RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Predicting patient-reported outcomes following lumbar spine surgery: development and external validation of multivariable prediction models
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.02.15.22270980
DO 10.1101/2022.02.15.22270980
A1 Halicka, Monika
A1 Wilby, Martin
A1 Duarte, Rui
A1 Brown, Christopher
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/05/05/2022.02.15.22270980.abstract
AB Background This study aimed to develop and externally validate prediction models of spinal surgery outcomes based on a retrospective review of a prospective clinical database, uniquely comparing multivariate regression and machine learning approaches, and identifying the most important predictors.Methods Outcomes were change in back and leg pain intensity and Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) from baseline to the last available postoperative follow-up (3-24 months), defined as minimal clinically important change (MCID) and continuous change score. Eligible patients underwent lumbar spine surgery for degenerative pathology between 2011 and 2021. Data were split by surgery date into development (N=2691) and validation (N=1616) sets. Multivariate logistic and linear regression, and random forest classification and regression models, were fit to the development data and validated on the external data.Results All models demonstrated good calibration in the validation data. Discrimination ability (area under the curve) for MCID ranged from 0.63 (COMI) to 0.72 (back pain) in regression, and from 0.62 (COMI) to 0.68 (back pain) in random forests. The explained variation in continuous change scores spanned 16%-28% in linear, and 15%-25% in random forests regression. The most important predictors included age, baseline scores on the respective outcome measures, type of degenerative pathology, previous spinal surgeries, smoking status, morbidity, and duration of hospital stay.Conclusions The developed models appear robust and generalisable across different outcomes and modelling approaches but produced only borderline acceptable discrimination ability, suggesting the need to assess further prognostic factors. External validation showed no advantage of the machine learning approach.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research was funded via the Translational Research Access Programme (TRAP), Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, UK.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Health and Life Sciences Research Ethics Committee of the University of Liverpool gave ethical approval for this work (ref. 8224).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesDue to confidentiality, the data are not publicly available.AUCarea under the curveBMIbody mass indexCIconfidence intervalCOMIcore outcome measures indexE/Oexpected-to-observed events ratioECIestimated calibration indexMCIDminimal clinically important differenceMICEmultivariate imputation by chained equationsOOBout-of-bagRFrandom forestRMSEroot mean square errorROCreceiver-operating characteristic curveTRIPODTransparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis