Feasibility and barriers to same-day physical therapy following lumbar fusion surgery.

Yoji Ogura; Michelle Nakatsuka; Kingsley Ogelle; Constance Maglaras; Themistocles Protopsaltis; Tina Raman; Jeffrey Goldstein

doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2026.112207

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 42520489

Feasibility and barriers to same-day physical therapy following lumbar fusion surgery.

Yoji Ogura·Michelle Nakatsuka·Kingsley Ogelle·Constance Maglaras·Themistocles Protopsaltis·Tina Raman·Jeffrey Goldstein

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of same-day (postoperative day 0; POD0) physical therapy (PT) following lumbar fusion and to identify factors associated with failure to participate. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed prospectively collected data from patients undergoing single-level posterior spinal fusion (PSF), with or without anterior (ALIF) or lateral (LLIF) interbody fusion, between January and December 2024 at a single institution. A standardized POD0 PT protocol was implemented for eligible patients. Patients were categorized into two groups: successful POD0 PT (ambulatory on POD0) and unable to participate. Demographic and surgical variables were compared between groups. Reasons for inability to participate were recorded and categorized. RESULTS: Among 129 patients in whom POD0 PT was attempted, 84 (65%) successfully participated, while 45 (35%) were unable. There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, ASA class, operative time, estimated blood loss, or surgical approach between groups. Patients who successfully completed POD0 PT had a significantly shorter hospital length of stay compared to those who did not (3.4 ± 1.6 vs 5.8 ± 2.9 days, P < 0.001), with no differences in complication rates, discharge disposition, emergency department visits, or reoperation rates. The most common barriers to POD0 PT were postoperative pain, medical issues (e.g., orthostatic hypotension, nausea, dizziness), and anesthesia-related somnolence. Less common factors included postoperative restrictions and logistical issues such as brace availability. CONCLUSIONS: POD0 PT following lumbar fusion is feasible in the majority of patients and is associated with a shorter hospital stay without increased complications. Failure to participate was not associated with the baseline patient or surgical characteristics evaluated in this study. Instead, the most common barriers were postoperative pain, transient medical issues, and anesthesia-related somnolence, suggesting that optimization of modifiable perioperative factors may improve the implementation of POD0 PT.

Explore related subjects

Humans Spinal Fusion Female Male Feasibility Studies Retrospective Studies Lumbar Vertebrae Physical Therapy Modalities Middle Aged Aged Length of Stay Ambulatory Surgical Procedures Complication Discharge disposition Length of stay Lumbar fusion surgery Physical therapy Journal Article

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Yoji Ogura, Michelle Nakatsuka, Kingsley Ogelle, Constance Maglaras, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Tina Raman, Jeffrey Goldstein. 2026-07-28. Feasibility and barriers to same-day physical therapy following lumbar fusion surgery.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2026.112207

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Journal Article resource Aged subject Ambulatory Surgical Procedures subject Feasibility Studies subject Female subject Humans subject Journal Article subject Length of Stay subject Lumbar Vertebrae subject Male subject Middle Aged subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine for surgical site infiltration in lumbar fusion: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Effective postoperative pain control after lumbar spine surgery remains challenging, and excessive opioid use is associated with adverse outcomes. Evidence comparing liposomal bupivacaine (LB) with conventional long-acting local anesthetics in spine surgery is limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-center, prospective, randomized, patient- and outcome assessor-blinded trial, adult undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion were assigned (1:1) to surgical site infiltration with either LB (266 mg) plus 25 mg plain bupivacaine (LB group) or ropivacaine (R group). The primary outcome was 72 h cumulative opioid consumption (morphine milligram equivalents, MME). Secondary outcomes included time-profile opioid consumption, pain scores, rescue analgesia, safety, and functional recovery. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Cumulative MME within 72 h was significantly lower in the LB group compared with the R group [43.0 (37.0, 58.0) mg vs. 58.0 (46.0, 73.0) mg], corresponding to a 22% relative reduction (GMR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.85; p < 0.001). The reduction was most pronounced during 8-24 h and 24-48 h postoperatively. Overall pain scores at rest and with movement, as well as 72-h pain AUC, were lower in the LB group. No significant between-group differences were observed in rescue analgesia, adverse events and functional recovery. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion, surgical site infiltration with an LB-based combined regimen, compared with ropivacaine monotherapy, reduced 72-h opioid consumption and cumulative postoperative pain burden without an observed increase in adverse events or impairment of early functional recovery.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of Ketamine and Pregabalin on Postoperative Opioid Usage and Pain Management in Spinal Fusion: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Spinal fusion is associated with substantial early postoperative pain and opioid exposure. Both ketamine and pregabalin are widely incorporated into Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols as opioid-sparing adjuncts. However, their comparative efficacy and safety in this specific setting remain uncertain. Our objective was to compare ketamine and pregabalin indirectly for early postoperative opioid consumption, pain, and adverse events in adults undergoing spinal fusion. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials were searched from inception through October 2025. Eligible studies were randomized trials enrolling adults undergoing instrumented spinal fusion, randomized to perioperative ketamine, pregabalin, or control, and reported extractable 24-hour opioid consumption or pain outcomes. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences in MME or VAS units, and adverse events were reported descriptively. A connected treatment network was analyzed using random-effects models. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (n=879) were included: ketamine (n=210), pregabalin (n=271), and control (n=398). Six trials contributed opioid data (3 ketamine, 3 pregabalin). Using pregabalin 150 mg as reference, ketamine was associated with lower 0-24-hour opioid use (MD -56.99 mg MME; 95% CI -99.56 to -14.43). Control (MD +21.31; 95% CI -1.05 to +43.66) and pregabalin 300 mg (MD -13.22; 95% CI -40.41 to +13.96) did not significantly differ from pregabalin 150 mg. Seven trials contributed 24-hour VAS data, with control being associated with higher pain versus pregabalin 150 mg (MD +0.84; 95% CI +0.01 to +1.66), while ketamine and pregabalin 300 mg were not k significantly different. Adverse events were generally infrequent and similar to control. CONCLUSIONS: Both ketamine and pregabalin provide early opioid sparing with comparable 24-hour analgesia. Ketamine showed a larger opioid-sparing point estimate, but indirect comparisons are imprecise. Adequately powered head-to-head trials with standardized protocols and adverse event reporting are needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The radiographic effect of cage subsidence on neuroforamina after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of cage subsidence on neuroforaminal area after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) utilizing computed tomography (CT). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Restoration of disc height via implantation of an interbody device provides an indirect decompression of the cervical neuroforamina. Interbody cage subsidence is a potential postoperative occurrence, but the effect of this on neuroforaminal area has yet to be characterized. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent one- to four-levels of ACDF utilizing an interbody device with anterior plating. Cage subsidence, neuroforaminal area, height and width were measured on CT scans preoperatively and at least 6 months postoperatively. Levels with a cumulative sum of cranial and caudal subsidence greater than 4 mm were classified as severely subsided, while levels with cumulative subsidence less than 4 mm were classified as non-severely subsided. RESULTS: A total of 83 patients (151 levels) were included in this retrospective analysis. Average endplate subsidence was 3.2 ± 1.9 mm. Non-severely subsided levels demonstrated a greater perioperative increase in neuroforaminal area (7.9 vs 2.1 mm2, p < 0.001), neuroforaminal height (1.1 vs 0.4 mm, p < 0.001) and neuroforaminal width (0.7 vs 0.1 mm, p < 0.001) compared to severely subsided levels. Interbody subsidence significantly predicted a decreased change in neuroforaminal height, width and area (p < 0.001). Severe subsidence was associated with an increased rate of pseudarthrosis, but similar reoperation rates and recurrent neurologic deficits between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Severe subsidence of interbody cages after an ACDF was associated with a decreased perioperative change in neuroforaminal dimensions. This decrease in the size of the neuroforamen may reduce the effect of indirect decompression of the nerve root.

Humans↗