Outcome of Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis - a Comparison of Data From Three National Quality Registries
NCT ID: NCT02897947
Last Updated: 2018-09-05
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
7500 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2011-01-31
2015-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Hypotheses: Between these three countries, there are no differences in (i) indications for surgery, (ii) patient-reported outcome after surgery or (iii) risk factors associated to outcome are similar.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Activity Levels Amongst Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
NCT06057428
Comparative Effectiveness of Microdecompression and Laminectomy for Central Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
NCT02006901
Long-term Reoperations After Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Surgery
NCT06407063
Balance Amongst Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
NCT06075862
Comparative Effectiveness and Prognostic Factors of Surgical and Non-surgical Management of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
NCT03548441
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The registers:
All registries have the aim of studying outcome after spine surgery. All departments participate voluntarily. Patients participate voluntarily after signing an informed consent. At the time of admission, the patient reports data on demographics, social factors, comorbidity and previous surgery. After surgery, the surgeon records diagnosis and type of surgery performed.
The Norwegian Spine register, NORspine, is based on experiences from the Swespine register and previous validation studies from a local clinical registry, and was founded in 2007. In total 38 of 40 centers performing lumbar spine surgery in Norway report to NORspine. Coverage is approximately 95%. The completeness is approximately 65%.
The Swespine Register has included individuals treated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis since 1993. During the last decade, the number of departments participating in the registry has varied between 35 and 41 of the 42 to 45 departments providing spinal surgery services in Sweden. Coverage is approximately 90%. The completeness (number of patients reported to Swespine at the time of surgery) is approximately 80%.
The Danish spine register, DaneSpine, is based on Swespine and was acquired by the Danish Spine Society from the Swedish Society of Spinal Surgeons in 2009 and has successively been implemented. Coverage and completeness for DaneSpine has not been determined.
Quality assurance:
Loss to follow-up may bias the results. Solberg et al. (2011) studied 633 patients, who were operated on for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine in Norway, and found that a loss to follow-up of 22% would not bias conclusions about overall treatment effects. There were no indications of worse outcomes in the non-responders group. In a similar one-center study of the DaneSpine. Højmark et al. (2016) found that a loss to follow-up of 12% at did not seem to bias the conclusions that can be drawn from DaneSpine at that center.
Data handling Anonymized individual level data from all three registers will be pooled in one database. The cohort will be divided by country for comparisons.
Missing data and out of range data: In case of missing data case exclusion analysis by analysis, will be used. Out of range data will be deleted.
Analysis The data will be cleaned by excluding patients with missing or incorrect date of surgery, missing date for follow-up, previous lumbar spine surgery and surgery other than decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis with or without concomitant arthrodesis.
After data cleaning, we aim to perform blinded statistical analyses, in which the independent statistician performing the analyses is unaware of group belonging (i.e. country). The code will not be broken until the analyses and interpretations have been performed.
Comparisons of indications for surgery Analysis of baseline data will include age at surgery, sex, anthropometrics, number of smokers, Oswestry Disability Index, EQ-5D, number on sick leave, employment status, and duration of leg and back pain and presented as mean (SD), mean (95% confidence interval), or number (%).
Variables will be analyzed by analysis of variance, Chi-square or logistic regression tests. Data will be presented as crude (unadjusted) data to elucidate any differences between the countries.
Comparisons of outcome Comparisons of the change of the outcome variables from baseline to 1 year, as well as comparisons of the actual value at 1 year will be performed. Analysis of covariance, Chi-square or logistic regression tests and the crude (unadjusted) data will be presented.
In addition, baseline variables will be used as covariates in the analysis of covariance and the adjusted data presented. Propensity scores will also be considered as covariates.
Comparison of surgical method used Based on the decompression with or without concomitant arthrodesis. Non-response analysis A non-response analysis will be performed comparing all available baseline variables between those that responded to the 1 year follow-up with those that did not respond.
Sample size A study of similar character has never been performed before. Due to the nature of the study, the sample size is not formulated in the guise of power, risk level, or clinical difference. The number of patients participating in the study is estimated to 7500. The sample is so large that differences in the Oswestry Disability Index of as low as 2 points may be detected (power 90%, significance level 5%), but in the interpretation the minimal important difference of 10-15 points in the Oswestry Disability Index often referred to has to be taken into account.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
treated in Norway included in NORspine
patients having had surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Norway and are included in the national register NORspine
Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Norway
treated in Sweden included in Swespine
patients having had surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Sweden and are included in the national register Swespine
Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Sweden
Surgery for neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis in Sweden
treated in Denmark included in Danespine
patients having had surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Denmark and are included in the national register DANEspine
Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Denmark
Surgery for neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis in Denmark
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Norway
Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Sweden
Surgery for neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis in Sweden
Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Denmark
Surgery for neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis in Denmark
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* registered in a national quality register
* signed informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
50 Years
90 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Karolinska Institutet
OTHER
St. Olavs Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Greger Lønne, md phd
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
St. Olavs Hospital
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Lonne G, Fritzell P, Hagg O, Nordvall D, Gerdhem P, Lagerback T, Andersen M, Eiskjaer S, Gehrchen M, Jacobs W, van Hooff ML, Solberg TK. Lumbar spinal stenosis: comparison of surgical practice variation and clinical outcome in three national spine registries. Spine J. 2019 Jan;19(1):41-49. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.05.028. Epub 2018 May 21.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2014/2219
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.