Covid-19 Research

Research Article

Medical and Non-Medical Drivers for Satisfaction and Fulfillment of Expectations of Patients after Spinal Surgery

Journal of Biomedical Research & Environmental Sciences article abstract with citation details, DOI, publication dates, subject areas, full text links, and references.

View DOI Submit Manuscript

Article Details

Publication record, authors, dates, abstract, and full text access.

Open Access
Article Type Research Article
Subject Medicine Group
OCLC JBRES Record
Dominik Schmid, u0130lker Uckay*, Yasmin Ramadani, Thorsten Jentzsch and Mazda Farshad
Issue: Volume6-Issue4
Pages: 361-367
Received: 2025-02-01
Accepted: 2025-04-16
Published: 2025-04-19

Abstract

Background: The drivers for satisfaction of patients after spinal surgeries are largely unknown and potentially responsive to non-medical factors. We investigated medical and non-medical drivers for patient satisfaction and fulfillment of expectations after spinal surgery.

Methods: We performed a questionnaire-based postoperative survey from May-December 2021. Overall, 400 questionnaires were sent within 3 to 6 weeks after adult spine surgery. The survey contained 33 variables (basic demographic (n = 6), health state (n = 6), satisfaction with change after spine surgery (n = 5), and satisfaction with non-medical (n = 9) variables. The primary outcome was global satisfaction of change after spinal surgery (>50th percentile of question).

Results: The return rate of questionnaires was 42% (n = 167). The internal consistency of the questionnaire was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha 0.59 [range 0.49-0.68]). The current health and satisfaction with change of current health after spine surgery showed mostly strong correlations (mobility: rho 0.67; self-care: 0.74; usual activities: 0.73; pain: 0.73; anxiety: 0.79; p < 0.001 each). Pain was most commonly ranked as the most important factor for satisfaction (n = 56 [58%]), mobility as second (n = 42 [43%]), and friendliness as third (n = 27 [28%]) most important. Surprisingly, radiological proof of successful surgery was most commonly ranked last (n = 51 [53%]]. Patients with fulfillment of their expectations were more likely to have been satisfied with mobility after spine surgery (odds ratio 2.2 [95% Confidence Interval (CI]] 1.3-3.7) and friendliness of the surgeon (1.8 [95% CI 1.1-2.8)].

Conclusion: Aside from the known medical driver, mobility, for satisfaction and fulfillment of patient’s expectations, friendliness of the surgeon is shown to play an important role. Surprisingly, other non-medical factors, such as patient’s knowledge about radiological proof of successful surgery, the role of nurses and guest relations did not play an important role in this patient cohort.

FullText HTML FullText PDF DOI: 10.37871/jbres2090 Crossmark

Certificate of Publication

Certificate of Publication

Copyright

© 2025 Schmid D, et al. Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 Creative CommonsAttribution

How to cite this article

Schmid D, Uçkay İ, Ramadani Y, Jentzsch T, Farshad M. Medical and Non-Medical Drivers for Satisfaction and Fulfi llment of Expectations of Patients after Spinal Surgery. J Biomed Res Environ Sci. 2025 Apr 19; 6(4): 361-367. doi: 10.37871/ jbres2090, Article ID: JBRES2090, Available at: https://www.jelsciences.com/articles/jbres2090.pdf

Subject area(s)

Pain and ReliefOrthopedicsPublic HealthSurgery

References

  1. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Nov 15;25(22):2940-52; discussion 2952. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017. PMID: 11074683.
  2. Menendez JY, Omar NB, Chagoya G, Tabibian BE, Elsayed GA, Walters BC, Guthrie BL, Hadley MN. Patient Satisfaction in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Asian Spine J. 2019 Dec;13(6):1047-1057. doi: 10.31616/asj.2019.0032. Epub 2019 Jul 30. PMID: 31352720; PMCID: PMC6894977.
  3. Menendez ME, Ring D. Does the timing of surgery for proximal humeral fracture affect inpatient outcomes? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Sep;23(9):1257-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.03.010. Epub 2014 Jun 9. PMID: 24925700.
  4. Vernon H. The Neck Disability Index: state-of-the-art, 1991-2008. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008 Sep;31(7):491-502. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.006. PMID: 18803999.
  5. Comer CM, Conaghan PG, Tennant A. Internal construct validity of the Swiss Spinal Stenosis questionnaire: Rasch analysis of a disease-specific outcome measure for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Nov 1;36(23):1969-76. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fc9daf. PMID: 21289573.
  6. Milligan G. An Introduction to the HCAHPS Survey. Nurse Educ. 2021 Sep-Oct 01;46(5):E89. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000981. PMID: 34435761.
  7. Karimi M, Brazier J. Health, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Quality of Life: What is the Difference? Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Jul;34(7):645-9. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0389-9. PMID: 26892973.
  8. Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003. PMID: 8628042.
  9. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473-83. PMID: 1593914.
  10. Mummaneni PV, Bydon M, Alvi MA, Chan AK, Glassman SD, Foley KT, Potts EA, Shaffrey CI, Shaffrey ME, Coric D, Knightly JJ, Park P, Wang MY, Fu KM, Slotkin JR, Asher AL, Virk MS, Kerezoudis P, Guan J, Haid RW, Bisson EF. Predictive model for long-term patient satisfaction after surgery for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: insights from the Quality Outcomes Database. Neurosurg Focus. 2019 May 1;46(5):E12. doi: 10.3171/2019.2.FOCUS18734. PMID: 31042653.
  11. Chapin L, Ward K, Ryken T. Preoperative Depression, Smoking, and Employment Status are Significant Factors in Patient Satisfaction After Lumbar Spine Surgery. Clin Spine Surg. 2017 Jul;30(6):E725-E732. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000331. PMID: 28632560.
  12. Crawford CH 3rd, Carreon LY, Bydon M, Asher AL, Glassman SD. Impact of preoperative diagnosis on patient satisfaction following lumbar spine surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Jun;26(6):709-715. doi: 10.3171/2016.11.SPINE16848. Epub 2017 Mar 24. PMID: 28338454.
  13. Gepstein R, Arinzon Z, Adunsky A, Folman Y. Decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly: preoperative expectations and postoperative satisfaction. Spinal Cord. 2006 Jul;44(7):427-31. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3101857. Epub 2005 Nov 22. PMID: 16304562.
  14. Witiw CD, Mansouri A, Mathieu F, Nassiri F, Badhiwala JH, Fessler RG. Exploring the expectation-actuality discrepancy: a systematic review of the impact of preoperative expectations on satisfaction and patient reported outcomes in spinal surgery. Neurosurg Rev. 2018 Jan;41(1):19-30. doi: 10.1007/s10143-016-0720-0. Epub 2016 Apr 7. PMID: 27053222.
  15. Abtahi AM, Lyman KS, Brodke DS, Lawrence BD, Zhang C, Spiker WR. Patient Satisfaction is Not Associated With Self-reported Disability in a Spine Patient Population. Clin Spine Surg. 2017 Oct;30(8):E1165-E1168. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000431. PMID: 27764055.
  16. Yamashita K, Hayashi J, Ohzono K, Hiroshima K. Correlation of patient satisfaction with symptom severity and walking ability after surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Nov 1;28(21):2477-81. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000090888.63860.4F. PMID: 14595167.
  17. Toyone T, Tanaka T, Kato D, Kaneyama R, Otsuka M. Patients' expectations and satisfaction in lumbar spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Dec 1;30(23):2689-94. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000187876.14304.15. PMID: 16319756.
  18. Godil SS, Parker SL, Zuckerman SL, Mendenhall SK, Devin CJ, Asher AL, McGirt MJ. Determining the quality and effectiveness of surgical spine care: patient satisfaction is not a valid proxy. Spine J. 2013 Sep;13(9):1006-12. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.04.008. Epub 2013 May 16. PMID: 23685216.
  19. Licina P, Johnston M, Ewing L, Pearcy M. Patient expectations, outcomes and satisfaction: related, relevant or redundant? Evid Based Spine Care J. 2012 Nov;3(4):13-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1328138. PMID: 23531640; PMCID: PMC3592768.
  20. Ehlers AP, Khor S, Cizik AM, Leveque JA, Shonnard NS, Oskouian RJ Jr, Flum DR, Lavallee DC. Use of patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction for quality assessments. Am J Manag Care. 2017 Oct;23(10):618-622. PMID: 29087633; PMCID: PMC5846490.
  21. Bible JE, Shau DN, Kay HF, Cheng JS, Aaronson OS, Devin CJ. Are Low Patient Satisfaction Scores Always Due to the Provider?: Determinants of Patient Satisfaction Scores During Spine Clinic Visits. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018 Jan 1;43(1):58-64. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001453. PMID: 26780613.
  22. Cheriyan T, Harris B, Cheriyan J, Lafage V, Spivak JM, Bendo JA, Errico TJ, Goldstein JA. Association between compensation status and outcomes in spine surgery: a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Spine J. 2015 Dec 1;15(12):2564-73. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.033. Epub 2015 Sep 30. PMID: 26431997.
  23. Sigmundsson FG, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B. Determinants of patient satisfaction after surgery for central spinal stenosis without concomitant spondylolisthesis: a register study of 5100 patients. Eur Spine J. 2017 Feb;26(2):473-480. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4495-3. Epub 2016 Mar 7. PMID: 26951175.
  24. Mancuso CA, Duculan R, Cammisa FP, Sama AA, Hughes AP, Lebl DR, Girardi FP. Fulfillment of patients' expectations of lumbar and cervical spine surgery. Spine J. 2016 Oct;16(10):1167-1174. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.04.011. Epub 2016 Apr 18. PMID: 27102994.
  25. Levin JM, Winkelman RD, Tanenbaum JE, Benzel EC, Mroz TE, Steinmetz MP. Key drivers of patient satisfaction in lumbar spine surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018 Jun;28(6):586-592. doi: 10.3171/2017.10.SPINE17732. Epub 2018 Mar 23. PMID: 29570048.
  26. Burkhard MD, Loretz R, Uçkay I, Bauer DE, Betz M, Farshad M. Occult infection in pseudarthrosis revision after spinal fusion. Spine J. 2021 Mar;21(3):370-376. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2020.10.015. Epub 2020 Oct 17. PMID: 33080375.
Publish with JBRES — Peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary Open Access with rapid review, DOI, and global visibility.
Double-Blind CrossRef DOI Discoverable
Submit Manuscript Membership