Outcomes and presurgery correlates of lumbar discectomy in Utah Workers' Compensation patients

Background contextLumbar discectomy is the most common type of back surgery performed in the United States. Outcomes after this procedure can be variable and it appears that Workers' Compensation patients might be at increased risk for poor outcomes.PurposeTo examine long-term multidimensional outcomes of lumbar discectomy within a cohort of Workers' Compensation patients from Utah and identify presurgical biopsychosocial factors related to poor outcomes.Study design/settingA retrospective cohort study consisting of a review of presurgical medical records and assessment of patient outcomes via a telephone survey. Outcomes were assessed at least 2 years postsurgery.Patient sampleA consecutive sample of 271 workers from Utah who underwent lumbar discectomy from 1994 to 1999. A total of 134 patients were surveyed at the time of follow-up.Outcome measuresPatient satisfaction, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, SF-36v2, and Stauffer-Coventry Index.MethodsA retrospective review of presurgical biopsychosocial variables and outcome assessment via telephone survey was conducted.ResultsWork disability rate for the cohort was 12.7% (17/134). Analysis of patient satisfaction, back pain-related dysfunction, and the Short-Form Health Survey-36 subscales indicated approximately 25% of patients experienced poor outcomes. Older age, number of comorbid health conditions, assigned case manager, litigation, and time delay from injury to surgery were consistently statistically significant predictors (p<.05) of poor outcomes.ConclusionsResults of this study suggest that compensated back surgery patients are at greater risk for poor lumbar discectomy outcomes than noncompensation patients. Presurgery correlates of poor outcomes may be useful in identifying high-risk compensation patients.     

TEN YEARS' EXPERIENCE IN LOW VISION PRACTICE

The Low Vision Clinic at the Palmerston North Hospital has now been oerating for 70 years. Over the course of these ten years a number of factors have emerged which can be as readily applied to general ophthalmological practice as to low vision practice. The philosophy of low vision care is one of which all ophthalmologists should be aware and includes factors to be taken into account when dealing with children, people in the workplace, and everyday factors involved in daily living activities, all of which are equally relevant in routine ophthalmological practice. This paper endeavours to share some thoughts on these factors and also discusses means by which the visually handicapped can be helped in areas where specialist low vision services are not readily available.     

Comparison of trichloroethylene and enflurane as adjuncts to nitrous oxide and relaxant anaesthesia

Forty women who underwent gynaecological surgery were randomly allocated to receive trichloroethylene, enflurane, or enflurane plus fentanyl as adjuncts to nitrous oxide/relaxant anaesthesia with controlled ventilation. No serious cardiac dysrhythmias were seen in any group. Each patient was observed postoperatively for 4 hours by a nurse blind to the technique used, and questioned at 24 hours by a similarly blinded anaesthetist. Recovery after trichloroethylene was not significantly prolonged although postoperative analgesia by visual analogue was better, opiate analgesia was required less frequently and there was less nausea and vomiting than in either of the enflurane groups. We argue for the continued use of trichloroethylene by this technique, because it costs one hundred times less than enflurane and because of the potential morbidity of the postoperative opiate dosage required after enflurane.     

Obstetrician-gynecologists as primary care physicians: The Oregon experience—Early perceptions regarding the effects of legislative action

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to assess whether legislative action influenced the role of obstetrician-gynecologists as primary care physicians. STUDY DESIGN: An observational study was performed on the basis of a questionnaire sent to 410 obstetrician-gynecologists and 27 medical directors of managed-care organizations. RESULTS: Of 67% of obstetrician-gynecologists and 96% of medical directors who responded, there was agreement as to the content of primary care, but a minority (38%) of obstetrician-gynecologists identified themselves as primary care providers. A minority of medical directors (35%) felt that obstetrician-gynecologists should serve in that role. Both obstetrician-gynecologists and medical directors felt that legislation had little impact. CONCLUSION: The reticence of obstetrician-gynecologists to assume a major role in primary care appears to be the result of an uneasiness with accepting a more comprehensive role in patient management and gatekeeping. They appear comfortable with the more traditional roles but feel that training and experience has not prepared them well for the management of more complex medical problems. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;178:1222-8.)