How are patients influenced when counseled for minimally invasive lumbar spine surgeries? A stepwise model assessing pivotal information for decision-making.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS)-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has many evidence-based short-term benefits over open TLIF, both procedures have similar long-term outcomes. Patients' preference for MIS over open TLIF may be confounded by a lack of understanding of what each approach entails. PURPOSE: The study aimed to identify the various factors influencing patients' choice between MIS and open TLIF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This is a cross-sectional study conducted at a tertiary health-care institution. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients, for whom TLIF procedures were indicated, were recruited over a 3-month period from specialist outpatient clinics. OUTCOME MEASURE: The outcome measure was patients' choice of surgical approach (MIS or open). METHODS: All patients were subjected to a stepwise interviewing process and were asked to select between open and MIS approaches at each step. Further subgroup analysis stratifying subjects based on stages of decision-making was performed to identify key predictors of selection changes. No sources of funding were required for this study and there are no conflicts of interests. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients with a mean age of 55.8 years participated in the study. Thirteen (24.1%) consistently selected a single approach, whereas 31 (57.4%) changed their selection more than once during the interviewing process. Overall, 12 patients (22.2%) had a final decision different from their initial choice, and 15 patients (27.8%) were unable to decide. A large proportion of patients (65.0%) initially favored the open approach's midline incision. This proportion dropped to 16.7% (p<.001) upon mention of the term MIS. The proportion of patients favoring MIS dropped significantly following discussion on the pros and cons (p=.002) of each approach, as well as conversion or revision surgery (p=.017). Radiation and cosmesis were identified as the two most important factors influencing patients' final decisions. CONCLUSIONS: The longer midline incision of the open approach is cosmetically more appealing to patients than the paramedian stab wounds of MIS. The advantages of the MIS approach may not be as valued by patients as they are by surgeons. Given the equivalent long-term outcomes of both approaches, it is crucial that patients are adequately informed during preoperative counseling to achieve the best consensus decision. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.