PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF EARLY MOBILIZATION PROTOCOLS AFTER INTERLAMINAR ENDOSCOPIC LUMBAR DISCECTOMY: IMPACT ON PAIN, RECOVERY, AND PATIENT SATISFACTION

Main Article Content

Dr.T. Suresh Babu
Dr.S. Balamurugan
Dr Giridharan. K

Keywords

Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy, Early Mobilization, Pain Recovery, Oswestry Disability Index, Patient Satisfaction, Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

Abstract

Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (IELD) is a minimally invasive spinal procedure that offers rapid recovery and reduced postoperative morbidity. Despite its advantages, the optimal timing for postoperative mobilization remains unclear. Early ambulation may enhance recovery, but concerns about pain and complications have limited its adoption.


Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of early mobilization (within 6–12 hours) versus standard mobilization (after 24 hours) on postoperative pain, functional recovery, patient satisfaction, and complication rates in patients undergoing IELD.


Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted on 60 patients undergoing IELD, divided into two groups based on mobilization timing. Pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), functional recovery using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and satisfaction using a 5-point Likert scale. Complications were monitored throughout the follow-up period. Statistical analyses included t-tests, ANOVA, Chi-square, and Pearson correlation.


Results: Patients in the early mobilization group demonstrated significantly lower pain scores at Day 1 and Week 1 (p < 0.05), faster functional recovery at Week 1 (p = 0.04), and higher satisfaction at Month 1. No major complications were reported in either group. Minor issues such as transient numbness and mild wound discomfort were evenly distributed.


Conclusion: Early mobilization following IELD is safe and associated with improved short-term outcomes. These findings support the integration of early ambulation protocols into postoperative care for minimally invasive spine surgery.

Abstract 0 | Pdf Downloads 0

References

1. Ma H, Shen M, Tang Z, Li K, Zhou H, Sun X, Zhou Z, Tan J. Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for high-grade migrated lumbar disc herniation: clinical efficacy and safety assessment. Int Orthop. 2024;48:2455–2463.
2. Yang YF, Yu JC, Zhu ZW, Li YW, Xiao Z, Zhi CG, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes and cost-utility between unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation. J Orthop Surg Res. 2024;19:755.
3. González-Murillo M, Castro-Toral J, Casal-Grau R, Bonome-Roel C, Bonome-González C, Álvarez de Mon-Montoliú J. Technical considerations and avoiding complications in interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy. J Minim Invasive Spine Surg Tech. 2024;9(Suppl 2):S136–S140.
4. Özden F, Koçyiğit GZ. The effect of early rehabilitation after lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Egypt J Neurosurg. 2024;39:8.
5. Kostic B, Gum J, Djurasovic M, Carreon L, Glassman S. Barriers to early mobilization after spine surgery. Norton Healthcare Med J. 2024.
6. Huang J, Li P, Wang H, Lv C, Han J, Lu X. Exploring elderly patients’ experiences and concerns about early mobilization following lumbar spinal surgery: a qualitative study. BMC Nurs. 2023;22:355.
7. Huang Q, Xiao L, Wang S, Cui P, Han D, Wang P, Lu S. Enhanced recovery pathway in adult patients with spinal deformity undergoing open thoracolumbar surgery. J Orthop Surg Res. 2025;20:54.
8. Fujii T, Kumar R, Lipson P, Nold K, Bansal A, Alostaz M, Louie PK, Sethi RK. Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in patients with adult spinal deformity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Global Spine J. 2025;15(7):3426–3438.
9. Mai YW, Yang WK, Huang YJ, Lu W, Su G, Huang C. Clinical study of applying enhanced recovery after surgery concept in single-segment lumbar spinal stenosis surgery. Open J Ther Rehabil. 2024;12:263–273.
10. Koivunen K, Widbom-Kolhanen S, Pernaa K, Arokoski J, Saltychev M. Reliability and validity of Oswestry Disability Index among patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery. BMC Surg. 2024;24:13.
11. Zapata KA, Carreon LY, Jo CH, Ramo BA. The Oswestry Disability Index is reflective of pain interference and mobility in children. Spine Deform. 2024;12:329–334.
12. Chowdary NP, Adarsh AD, Sakalecha AK. Magnetic resonance imaging in lumbar degenerative disease and correlation with modified Oswestry Disability Index. NeuroQuantology. 2024;22(5):336–349.
13. Ells B, Canizares M, Charest-Morin R, Nataraj A, Bailey C, Wai E, et al. Surgical outcomes and patient expectations and satisfaction in spine surgery stratified by surgeon age. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;8(4).
14. Solomito MJ, Makanji H. Patient satisfaction following lumbar fusion is associated with functional status and pain more than attainment of MCID. Int J Spine Surg. 2025;8757.
15. Cheng LJ, Luo N, Chen LA, Cheng JY, Liu GK, Wang W, Hey HWD, Wu VX. Patients and spine surgeons’ perspectives regarding decision-making and outcomes in lumbar surgery: an exploratory qualitative study. The Patient. 2025;18:145–160.
16. Manni T, et al. Rehabilitation after lumbar spine surgery in adults: a systematic review. Arch Physiother. 2023;13:21.
17. Gadjradj PS, et al. Early mobilization after lumbar surgery: a systematic review. Global Spine J. 2022;12(1):45–52.
18. Jasper GP, Francisco G. Interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy: technique and outcomes. J Spine Surg. 2021;7(1):1–9.
19. Goh GS, Liow MHL, et al. Enhanced recovery after spine surgery: a review. Eur Spine J. 2021;30(1):1–10.