Mental health after lumbar spine surgery: cognitive appraisal processes and outcome in a longitudinal cohort study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: A not uncommon finding following spine surgery is that many patients do not achieve mental health improvement up to population norms for their age cohort, despite improvement in pain and functioning. PURPOSE: This study examined how patients who were categorized as depressed versus not depressed think about health-related quality of life as assessed by cognitive-appraisal processes. It examined cross-sectional and longitudinal differences over 12 months post-surgery. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal cohort study with data collected at pre-surgery and at ∼3- and ∼12-months post-surgery from August 2013 to August 2023. PATIENT SAMPLE: We included 173 adults undergoing lumbar spine surgery for degenerative spinal conditions at an academic medical center. The study sample was 47% female, with a mean age of 61 (SD=15.0), and a median level of education of college graduate. OUTCOME MEASURES: Depression was defined as a Mental Component Score (MCS)≤38 on the Rand-36, building on studies that equated MCS scores with significant depression as assessed by clinically validated depression scales. The Quality-of-Life Appraisal Profile assessed the cognitive-appraisal domains of Experience Sampling and Standards of Comparison. METHODS: The analysis focused on two comparisons: cross-sectionally comparing those who were not depressed (n=82) to those who were depressed (n=77) at baseline; and comparing longitudinal trajectories among those depressed before surgery and improved (n=54) versus did not improve (n=23). T-tests characterized group differences in appraisal endorsement; analysis of variance evaluated appraisal items in terms of explained variance; and Pearson correlation coefficients assessed direction of association in predicting mental health. RESULTS: There were pre-surgical and longitudinal differences in both cognitive appraisal domains. Before surgery, depressed patients were less likely than non-depressed patients to endorse emphasizing the positive; more likely to focus on worst moments, recent flare-ups, their spinal condition, and the future; and more likely to compare themselves to high aspirations (eg, perfect health). Over time, among those who were depressed before surgery, those who improved focused decreasingly on worst moments and on the time before their spinal condition, and increasingly on emphasizing the positive and balancing the positives/negatives. Appraisal explained more variance in mental health among those who did not improve as compared to those who did, at all timepoints. All appraisal items were more highly correlated with mental health among those who remained depressed as compared to those who improved, particularly over time. CONCLUSIONS: Endorsement of cognitive appraisal processes was different for depressed versus non-depressed spine-surgery patients before surgery and distinguished those who were depressed before surgery and improved versus those who did not improve. These findings suggest that targeted interventions could be beneficial for addressing mental health concerns during the spine surgery recovery trajectory. These interventions might use appraisal measures to identify patients likely to remain depressed after surgery, and then focus on helping these patients shift their focus and standards of comparison.