The smallest worthwhile effect of surgery versus non-surgical treatments for sciatica: a benefit-harm trade-off study.

Abstract

What is the smallest worthwhile (SWE) effect of discectomy compared with non-surgical treatments amongst people with sciatica? Benefit-harm trade-off study. People with sciatica of any duration living in Australia and recruited through social media. The outcome of interest was leg pain intensity. Participants were asked to nominate the additional percentage reduction in leg pain from discectomy--above the reduction anticipated from non-surgical treatments--that would make discectomy worthwhile for them. The SWE was estimated as the median (IQR) of the smallest percentage reduction in leg pain with discectomy (compared with non-surgical treatment) that participants considered worthwhile. The SWE was estimated for the overall sample and those with acute (≤ 6 weeks), subacute (> 6 to 12 weeks) and chronic (> 12 weeks) sciatica, and investigated factors associated with the SWE. Two hundred participants with a mean age of 59 years (SD 12) were included. The SWE was estimated to be an additional 15% (IQR 10 to 40) reduction in leg pain with discectomy, beyond any reduction in leg pain achieved by non-surgical treatments. Dissatisfaction with previous non-surgical treatments and low pain self-efficacy were associated with smaller SWE estimates. People with sciatica would require discectomy to provide an additional 15% reduction in their leg pain beyond the expected 50% improvement in leg pain from non-surgical treatments in the short term to consider discectomy worthwhile. These results can inform the interpretation of the effects of discectomy in randomised trials and meta-analysis from the perspective of consumers.