EVALUATING CANDIDATES FOR SPINE SURGERY AND SPINAL … · EVALUATING CANDIDATES FOR SPINE SURGERY AND SPINAL CORD STIMULATION USING THE MMPI-2-RF Andrew R Block, PhD, ABPP Texas Back

EVALUATING CANDIDATES FOR SPINE SURGERY AND SPINAL CORD STIMULATION USING THE MMPI-2-RF

Andrew R Block, PhD, ABPP Texas Back Institute 6020 W. Parker Rd., Suite 200 Plano, TX 75093 Email: [email protected]

Disclosure

Andrew R Block received research funding support from University of Minnesota Press for many of the studies cited in this presentation. As co-author of the MMPI-2-RF Spine Surgery Candidate (Spine-CIR) and Spinal Cord Stimulator Candidate (Stim-CIR) Interpretive Reports he receives royalties on sales of the reports

1

Participants • Experience with presurgical psychological evaluation of

spinal cord stimulator or spine surgery candidates• Experience with use of the MMPI-2-RF

Spine Surgeries (Spine-CIR) • Goals

• Repair or mitigate physical condition in order to reduce pain andimprove function

• Major Spine Surgeries• Laminectomy/Discectomy

• Removal of herniated portion of intervertebral disc, also may requireremoval of portion of vertebra to gain access to the disc.

• Spinal fusion• Removal of disc, replacement of disc with material that solidifies to fuse

together adjacent vertebrae while restoring normal disc height• May involve hardware to stabilize fusion

• Artificial Disc Replacement• Removal of disc and replacement with appliance that both restores

normal disc height and allows movement.

2

Spinal Cord Stimulation (Stim-CIR) • Goal is to reduce perceived pain and improve function

without addressing any underlying cause of pain• Implantation of leads containing electrodes into the

epidural space along spinal cord. Deliver electricalstimulation along ascending nerve pathways, therebyreducing pain

• Two-step process• Stimulator trial: 3 to 7 day implantation of electrodes with external

stimulator device, determines best stimulation pattern• If 50% or greater reduction in pain is achieved during trial

stimulator device is permanently implanted. If not, leads areremoved.

Agenda § Introduction: Psychosocial factors impactingsurgery results—previous studies§ Research on MMPI-2-RF in Spine Surgery andSpinal Cord Stimulator Candidates§ Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR components§ Case Example§ Q&A

3

Spine Surgery is Not Always Effective in Reducing Pain and

Improving Function, Even If Pathology is Corrected

Discectomy Recent analysis of insurance claims on 494 discectomy

patients: • 28% unfavorable outcome (80% of whom had additional surgery)

(Sherman et al, 2010)

4

Spinal Fusion In recent study of surgery (mostly fusion) outcome, using 4

measures of Health-Related Quality of Life: • 47%-61% clinically sig improvement• 27% clinically sig improvement on all 4 measures

…Copay et al, 2010

Consequences of Failed Back Surgery

• Majority never return to work• Anger, depression• Iatrogenic problems• Financial disincentives to recovery increase• Total cost of case rises dramatically• Drug addiction• Additional surgery or spinal cord stimulation

5

Spinal Cord Stimulation • Candidates for Spinal Cord Stimulation

§  Failed Spine Surgery Syndrome§  Avoid major spine surgery§  Complex Regional Pain Syndrome or other conditions not

amendable to surgery

• Results are variable§  64% achieve > 50% reduction in pain (Eldabe et al, 2010)

• Costs are high§  > $52,000 in first 24 months post implant (Hollingsworth et al, 2011)

Psychosocial factors are associated with

reduced effectiveness of both spine surgery and

spinal cord stimulation

6

Presurgical Psychological Evaluation MMPI & MMPI-2 studies

Description Scale # Studies

Pain Sensitivity Hs & Hy 11 Depression D 9 Anxiety Pt 5 Anger Pd 5

MMPI-2-RF in Evaluation of Spine Surgery and Spinal Cord

Stimulator Candidates

7

Key Differences Between MMPI-2-RF and MMPI-2

• Significantly reduces shared variance between scales• Captures common factor between scales—Demoralization • After removing shared variance identifies core constructs

of MMPI-2 scales• 338 items rather than 567 items

MMPI-2-RF Scales • 51 Scales

• 9 Validity Scales• 3 Higher-Order Scales• 9 RC Scales• 23 Specific Problems Scales

• 5 Somatic/Cognitive• 9 Internalizing• 4 Externalizing• 5 Interpersonal

• 2 Interest Scales• 5 PSY-5 Scales

8

Psychosocial Factors Increase Risk for Poor Spine Surgery Results (2017)

• 344 patients (all had surgery)• Average Follow-up 142 days post-op• Surgery types

§  Fusion 66.7% §  ADR 11.5% §  Lami/Disc 9.1%§  Other 12.7%

• Not included in analysis 41 pts with fair-poor or poorprognosis who did not have surgery.

Outcome measures • Pain rating (0-10)• Oswestry Disability index• Negative Affect

• Combined likert ratings of depression, anxiety, fear & worry

• Outcome satisfaction (0-10)• Scale reversed so that higher scores represent greater

disatisfaction

• For all measures except satisfaction, baselinemeasure was used as covariate.

9

Correlations of MMPI-2-RF Selected Scales with Post-Surgery Outcome

Scale Pain ODI Negative Affect

Dis-satisfaction

RCd .26** .28** .42** .26**

RC1 .28** .31** .29** .20**

RC2 .18** .22** .28** .13*

RC7 .14** .15** .33** .19**

MLS .29** .41** .32** .21**

SFD .23** .23** .37** .22**

STW .17** .22** .34** .22**

FML .13* .12* .25** .14*

NEGE-r .18** .24** .38** .24**

Association between pre-implant psychosocial factors and spine cord

stimulator outcome (2015)

• 319 subjects (118 men, 201 women)• Mean age = 53.4• Average time to follow up 146 days

10

Correlations of MMPI-2-RF selected scales with stimulator outcome

Scale Pain ODI Negative Affect

Dis-satisfaction

RCd .26** .29** .52** .27**

RC1 .19* .15 .01 .23**

RC2 .15 .29** .31** .16

RC7 .21** .23** .40** .23**

MLS .17* .37** .26** .17

SFD .20** .19* .37** .24**

NFC .21** .19* .36** .08

STW .23** .30** .41** .30**

FML .19* .20** .28** .16

NEGE-r .19* .23** .41** .24**

Selected MMPI-2-RF Relative Risk Ratios (RRRs): Post-Implant Oswestry > 40

Scale Cut Off Risk if Elevated

Risk if not Elevated

RRR

RCd 60 79.3% 55.8% 1.42

RC2 65 84.4% 53.8% 1.56

MLS 80 85.3% 53.0% 1.61

COG 75 92.3% 57.4% 1.61

STW 55 80.6% 54.0% 1.49

ANP 55 88.2% 56.8% 1.55

NEGE-r 65 92.9% 57.0% 1.63

11

RC Scales most strongly correlated with spine surgery & stimulator outcome

• RCd: Demoralization – General unhappiness anddissatisfaction

• RC1: Somatic Complaints – Diffuse physical healthcomplaints

• RC2: Low Positive Emotions – Lack of positiveemotional responsiveness

• RC7: Dysfunctional Negative Emotions – Maladaptiveanxiety, anger, irritability

Supplemental and PSY-5 Scales Strongly Correlated with Surgery & Stim Outcome

• MLS: Malaise – Overall sense of physical debilitation, poor health

• SFD: Self-Doubt -- Lack of self-confidence, uselessness• NFC: Inefficacy – Belief one is indecisive and inefficacious• STW: Stress/Worry -- Preoccupation with disappointments,

difficulty with time pressure • AXY: Anxiety – Pervasive anxiety, frights, nightmares• FML: Family Problems – Conflictual family

relationships• NEGE-r: Negative Emotionality/Neuroticism-Revised –Anxiety, insecurity, worry, and fear

12

Spine Surgery Candidate Interpretive

Report (Spine-CIR)

Spinal Cord Stimulator Candidate Interpretive

Report (Stim-CIR)

SPINE-CIR & STIM-CIR

Provides all information of the General MMPI-2-RF Interpretive Report

PLUS Information specific to spine surgery and spinal cord stimulator candidates

13

SPINE-CIR & STIM-CIR Report Structure

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR:

Profile

14

MMPI-2-RF Higher-Order (H-O) and Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales

20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

RC9RC8RC7RC6RC4RC3RC2RC1RCdBXDTHDEID

Raw Score:

T Score:

Response %:

EIDTHDBXD

Emotional/Internalizing DysfunctionThought DysfunctionBehavioral/Externalizing Dysfunction

22

66

100

RCdRC1RC2RC3RC4

DemoralizationSomatic ComplaintsLow Positive EmotionsCynicismAntisocial Behavior

RC6RC7RC8RC9

Ideas of PersecutionDysfunctional Negative EmotionsAberrant ExperiencesHypomanic Activation

7

61

100

16

71

96

9

57

100

1

48

100

9

69

100

11

68

100

2

41

100

0

43

100

1

47

100

4

46

100

11

48

100

120

110

Higher-Order Restructured Clinical

51 64524348 53 4546 49 4746 42

11 111189 10 810 9 910 8

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Comparison Group Data: Spine Surgery Candidate (Women), N = 662

Standard Dev

Mean Score

1 SD+( ):

( ):

_

Percent scoring at orbelow patient:

90 49959667 94 9939 61 6858 84

The highest and lowest T scores possible on each scale are indicated by a "---"; MMPI-2-RF T scores are non-gendered.

MMPI-2-RF® Spine Surgery Candidate Interpretive Report ID: Ms. E08/10/2017, Page 3

15

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR: Comparison Groups

• Two separate comparison groups generate report-specificinterpretive statements§  Spine Surgery Candidates (662 women, 590 men)§  Spinal Cord Stimulator Candidates (336 women, 218 men)

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR: Scores by Domain

• Provides T-Scores for all scales, by Domain• Interpreted scores are listed in bold

16

17

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Intended Use Statement

• Qualifications: User should have experience withevaluation of surgical candidates and MMPI-2-RF

• Consider context of evaluation• Annotation for each statement indicated by superscript

tied to Endnotes and Reference section

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Synopsis

General Overview of: • Validity Concerns• Comparison Group Findings• Presurgical Psychological Risk factors

18

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR Clinical Interpretive Report Sections

Based on T-scores compared to general MMPI-2-RF normative sample

• Protocol Validity• Substantive Scale Interpretations• Diagnostic Considerations

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Comparison Group Findings

Construct-Based Statements • Based on scale item content• Clinical Implications of elevated scale scores• Clinical Implications of uncommonly high scores

EXAMPLE: “She reports a comparatively low level of positive emotional experiences for a spine surgery candidate. Only 9.5% of comparison group members convey this or a lower level of positive emotions”.

19

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Presurgical Psychological Risk Factors

• Description of presurgical correlates of test-takerscores associated with reduced outcome

• Divided into 9 domains relevant to outcome ofspine surgery and spinal cord stimulation

• Statements fully annotated and linked to studies

• Example:§ Correlate for the fear-avoidance dimension is FABQ

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Presurgical Psychological Risk Factor Domains

• #1: Depression & Demoralization Problems§  Unhappiness and Life Dissatisfaction

• #2: Pain & Somatic Sensitivity Problems§  Heightened awareness of physical problems, esp. pain

• #3: Pain-Coping Problems§  Maladaptive behaviors and cognitions

• #4: Health Orientation & Medical Adherence Problems§  Tendency to resist therapeutic recommendations

• #5: Anxiety & Stress Problems§  Stressful events and chronic anxiety that may impact healing

20

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Presurgical Psychological Risk Factor Domains

• #6: Fear-Avoidance Problems§  Behaviors and thoughts resulting from fear of pain or damage

• #7: Interpersonal Problems§  Behaviors that limit ability to draw on support systems

• #8: Substance Abuse Problems§  Inappropriate use of drugs and alcohol

• #9: Recovery Disincentive Problems§  Reinforcement of disability and excessive pain behavior

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Surgery Outcome Correlates

Narrative description of specific areas of reduced surgical outcome that have been found to be empirically linked to MMPI-2-RF elevations obtained from the patient’s profile, including

• pain reduction,• functional ability,• medication use,• emotional state,• return to work,• and others

21

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Follow-Up Recommendations

• General treatment guidelines designed to reinforcesurgical outcomes, or be alternatives to surgery, based onany major MMPI-2-RF elevations.

• May include:§  Antidepressant medication,§  Pain management training such as biofeedback or hypnotherapy,§  Cognitive-Behavioral techniques,§  Techniques to assess or test motivation§  Consideration of a chronic pain management program.

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Item Level Information

• From General Interpretive Report§  Unscorable Responses,§  Critical Responses,§  User-Designated Item-Level Information,

• Spine & Stim CIR Critical Follow-up Items,§  Identified by survey of 10 psychologists experienced in PPS§  Indicates follow-up questions for clinical interview.

22

MMPI-2-RF Spine-CIR & Stim-CIR: Annotation and References

• Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR is fully annotated and referenced (as is the clinical report). References will be updatedregularly.

• Rollover superscript after a statement to see reference

Case Example: Ms E. Spine Surgery Candidate

• 56 years old• Married x2, for 3 years• Injured on the job as a nursing assistant• Chronicity: 26 months of low back and left leg pain• No previous spine surgeries• Unable to work for 8 months• History of arrest for shoplifting in distant past• Candidate for a anterior lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5

and L5-S1

23

MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales

20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

K-rL-rFBS-rFsFp-rF-rTRIN-rVRIN-r

Raw Score:

Response %:

VRIN-rTRIN-rF-rFp-r

Variable Response InconsistencyTrue Response InconsistencyInfrequent ResponsesInfrequent Psychopathology Responses

3

48

98

FsFBS-rRBS

Infrequent Somatic ResponsesSymptom ValidityResponse Bias Scale

3

66

100

1

51

100

4

61

100

10

57

100

13

67

100

0

37

100

9

67

100

120

110

Cannot Say (Raw): 1

T Score: F

38Percent True (of items answered): %

554956

F

F

47 52 65 5958

10 149129 12 1112

F


---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Standard Dev

Mean Score

1 SD+( ):

( ):

_

68 86837781 283Percent scoring at orbelow patient:

L-rK-r

Uncommon VirtuesAdjustment Validity

RBS

8

52

100

54

10

4664


24

MMPI-2-RF Higher-Order (H-O) and Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales

20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

RC9RC8RC7RC6RC4RC3RC2RC1RCdBXDTHDEID

Raw Score:

T Score:

Response %:

EIDTHDBXD

Emotional/Internalizing DysfunctionThought DysfunctionBehavioral/Externalizing Dysfunction

22

66

100

RCdRC1RC2RC3RC4

DemoralizationSomatic ComplaintsLow Positive EmotionsCynicismAntisocial Behavior

RC6RC7RC8RC9

Ideas of PersecutionDysfunctional Negative EmotionsAberrant ExperiencesHypomanic Activation

7

61

100

16

71

96

9

57

100

1

48

100

9

69

100

11

68

100

2

41

100

0

43

100

1

47

100

4

46

100

11

48

100

120

110

Higher-Order Restructured Clinical

51 64524348 53 4546 49 4746 42

11 111189 10 810 9 910 8

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---


Standard Dev

Mean Score

1 SD+( ):

( ):

_


90 49959667 94 9939 61 6858 84



25

MMPI-2-RF Somatic/Cognitive and Internalizing Scales

20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

NFC ANPAXYSTW MSFBRFNUCGIC HPC HLPCOG SFD

Raw Score:

T Score:

Response %:

MLSGICHPCNUCCOG

MalaiseGastrointestinal ComplaintsHead Pain ComplaintsNeurological ComplaintsCognitive Complaints

3

57

100

AXYANPBRFMSF

AnxietyAnger PronenessBehavior-Restricting FearsMultiple Specific Fears

SUIHLPSFDNFCSTW

Suicidal/Death IdeationHelplessness/HopelessnessSelf-DoubtInefficacyStress/Worry

5

69

100

1

53

100

2

59

100

0

46

100

0

45

100

2

56

100

1

52

100

5

58

100

0

44

100

3

52

100

5

66

100

1

42

100

0

43

100

Somatic/Cognitive Internalizing

120

110

68 54636356 49 5149 47 5250 48 5150

12 1214915 9 1111 10 1211 10 810


---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

------

--- ---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

MLS SUI

27 91325662 86 8278 90 6574 95 1859

Standard Dev

Mean Score

1 SD+( ):

( ):

_




26

MMPI-2-RF Externalizing, Interpersonal, and Interest Scales

20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

SAV MECAESACTAGGSUBJCP FML DSFIPP SHY

Raw Score:

T Score:

Response %:

FMLIPPSAVSHYDSF

Family ProblemsInterpersonal PassivitySocial AvoidanceShynessDisaffiliativeness

3

63

100

JCPSUBAGGACT

Juvenile Conduct ProblemsSubstance AbuseAggressionActivation

AESMEC

Aesthetic-Literary InterestsMechanical-Physical Interests

2

49

100

1

39

100

2

51

100

2

55

100

3

46

100

1

44

100

4

52

100

0

44

100

7

69

100

5

62

100

InterpersonalExternalizing Interest

120

110

47 47454445 51 4650 48 4546

9 101076 9 910 9 79

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

95 76428996 43 5571 77 99.596


Standard Dev

Mean Score

1 SD+( ):

( ):

_




27

MMPI-2-RF PSY-5 Scales

20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

INTR-rNEGE-rDISC-rPSYC-rAGGR-r

Raw Score:

T Score:

Response %:

AGGR-rPSYC-rDISC-rNEGE-rINTR-r

Aggressiveness-RevisedPsychoticism-RevisedDisconstraint-RevisedNegative Emotionality/Neuroticism-RevisedIntroversion/Low Positive Emotionality-Revised

7

45

100

10

60

100

8

53

100

13

69

100

3

56

100

120

110

48 53494247

8 111178

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---


Standard Dev

Mean Score

1 SD+( ):

( ):

_


44 807599.890



28

SYNOPSIS • This is a valid MMPI-2-RF protocol…• Comparison group findings point to possible concerns

about cognitive complaints, emotional problems includingunhappiness and dissatisfaction, inefficacy, a low level ofpositive emotions, and anger, odd perceptions and beliefs, and behavioral problems including irresponsible behaviorand substance use.

• Possible presurgical risk factors are identified in theDemoralization and Depression, Pain and SomaticSensitivity, Pain Coping, Health Orientation and Medical Adherence, Fear/Avoidance, Interpersonal, and Substance Abuse domains.

Comparison Group Findings 1

Emotional-Internalizing Disorders

- Depression-related disorder22

- Anger-related disorders23

Behavioral-Externalizing Disorders

- Antisocial personality disorder, substance use disorders, and other externalizing disorders24

SPINE SURGERY COMPARISON GROUP FINDINGS

This section describes the MMPI-2-RF substantive scale findings in the context of the women of theSpine Surgery Candidate comparison group. Specific sources for each statement can be accessed withthe annotation features of this report. Presurgical risk factors, postsurgical outcomes, and treatmentrecommendations associated with these results, if any, are provided in subsequent sections of thisreport.

The comparison group means reported on pages 2 through 6 of this report show that female spinesurgery candidates score differently from the general MMPI-2-RF normative sample on several scales.Problems discussed earlier in the Substantive Scale Interpretation section are based on clinicallyelevated normative T scores of 65 and above. Potential difficulties identified in this section are based onscores that are unusually high in relation to the Spine Surgery Candidate (Women) comparison group,and thus may differ from those discussed earlier. If multiple risk factors are identified, the possibility ofpoor surgery results increases, but may be mitigated with psychological intervention. Somatic/Cognitive Complaints The patient reports a comparatively high level of cognitive complaints for a spine surgery candidate.Only 16.6% of comparison group members convey this or a greater number of cognitive problems1.

Emotional/Internalizing Problems The patient reports a comparatively large number of emotional problems for a spine surgery candidate.Only 11.9% of comparison group members convey this or a greater level of emotional difficulties25.More specifically, she reports a relatively high level of unhappiness and dissatisfaction for thispopulation. Only 7.3% of comparison group members convey this or a greater level of poor morale6. Inparticular, she reports a comparatively high level of inefficacious decision making for a spine surgerycandidate. Only 16.3% of comparison group members convey this or a greater level of perceivedinefficacy26.

She reports a comparatively low level of positive emotional experiences for a spine surgery candidate8.Only 9.5% of comparison group members convey this or a lower level of positive emotions8.

The patient reports a comparatively high level of problems with anger for a spine surgery candidate.Only 11.0% of comparison group members convey this or a greater level of anger proneness9.


29

30

Comparison Group Findings 2

Unusual Thoughts, Perceptions, and BeliefsThe patient reports a comparatively high level of eccentric beliefs for a spine surgery candidate27. Only18.0% of comparison group members convey this or a greater level of peculiar thinking27.

Behavioral/Externalizing ProblemsThe patient reports a comparatively large number of behavioral problems for a spine surgery candidate.Only 6.2% of comparison group members convey this or a greater level of behavioral difficulties28. Morespecifically, her responses indicate a level of disconstraint reflecting behavioral control problems thatmay negatively affect surgical results29. This level of poor impulse control is very uncommon among thispopulation. Only 0.3% of comparison group members give evidence of this or a greater level ofdisconstraint30. In particular, she reports a relatively high level of juvenile conduct problems for a spinesurgery candidate. Only 8.8% of comparison group members convey this or a greater level of conductproblems during their teenage years31. She also reports a comparatively large number of problems withsubstance use for this population. Only 11.6% of comparison group members convey this or a greaterlevel of misusing substances32.

Presurgical Psychological Risk Factors

Demoralization and Depression ProblemsCompared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is more likely to be experiencing depressiveaffect33 and to have a low energy level and feel exhausted34.

Pain and Somatic Sensitivity ProblemsCompared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is more likely to perceive herself asdeserving and needing assistance from others35. She is also likely to report greater functional disabilityassociated with pain36.

Pain Coping ProblemsCompared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is more likely to catastrophize whenexperiencing pain37. She is also likely to be less self-reliant37.

Health Orientation and Medical Adherence ProblemsCompared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is less likely to seek out information abouthealth38, to feel confident in obtaining information from the physician38, to be able to continue withexercise/diet recommendations when under stress38, and to be engaged in overall health maintenance andimprovement38. She is also more likely to smoke39.

31

32

Presurgical Psychological Risk Factors 2 Fear/Avoidance Problems Compared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is likely to express higher levels of fear andavoidance of work activities37. She is also more likely to have been out of work for more than 2 months40. Interpersonal Problems Compared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is more likely to have had a chaotic ordisrupted childhood41, to have a partner who reinforces pain behavior42, and to report a lack of socialsupport43. She is also likely to report higher levels of anger44. Substance Abuse Problems Compared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is more likely to have a diagnosis ofSubstance Use Disorder45. She is also likely to be at increased risk for opioid abuse46. The candidate's scores are not associated with empirically identified risk factors in the followingdomains:- Anxiety and Stress Problems- Recovery Disincentive Problems

POSTSURGICAL OUTCOMES

The postsurgical outcome statements listed here are based on prospective empirical studies indicatingthat, relative to other candidates, this patient is at increased risk for these specific adverse results.Inclusion of an adverse outcome does not imply that it will definitely occur, nor can other negativeoutcomes be definitively ruled out. Specific sources for each statement can be accessed with theannotation features of this report.

Compared to other spine surgery candidates, post-surgery this patient is likely to:

- Report higher levels of pain47

- Report greater levels of disability47

- Experience more negative affect and higher levels of psychological distress47

- Be more likely to take Schedule II opioid medication48

- Be less likely to return to work49

- Have lower levels of satisfaction with the results of surgery50

- Convey stronger feelings that surgical results did not meet expectations50

- Report a more negative overall outcome51

TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

This section contains inferential treatment-focused recommendations specifically for spine surgerycandidates, based on the patient's MMPI-2-RF scores. Sources for each statement can be accessed withthe annotation features of this report.


Post Surgical Outcomes

Fear/Avoidance ProblemsCompared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is likely to express higher levels of fear andavoidance of work activities37. She is also more likely to have been out of work for more than 2 months40.

Interpersonal ProblemsCompared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is more likely to have had a chaotic ordisrupted childhood41, to have a partner who reinforces pain behavior42, and to report a lack of socialsupport43. She is also likely to report higher levels of anger44.

Substance Abuse ProblemsCompared with other spine surgery candidates, the patient is more likely to have a diagnosis ofSubstance Use Disorder45. She is also likely to be at increased risk for opioid abuse46.

The candidate's scores are not associated with empirically identified risk factors in the followingdomains:- Anxiety and Stress Problems- Recovery Disincentive Problems

POSTSURGICAL OUTCOMES

The postsurgical outcome statements listed here are based on prospective empirical studies indicatingthat, relative to other candidates, this patient is at increased risk for these specific adverse results.Inclusion of an adverse outcome does not imply that it will definitely occur, nor can other negativeoutcomes be definitively ruled out. Specific sources for each statement can be accessed with theannotation features of this report.

Compared to other spine surgery candidates, post-surgery this patient is likely to: - Report higher levels of pain47 - Report greater levels of disability47 - Experience more negative affect and higher levels of psychological distress47 - Be more likely to take Schedule II opioid medication48 - Be less likely to return to work49 - Have lower levels of satisfaction with the results of surgery50 - Convey stronger feelings that surgical results did not meet expectations50 - Report a more negative overall outcome51

TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

This section contains inferential treatment-focused recommendations specifically for spine surgerycandidates, based on the patient's MMPI-2-RF scores. Sources for each statement can be accessed withthe annotation features of this report.


33

Treatment Recommendations Recommendations Based on Elevated Emotional Dysfunction Scales The patient is significantly demoralized, feels overwhelmed, and may be quite dissatisfied with lifecircumstances. She may have difficulty becoming motivated and following treatment recommendations.Helping the patient recognize positive aspects of her situation, and focusing on each improvement,however small, may help build momentum for recovery52. The patient may also be experiencing depressive affect, which could impact surgical outcome.Consideration should be given to antidepressant medication, which may also help with pain reduction, asdepression can increase pain awareness. Including individual psychotherapy in the overall surgicaltreatment plan may help the patient identify and experience pleasurable activities while rehabilitating53. In addition, the patient is prone to experience anger, irritability, and poor frustration tolerance--all ofwhich may impact relationships with the treatment team. It is recommended that providers collaboratewith her in developing approaches to prepare for and recover from surgery, and help her anticipate anddeal with setbacks in the recovery process23.

Recommendations Based on Elevated Behavioral Dysfunction Scales Test results indicate possible problems with authority figures. There may be increased risk ofnon-adherence to post-surgical treatment requirements. Having the patient participate and gainownership in developing plans for rehabilitation and return to normal activity may reduce this risk54.

ITEM-LEVEL INFORMATION

Unscorable Responses

Following is a list of items to which the patient did not provide scorable responses. Unanswered ordouble answered (both True and False) items are unscorable. The scales on which the items appear arein parentheses following the item content.

299. I feel helpless when I have to make some important decisions. (VRIN-r, RCd)

Critical Responses

Seven MMPI-2-RF scales--Suicidal/Death Ideation (SUI), Helplessness/Hopelessness (HLP), Anxiety(AXY), Ideas of Persecution (RC6), Aberrant Experiences (RC8), Substance Abuse (SUB), andAggression (AGG)--have been designated by the test authors as having critical item content that mayrequire immediate attention and follow-up. Items answered by the individual in the keyed direction(True or False) on a critical scale are listed below if her T score on that scale is 65 or higher.

The patient has not produced an elevated T score (> 65) on any of these scales.


Items for Follow-up

Cognitive Complaints (COG, T Score = 69)59. My memory seems to be all right. (False; NS 9.4%, CG 26.0%)

102. I seem to be about as capable and smart as most others around me. (False; NS 6.2%, CG 8.8%)136. I cannot keep my mind on one thing. (True; NS 15.0%, CG 26.9%)200. I have more trouble concentrating than others seem to have. (True; NS 17.8%, CG 31.7%)306. I forget where I leave things. (True; NS 38.5%, CG 51.7%)

Anger Proneness (ANP, T Score = 66)119. I easily become impatient with people. (True; NS 39.5%, CG 34.0%)134. I am not easily angered. (False; NS 32.5%, CG 21.1%)155. I get mad easily and then get over it soon. (True; NS 41.6%, CG 24.2%)293. I am usually calm and not easily upset. (False; NS 18.5%, CG 18.9%)303. I often become very irritable when people interrupt my work. (True; NS 28.6%, CG 27.2%)

Substance Abuse (SUB, T Score = 55)49. I have enjoyed using marijuana. (True; NS 29.6%, CG 11.2%)

141. I have used alcohol excessively. (True; NS 34.2%, CG 15.3%)

Disconstraint-Revised (DISC-r, T Score = 69)21. Sometimes when I was young I stole things. (True; NS 47.1%, CG 17.7%)42. I would like to be a soldier. (True; NS 10.3%, CG 6.0%)49. I have enjoyed using marijuana. (True; NS 29.6%, CG 11.2%)61. I have never done anything dangerous for the thrill of it. (False; NS 61.6%, CG 43.5%)66. In school I was sometimes sent to the principal for bad behavior. (True; NS 20.3%, CG 14.2%)75. I think I would like the kind of work a forest ranger does. (True; NS 50.3%, CG 28.5%)

107. I like to talk about sex. (True; NS 47.3%, CG 14.8%)115. I am not afraid of fire. (True; NS 55.0%, CG 44.0%)156. I can remember "playing sick" to get out of something. (True; NS 59.8%, CG 46.5%)190. I have never been in trouble with the law. (False; NS 28.6%, CG 18.1%)226. I would like to be an auto racer. (True; NS 21.5%, CG 17.4%)253. In school my marks in classroom behavior were quite regularly bad. (True; NS 5.8%, CG 4.2%)300. I really like playing rough sports (such as football or soccer). (True; NS 26.5%, CG 14.7%)

Items for Follow-up

This section contains a list of items to which the patient responded in a manner warranting follow-up.The items were identified by presurgical assessment experts as having critical content. Clinicians areencouraged to follow up on these statements with the patient by making related inquiries, rather thanreciting the item(s) verbatim. Each item is followed by the patient's response, the percentage of theSpine Surgery Candidate (Women) comparison group members who gave this response, and the scale(s)on which the item appears.

23. At times I feel like smashing things. (True; 16.5%; K-r, RC7, AGG, NEGE-r)25. I am about as able to work as I ever was. (False; 79.2%; VRIN-r, EID, RC2, MLS)49. I have enjoyed using marijuana. (True; 11.2%; BXD, RC4, SUB, DISC-r)65. I am almost never bothered by pains over my heart or in my chest. (False; 18.6%; RC1)


105. I am happy most of the time. (False; 15.3%; VRIN-r, EID, RCd)135. It bothers me greatly to think of making changes in my life. (True; 22.1%; HLP)141. I have used alcohol excessively. (True; 15.3%; VRIN-r, FBS-r, RC4, SUB)152. I feel like giving up quickly when things go wrong. (True; 13.4%; VRIN-r, NFC)156. I can remember "playing sick" to get out of something. (True; 46.5%; VRIN-r, FBS-r, RBS,

BXD, RC4, DISC-r)172. Often, even though everything is going fine for me, I feel that I don't care about anything. (True;

9.8%; EID, RCd)246. I usually expect to succeed in things I do. (False; 3.8%; VRIN-r, TRIN-r, EID, RC2, INTR-r)261. I sometimes feel that I am about to go to pieces. (True; 29.2%; VRIN-r, TRIN-r, FBS-r, EID,

RCd)331. When my life gets difficult, it makes me want to just give up. (True; 10.7%; VRIN-r, EID, RCd)


(True; 16.5%; K-r, RC7, AGG, NEGE-r)(False; 79.2%; VRIN-r, EID, RC2, MLS)(True; 11.2%; BXD, RC4, SUB, DISC-r)(False; 18.6%; RC1)(False; 15.3%; VRIN-r, EID, RCd)(True; 22.1%; HLP)(True; 15.3%; VRIN-r, FBS-r, RC4, SUB)(True; 13.4%; VRIN-r, NFC)(True; 46.5%; VRIN-r, FBS-r, RBS, BXD, RC4, DISC-r)

(True; 9.8%; EID, RCd)

(False; 3.8%; VRIN-r, TRIN-r, EID, RC2, INTR-r)(True; 29.2%; VRIN-r, TRIN-r, FBS-r, EID, RCd)

(True; 10.7%; VRIN-r, EID, RCd)

34

Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR Interpretive Reports: Final Points

• Only Broadband psychometric test having an empiricalbase

• Allows for most accurate estimate of the extent to whichpsychosocial factors are likely to impact outcome ofstimulator and spine surgery

• Ties treatment recommendations to identified risk factors

Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR Interpretive Reports: Final Points

Identifies issues that should be specifically addressed during diagnostic interview, especially by examining the “Items for Follow Up”

The Spine-CIR and Stim-CIR provide the objective cornerstone of a comprehensive presurgical psychological evaluation, which should include:

• Diagnostic Interview• Medical Records Review• Psychometric testing• A comprehensive report integrating all information

35

DISCUSSION

Questions? [email protected]

36

Documents

EVALUATING CANDIDATES FOR SPINE SURGERY AND SPINAL … · EVALUATING CANDIDATES FOR SPINE SURGERY AND SPINAL CORD STIMULATION USING THE MMPI-2-RF Andrew R Block, PhD, ABPP Texas Back