health care patients. J Phys Act Health 2009;6:483–92. 10.1123/jpah.6.4.483
    1. Leijon ME, Bendtsen P, Nilsen P, et al. . Does a physical activity referral scheme improve the physical activity among routine primary health care patients? Scand J Med Sci Sports 2009;19:627–36. 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2008.00820.x
    1. Carlsson AM. Assessment of chronic pain. I. Aspects of the reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale. Pain 1983;16:87–101. 10.1016/0304-3959(83)90088-X
    1. Ferreira-Valente MA, Pais-Ribeiro JL, Jensen MP. Validity of four pain intensity rating scales. Pain 2011;152:2399–404. 10.1016/j.pain.2011.07.005
    1. Barbero M, Moresi F, Leoni D, et al. . Test-retest reliability of pain extent and pain location using a novel method for pain drawing analysis. Eur J Pain 2015;19:1129–38. 10.1002/ejp.636
    1. Odom GL. Cervical disk lesions. J Am Med Assoc 1958;166:23–8. 10.1001/jama.1958.02990010025006
    1. Jacobson GP, Newman CW. The development of the Dizziness Handicap Inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990;116:424–7. 10.1001/archotol.1990.01870040046011
    1. Yang M, Rendas-Baum R, Varon SF, et al. . Validation of the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6™) across episodic and chronic migraine. Cephalalgia 2011;31:357–67. 10.1177/0333102410379890
    1. Osman A, Barrios FX, Gutierrez PM, et al. . The pain catastrophizing scale: further psychometric evaluation with adult samples. J Behav Med 2000;23:351–65. 10.1023/A:1005548801037
    1. Altmaier ERD, Kao C, Lehmann T, et al. . Role of self-efficacy in rehabilitation outcome among chronic low back pain patients. J Counsel Psychol 1993;36:725–33.
    1. Stratford P. Assessing disability and change on individual patients: a report of a patient specific measure. Physiotherapy Canada 1995;47:258–63. 10.3138/ptc.47.4.258
    1. Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, et al. . A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 1993;52:157–68. 10.1016/0304-3959(93)90127-B
    1. Dedering A, Börjesson T. Assessing fear-avoidance beliefs in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Physiother Res Int 2013;18:193–202. 10.1002/pri.1545
    1. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361–70. 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x
    1. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996;37:53–72. 10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6
    1. Tuomi K, Ilmarinen J, Jahkola A, et al. . Helsinki: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health. 1998. .
    1. Radkiewich P, Widerszal-Bazyl M. Psychometric Properties of work ability index in the light of comparative survey study. International Congress Series 2005:1289–304.
    1. de Zwart BC, Frings-Dresen MH, van Duivenbooden JC. Test-retest reliability of the Work Ability Index questionnaire. Occup Med 2002;52:177–81. 10.1093/occmed/52.4.177
    1. Siegrist J, Starke D, Chandola T, et al. . The measurement of effort-reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Soc Sci Med 2004;58:1483–99. 10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00351-4
    1. Koopman C, Pelletier KR, Murray JF, et al. . Stanford presenteeism scale: health status and employee productivity. J Occup Environ Med 2002;44:14–20. 10.1097/00043764-200201000-00004
    1. Turpin RS, Ozminkowski RJ, Sharda CE, et al. . Reliability and validity of the Stanford Presenteeism Scale. J Occup Environ Med 2004;46:1123–33. 10.1097/01.jom.0000144999.35675.a0
    1. Statistics Sweden (SCB). SSYK 2012 Standard för svensk yrkesklassificering. 2012. In Swedish). (Devoloped from the ISCO-08 (International Standard Classification of Occupation 2008
    1. Cherkin DC, Deyo RA, Street JH, et al. . Predicting poor outcomes for back pain seen in primary care using patients’ own criteria. Spine 1996;21:2900–7. 10.1097/00007632-199612150-00023
    1. Howie JG, Heaney DJ, Maxwell M, et al. . A comparison of a Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) against two established satisfaction scales as an outcome measure of primary care consultations. Fam Pract 1998;15:165–71. 10.1093/fampra/15.2.165
    1. Ekberg K, Noorlind-Brage H, Dastserri M. Östgötens hälsa och miljö 2000. Swedish: Linköping: Folkhälsovetenskapligt Centrum Landstinget i Östergötland, 2000.
    1. Peolsson A, Almkvist C, Dahlberg C, et al. . Age- and sex-specific reference values of a test of neck muscle endurance. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2007;30:171–7. 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.01.008
    1. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Ertzgaard S, et al. . Intra-and inter-tester reliability and age- and sex-specific range of motion of the neck. Physiother Canada 2000;52:233–42.
    1. Jull GA, O’Leary SP, Falla DL. Clinical assessment of the deep cervical flexor muscles: the craniocervical flexion test. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2008;31:525–33. 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.003
    1. Wainner RS, Fritz JM, Irrgang JJ, et al. . Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination and patient self-report measures for cervical radiculopathy. Spine 2003;28:52–62. 10.1097/00007632-200301010-00014
    1. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Oberg B. Intra- and inter-tester reliability and reference values for hand strength. J Rehabil Med 2001;33:36–41. 10.1080/165019701300006524
    1. Kammerlind A-S, Bergquist Larsson P, Ledin T, et al. . Reliability of clinical balance tests and subjective ratings in dizziness and disequilibrium. Adv Physiother 2005;7:96–107. 10.1080/14038190510010403
    1. Peolsson A, Landén Ludvigsson M, Tigerfors AM, et al. . Effects of neck-specific exercises compared to waiting list for individuals with chronic whiplash-associated disorders: a prospective, randomized controlled study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016;97:189–95. 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.10.087
    1. Landén Ludvigsson M, Peolsson A, Peterson G, et al. . Neck-specific exercise is cost-effective in the treatment of chronic whiplash associated disorders. Analyses of a randomized clinical trial Medicine 2017;96:e7274.
    1. Fox CS, Hwang SJ, Nieto K, et al. . Digital connectedness in the framingham heart study. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e003193 10.1161/JAHA.116.003193

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir