COMPARISON OF A SIX MONTH NON-AGGRAVATING GYM REHABILITATION PROGRAM VERSUS USUAL SURGICAL ADVICE POST LUMBAR DISCECTOMY. A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL WITH 3 YEAR FOLLOW UP

Abstract

Lumbar discectomy is now the operation of choice for lumbosacral radicular syndrome. Few studies of high quality have been performed on the post surgical management of these cases. The studies that have been reported compare one exercise regime to another.

The aim of this study was to compare long term outcomes of usual surgical advice, involving no formal post-surgical rehabilitation, with a non-aggravating six month gym rehabilitation programme post lumbar discectomy. This study is a prospective randomised controlled trial using a cohort followed for three years.

The patients were computer randomised into two groups. Group A, the control group followed usual surgical advice which was to resume normal activity as soon as pain allowed. Group B, undertook the gym rehabilitation programme. Inclusion criteria were: age 17 to 65 years, good health and no major medical problems. The surgical level had to be L3, L4, or L5. Patients were excluded if they had central neurological disorders, communication difficulties, any condition making gym-based exercises unsafe, or if the surgery was indicated for spinal infection, tumour or inflammatory disease. Patients were followed for a three year period using validated outcome measures (Roland-Morris Questionnaire and Oswestry Low Back Pain Index) and an annual Quality of Life (QoL) questionnaire. The annual questionnaire reported information on number of GP visits, other therapist visits, medication levels and time off work.

Ninety three participants were randomised; Control n=46 and trial n=47. Eighty nine participants completed the study. Randomisation achieved a balance of confounding factors, with the exception of work heaviness, where there were a greater number of participants in the very heavy and heavy categories in the trial group (P< 0.01). Functional outcome measures did not achieve statistical difference over the three year period. Other studies have shown these measures to be reliable for short term follow up but their reliability diminishes with time (1,2). Key findings of cumulative three year data for the QoL questionnaire were in the intent-to-treat analysis: fewer GP visits in the trial group p< 0.008; and per protocol: fewer episodes off work p< 0.01 (49% versus 15%), fewer days off p< 0.053 and fewer GP visits p< 0.009.

The results reveal an advantage in terms of episodes off work and GP visits for participants in Group B who completed the programme. Time off work is a significant consideration for funding providers. These results suggest that surgeons should consider referral of discectomy patients to appropriate post-surgical rehabilitation programmes.