[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"spinal-stenosis-lumbar\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:spinal-stenosis-lumbar":26},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,10,0,[8,48,76,104,127,150,176,205,229,257],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":18,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":22,"briefSummary":24,"conditions":25,"keywords":27,"overallStatus":35,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":36,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":37,"startDateStruct":40,"completionDateStruct":42,"leadSponsor":44,"locationsCount":47},"100587962","evaluation-of-a-digital-person-centered-rehabilitation-program-targeting-physical-activity-in-spinal-stenosis-surgery-get-back-100587962",false,"NCT06935201","Evaluation of a Digital Person-Centered Rehabilitation Program Targeting Physical Activity in Spinal Stenosis Surgery (Get Back)","Get Back, A Digital Person-Centered Rehabilitation Program to Increase Physical Activity After Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Surgery - a Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients planned for decompression surgery due to central lumbar spinal stenosis\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with malignancy under treatment or with metastases;\n* History of neurological or other disorders resulting in severe movement dysfunction;\n* Untreated or instable heart conditions that prohibits physical tests;\n* Poor understanding of Swedish.","ALL","18 Years",{"count":19,"type":20},252,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[23],"NA","This study aims to investigate whether Get Back is more effective than standard rehabilitation in increasing the number of steps per day, improving physical activity levels, and functional ability for patients undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). LSS is common, especially among older adults, leading to increased health risks and reduced quality of life. Despite its prevalence (about 60% of all spinal surgeries in Sweden), many LSS patients remain physically inactive post-surgery, worsening their health. Rehabilitation remains a global challenge with unequal access, and many patients feel disengaged from the process. Get Back is a digital rehabilitation program including three components: gradually increasing physical activity, managing fear and avoidance behaviors, and using behavior change techniques. It has shown promising results in a pilot study, increasing daily steps. The program uses a person-centered approach tailored to personal needs. This multicenter randomized controlled trial will assess efficacy, process, and cost-effectiveness. It will also explore how preoperative values such as physical capacity and psychological factors predict changes in daily steps after surgery. Data will be collected via questionnaires, functional tests, and interviews, with the primary outcome being daily steps measured with motion sensors. The study will involve 252 patients from four spinal clinics. Get Back promotes increased physical activity and accessible rehabilitation, contributing to better health for LSS patients.",[26],"Spinal Stenosis Lumbar",[28,29,30,31,32,33,34],"Rehabilitation","Person-centred care","Physical activity","Steps per day","Behavioral medicine","Telerehabilitation","Telehealth","RECRUITING","2026-04-22",{"date":38,"type":39},"2026-04-28","ACTUAL",{"date":41,"type":39},"2025-05-12",{"date":43,"type":20},"2028-05",{"name":45,"class":46},"Sophiahemmet University","OTHER",4,{"id":49,"slug":50,"hasResults":11,"nctId":51,"briefTitle":52,"officialTitle":53,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":54,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":55,"maxAge":56,"enrollmentInfo":57,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":59,"briefSummary":60,"conditions":61,"keywords":62,"overallStatus":66,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":67,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":68,"startDateStruct":70,"completionDateStruct":72,"leadSponsor":74,"locationsCount":4},"100630065","full-endoscopic-decompression-vs-endoscopic-lumbar-fusion-for-middle-aged-and-older-adults-with-spinal-stenosis-100630065","NCT07482826","Full-Endoscopic Decompression vs. Endoscopic Lumbar Fusion for Middle-Aged and Older Adults With Spinal Stenosis","Full-Endoscopic Decompression (FED) Versus Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion (Endo-LIF) in Middle-Aged and Older Adults With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Aged between 50 and 75 years, regardless of gender.\n2. A definitive diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis, presenting with typical clinical symptoms (e.g., lower extremity radiating pain, neurogenic claudication) and signs, confirmed by imaging (MRI or CT).\n3. The lesion involves only a single spinal segment (L2-S1).\n4. Failed to respond to at least three months of systematic conservative treatment, with a significant impact on quality of life, and the patient has a clear willingness to undergo surgery.\n5. (Clinical equipoise) After evaluation by at least two senior spine surgeons, both agree that the patient's condition meets the surgical indications for both full-endoscopic decompression and endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion.\n6. The patient fully understands the randomized nature of this study (including random assignment and the relinquishment of choice by both the physician and the patient) and voluntarily signs the Informed Consent Form.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Clear indications for fusion: Degenerative spondylolisthesis greater than Meyerding Grade I, presence of lumbar spondylolysis, or evidence of definite lumbar instability on flexion-extension radiographs (e.g., segmental translation \\> 3 mm or angular change \\> 10°).\n2. Clear indications for decompression alone: Stenosis caused solely by soft disc herniation, without concomitant bony spinal canal or lateral recess stenosis.\n3. Spinal stenosis due to non-degenerative causes: Presence of spinal stenosis caused by fracture, spinal tumor, active infection, or inflammatory disease (e.g., ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis).\n4. Severe spinal structural abnormalities: Presence of severe spinal deformity (e.g., degenerative scoliosis with a Cobb angle \\> 20°).\n5. History of relevant prior surgery: Previous lumbar surgery at the same or an adjacent segment.\n6. Systemic diseases precluding tolerance to surgery: Presence of severe dysfunction of major organs (e.g., heart, lung, liver, kidney) or an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification \\> III, indicating an inability to tolerate anesthesia or surgery upon evaluation.\n7. Comorbidities that may confound outcome assessment: Presence of other conditions that could cause lower extremity claudication or dysfunction, such as severe hip or knee osteoarthritis (including a history of total hip or knee arthroplasty), peripheral vascular claudication, or polyneuropathy. Presence of other neurological or muscular system disorders that could seriously affect treatment evaluation (e.g., Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis).\n8. Participation in other studies: Currently participating in other clinical trials that could potentially influence the results of this study.","50 Years","75 Years",{"count":58,"type":20},176,[23],"Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS) is a syndrome characterized by anatomical narrowing of the central canal, lateral recess, or intervertebral foramen of the lumbar spine, leading to compression of nerve roots, the cauda equina, and their associated blood supply. Its clinical manifestations primarily include neurogenic intermittent claudication and\u002For radiating pain and numbness in the lower extremities. LSS is a common cause of disabling low back and leg pain and neurogenic claudication in middle-aged and older adults. Epidemiological studies confirm that its prevalence increases significantly with age, affecting approximately 11% of the general population and rising to 19.4% among individuals over 60. Against the backdrop of accelerating population aging in China, LSS not only severely threatens the quality of life and physical and mental health of middle-aged and older adults but also imposes a substantial economic burden on society.\n\nFor patients who do not respond to systematic conservative treatment, surgery can provide rapid relief from low back and leg pain. In recent years, high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has shown that in specific LSS subgroups with Grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis, the two-year clinical outcomes of decompression alone are non-inferior to those of decompression with instrumented fusion. This finding suggests that fusion is not an absolute indication for such patients and challenges the potential trend of overuse of fusion in clinical practice, prompting surgeons to more carefully evaluate the risk-benefit ratio of fusion surgery. However, it is important to note that this evidence primarily originates from traditional open surgical approaches and highly selected study populations. Therefore, whether these conclusions can be directly extrapolated to full-endoscopic techniques and their applicability in complex middle-aged and older patient populations with multiple comorbidities remain unclear and warrant further investigation.\n\nAgainst this backdrop, minimally invasive spine surgery technology, guided by the core principle of \"achieving maximum efficacy with minimal trauma,\" has developed rapidly. Over the past decade, full-endoscopic spine techniques, representing the concept of \"ultra-minimally invasive\" surgery, have made significant progress. This technology, relying on high-definition endoscopic systems, enables precise decompression of neural structures under a magnified and clear surgical field through tiny skin incisions less than 1 cm in diameter and sequentially dilated working channels. Its clinical advantages in reducing perioperative pain and accelerating postoperative recovery have been widely confirmed. Innovations in full-endoscopic techniques have allowed the classic clinical debate of \"decompression alone versus decompression with fusion\" to be re-examined within a new technological platform. However, high-quality prospective studies directly comparing full-endoscopic decompression alone with Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion (Endo-LIF) remain scarce, especially evidence specific to the unique patient population of middle-aged and older adults. Consequently, in current real-world clinical practice, a surgeon's choice between these two endoscopic procedures often relies more on personal clinical experience than on support from high-level evidence-based medicine.\n\nBased on the aforementioned background, this study aims to conduct a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of full-endoscopic decompression versus endoscopic fusion in middle-aged and older adult patients with LSS, thereby providing a scientific basis for individualized and precise surgical decision-making for this patient population.",[26],[63,64,65],"Spinal Stenosis","Lumbar Vertebrae","Decompression, Surgical","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-03-25",{"date":69,"type":39},"2026-03-27",{"date":71,"type":20},"2026-04-01",{"date":73,"type":20},"2029-12-31",{"name":75,"class":46},"The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University",{"id":77,"slug":78,"hasResults":11,"nctId":79,"briefTitle":80,"officialTitle":80,"acronym":81,"eligibilityCriteria":82,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":83,"enrollmentInfo":84,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":86,"phases":4,"briefSummary":87,"conditions":88,"keywords":89,"overallStatus":35,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":94,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":95,"startDateStruct":97,"completionDateStruct":99,"leadSponsor":101,"locationsCount":103},"100596458","bilateral-lumbar-decompression-via-uniportal-endoscopic-laminotomy-in-patients-with-lumbar-spinal-stenosis-multicentric-case-series-100596458","NCT07045714","Bilateral Lumbar Decompression Via Uniportal Endoscopic Laminotomy in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Multicentric Case Series","MELD-1","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Provision of informed consent to participate in the study.\n* Age ≥18 years and \\\u003C75 years.\n* Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis grade I-III according to the Lee scale.\n* Radicular or myelopathic symptoms.\n* Having undergone complete conservative management, including physical therapy and analgesia, for at least 3 months.\n* Patients who have opted for ULBLD using endoscopic uniportal technique for lumbar spinal stenosis.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Inability to read or write.\n* Prior lumbar surgeries at the levels to be treated.\n* Infectious symptoms or concomitant rheumatologic diseases.\n* Criteria of lumbar vertebral instability.\n* Congenital spinal malformations.\n* Disc herniation at the same lumbar level to be operated on.\n* Medullary hyperintensity on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the levels to be treated.","74 Years",{"count":85,"type":20},78,"OBSERVATIONAL","Lumbar spinal stenosis is a condition that can cause pain, sensory disturbances, and motor deficits due to the compression of neural structures in the lumbar spine. While conservative treatments such as physical therapy and pain management can help some patients, others with persistent neurological deficits may require surgical intervention. Traditional surgical approaches, including open laminectomy, have proven effective but carry risks such as extensive muscle damage, considerable blood loss, postoperative spinal instability, and prolonged recovery times.\n\nThis study evaluates a minimally invasive surgical approach called unilateral laminotomy with bilateral lumbar decompression (ULBLD) using endoscopic uniportal technique as an alternative to traditional methods for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. The main objective is to assess changes in neurological deficits and disability in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis following this procedure. The study will also document hospitalization duration, surgical time, blood loss, and the incidence of postoperative complications.\n\nThis multicenter, prospective case series will recruit 78 patients from three medical centers in Mexico. Participants must have symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis that persists despite at least three months of conservative treatment. Eligible patients will undergo ULBLD using endoscopic uniportal technique, a method that allows precise nerve decompression through a small incision, minimizing damage to surrounding tissues. Standardized clinical assessment tools, including the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale for lumbar disease, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, will be used to evaluate outcomes at multiple time points over 12 months.\n\nBy comparing patients' preoperative and postoperative evaluations, the study aims to determine whether ULBLD using endoscopic uniportal technique effectively improves neurological function and reduces disability while maintaining a favorable safety profile. Findings from this study could lead to a more precise understanding of the impact of ULBLD on disability, pain, and health-related quality of life for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.",[26],[90,91,92,93],"Lumbar Spinal Stenosis","Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures","Endoscopic Spine Surgery","Spinal Degenerative Disease","2026-03-03",{"date":96,"type":39},"2026-03-04",{"date":98,"type":39},"2026-02-25",{"date":100,"type":20},"2027-07",{"name":102,"class":46},"TecSalud Investigación Clínica",1,{"id":105,"slug":106,"hasResults":11,"nctId":107,"briefTitle":108,"officialTitle":109,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":110,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":111,"enrollmentInfo":112,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":114,"briefSummary":115,"conditions":116,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":35,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":118,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":119,"startDateStruct":121,"completionDateStruct":123,"leadSponsor":125,"locationsCount":103},"100619738","comparison-of-the-postoperative-analgesic-efficacy-of-classical-and-modified-erector-spinae-plane-blocks-after-lumbar-spinal-surgery-100619738","NCT07348523","Comparison of the Postoperative Analgesic Efficacy of Classical and Modified Erector Spinae Plane Blocks After Lumbar Spinal Surgery","Comparison of the Effectiveness of Classical and Modified Erector Spinae Plane Blocks in Postoperative Analgesia Management Following Lumbar Spinal Surgery: A Prospective Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients aged 18-70 years,\n* Classified as ASA physical status I-III,\n* Scheduled to undergo single-level lumbar spinal surgery under general anesthesia\n* Who agree to participate in the study by providing written informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* History of bleeding diathesis or current anticoagulant therapy\n* Known allergy or hypersensitivity to local anesthetics or opioid medications\n* Infection at the planned block injection site\n* Previous lumbar spine surgery\n* History of gabapentinoid or corticosteroid use within the last 3 weeks\n* Inability to use a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device\n* Suspected pregnancy, confirmed pregnancy, or breastfeeding Refusal to undergo the procedure or to participate in the study","70 Years",{"count":113,"type":20},60,[23],"The investigators aim to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of the classical erector spinae plane block and the modified erector spinae plane block in the management of postoperative analgesia after lumbar disc surgery.",[117,26],"Acute Pain","2026-02-02",{"date":120,"type":39},"2026-02-03",{"date":122,"type":39},"2025-12-02",{"date":124,"type":20},"2026-08-30",{"name":126,"class":46},"Samsun University",{"id":128,"slug":129,"hasResults":11,"nctId":130,"briefTitle":131,"officialTitle":132,"acronym":133,"eligibilityCriteria":134,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":135,"enrollmentInfo":136,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":138,"briefSummary":139,"conditions":140,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":66,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":141,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":142,"startDateStruct":144,"completionDateStruct":146,"leadSponsor":148,"locationsCount":4},"100614396","modified-mini-open-tlif-vs-traditional-open-tlif-100614396","NCT07279051","Modified Mini-Open TLIF vs Traditional Open TLIF","Modified Mini-Open TLIF Versus Traditional Open TLIF for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis : A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial","TLIF","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients aged between 18 and 80 years.\n* Presence of unilateral neurogenic claudication or radicular pain in the lower limbs, with failure to respond to at least 3 months of conservative treatment.\n* Presence of bilateral neurogenic claudication or radicular pain in the lower limbs, but with complete resolution of neurological symptoms in at least one lower limb during recumbency and an unremarkable physical examination, alongside failure to respond to at least 3 months of conservative treatment.\n* Radiologically confirmed single- or two-level lumbar spinal stenosis on MRI, with evidence of instability specifically at the stenotic level(s) on standing lateral radiographs.\n* The mMO-TLIF or TLIF surgical procedure is performed by the same lead surgeon at each participating investigational site.\n* Subjects voluntarily participate and provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Presence of bilateral radicular pain in the lower limbs that does not completely resolve at rest.\n* History of previous lumbar spine trauma or surgery.\n* Presence of spinal infection, tuberculosis, or tumor.\n* Contraindications to surgery, such as severe systemic medical diseases, coagulation disorders, severe active infectious diseases, or osteoporosis.\n* Significant intervertebral space collapse, presence of bony ankylosis, etc.\n* Incomplete data.","80 Years",{"count":137,"type":20},224,[23],"This clinical study aims to find out if a modified mini-open spine surgery (modified mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion，mMO-TLIF) is as good as, or better than, the traditional open surgery (traditional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion，traditional TLIF) for treating low back pain, leg pain, and walking difficulties caused by lumbar spinal stenosis with instability. The study will also look at the safety of both surgeries.\n\nIt is designed to answer these main questions:\n\nIs the mMO-TLIF surgery as good as the traditional TLIF surgery at improving patients' lower back function and quality of life? Does the mMO-TLIF surgery reduce blood loss during the operation and shorten hospital stays and recovery time? What medical problems (like infections or nerve injuries) might patients experience after having the mMO-TLIF surgery? Researchers will compare the results of the mMO-TLIF surgery group with the traditional TLIF surgery group to see which one works better.\n\nParticipants will:\n\nBe randomly assigned to receive either the mMO-TLIF minimally invasive surgery or the traditional TLIF open surgery.\n\nCome back to the hospital for check-ups before surgery, and then at 1 month, 3 months, 12 months and 24 months after surgery.\n\nDuring these check-ups, they will have physical exams, fill out questionnaires about their symptoms, dysfunction and quality of life, and get X-rays or CT scans to see how their bones are healing.",[26],"2025-11-30",{"date":143,"type":39},"2025-12-12",{"date":145,"type":20},"2025-12-06",{"date":147,"type":20},"2028-05-01",{"name":149,"class":46},"The First People's Hospital of Lianyungang",{"id":151,"slug":152,"hasResults":11,"nctId":153,"briefTitle":154,"officialTitle":154,"acronym":155,"eligibilityCriteria":156,"healthyVolunteers":157,"sex":16,"minAge":55,"maxAge":135,"enrollmentInfo":158,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":159,"briefSummary":161,"conditions":162,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":35,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":167,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":168,"startDateStruct":170,"completionDateStruct":172,"leadSponsor":174,"locationsCount":103},"100544359","phase-4-efficacy-and-safety-of-preemptive-intravenous-dexamethasone-in-mis-tlif-100544359","NCT06367855","Efficacy and Safety of Preemptive Intravenous Dexamethasone in MIS-TLIF","MIS-TLIF","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age range: 50-80 years old.\n* Undergoing MIS TLIF surgery at 1-2 spinal levels.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Previously undergone spine surgery.\n* HbA1C greater than or equal to 7.5 mg%\n* Allergic to all types of experimental medication.\n* History of using systemic steroids.",true,{"count":113,"type":20},[160],"PHASE4","Researchers are considering Dexamethasone as preemptive medication before minimally invasive spine fusion surgery to minimize postoperative back pain with minimal side effects, aiming to enhance the effectiveness of surgery and improve patient outcomes.",[26,163,164,165,166],"Disc Degeneration","Disc Disease","Fusion of Spine","Surgery","2025-08-31",{"date":169,"type":39},"2025-09-08",{"date":171,"type":39},"2024-05-01",{"date":173,"type":20},"2025-12-31",{"name":175,"class":46},"Potsawat Surabotsopon",{"id":177,"slug":178,"hasResults":11,"nctId":179,"briefTitle":180,"officialTitle":181,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":182,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":183,"enrollmentInfo":184,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":186,"briefSummary":187,"conditions":188,"keywords":192,"overallStatus":66,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":196,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":197,"startDateStruct":199,"completionDateStruct":201,"leadSponsor":203,"locationsCount":103},"100578105","artificial-intelligence-enabled-decision-support-for-selection-of-patients-for-lumbar-spine-surgery-100578105","NCT06806969","Artificial Intelligence Enabled Decision Support for Selection of Patients for Lumbar Spine Surgery","Artificial Intelligence (AI) Enabled Decision Support Tool for Selection of Patients for Lumbar Spine Surgery: a Feasibility Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with MRI-confirmed LDH or LSS referred to University hospital of North Norway Tromsø for assessment of indication for surgery\n* Specialists and physicians in training (for two years or more) in neurosurgery or orthopedic surgery who evaluate such patients at the neurosurgical outpatient clinic at University hospital of North Norway Tromsø\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients unable to consent because of\n\n  * Age \\\u003C 18 years\n  * Serious drug abuse of severe psychiatric disorders\n  * Language barriers (patients who cannot speak or read Norwegian)\n* Patients with a baseline ODI ≤14 (LDH) or ≤22 (LSS)\n* Patients undergoing non-elective\u002Femergency operations\n* Patients with degenerative conditions other that LDH and LSS, fractures, primary infections, or malignant conditions of the spine\n* Physicians in training with less than two years' experience with spine surgery","100 Years",{"count":185,"type":20},26,[23],"Background One third of patients operated for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) or spinal stenosis (LSS) do not achieve substantial improvement. Studies indicate that well informed shared decision making (SDM) can improve the selection to surgery, and thus the outcomes. Numerous algorithms for outcome prediction have therefore been developed, and some use artificial intelligence (AI). Most are trained on small datasets, few are accurate, all are stand-alone or web-based applications not integrated in the electronic health record (EHR), and none are implemented in routine clinical practice.\n\nThe Norwegian registry for spine surgery (NORspine) comprises a cohort of more than 69,000 cases. The investigators have used AI to analyze the dataset and predict the outcome, and developed a decision support tool (DST) which is seamlessly integrated in the EHR DIPS Arena®.\n\nThe investigators intend to use the tool to inform the SDM between surgeons and patients about the indication for surgery (yes or no), to increase the proportion with a successful outcome. The aim of the study is to assess the safety and feasibility of the DST for use in a subsequent pilot study.\n\nThe device The DST (the device) is an integrate compound of software-solutions. Baseline data are registered by patients and surgeons on questionnaires integrated in DIPS Arena®, and transferred to NORspine. The data are also transferred (de-identified) to the AI-enabled prediction algorithm which operates in a cloud-based model hosting service. The algorithm has been trained and validated on a dataset from NORspine. The area under the curve for prediction of the main outcome (Oswestry disability index after12 months) in receiver operating characteristic analysis is very high (0.85) for LDH and moderate (0.72) for LSS. The model host also calculates outcomes (proportions with substantial, slight, or no improvement, and worsening) for the 50 cases with baseline variables most similar to the present case (\"patients-like-me\"). Finally, the individual prediction and the outcomes for the \"patients-like-me\" are transferred back and displayed in the regular user interface of DIPS Arena® for use in the SDM.\n\nClinical investigations For this feasibility study, the investigators will use convergent qualitative and quantitative mixed methods. The comparator is decision making in routine clinical practice, without use of the DST. The study will include 20 patients with magnetic resonance imaging confirmed LDH or LSS referred for evaluation of the indication for surgery, and six surgeons who do the evaluations. The study will iteratively redesign the user interface of the DST until it is considered safe and feasible for use in a following pilot study.",[189,26,190,191],"Intervertebral Disc Displacement","Lumbar Disc Herniation","Lumbar Spine Degeneration",[193,194,195],"artificial intelligence","decision support","surgery selection","2025-01-30",{"date":198,"type":39},"2025-02-04",{"date":200,"type":20},"2025-02-01",{"date":202,"type":20},"2027-06-30",{"name":204,"class":46},"University Hospital of North Norway",{"id":206,"slug":207,"hasResults":11,"nctId":208,"briefTitle":209,"officialTitle":209,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":210,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":211,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":213,"briefSummary":214,"conditions":215,"keywords":216,"overallStatus":35,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":220,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":221,"startDateStruct":223,"completionDateStruct":225,"leadSponsor":227,"locationsCount":103},"100458723","the-effect-of-progressive-muscle-relaxation-exercises-on-pain-and-disability-after-spinal-surgery-100458723","NCT05253326","The Effect of Progressive Muscle Relaxation Exercises on Pain and Disability After Spinal Surgery","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Having undergone spinal surgery (such as Discectomy, Laminectomy, Spinal fusion, Foraminatomy),\n* 18 years of age or older\n* Agreeing to apply progressive relaxation exercises and willing and willing to participate in the study,\n* Having no medically diagnosed health problems (neurological, psychiatric, orthopedic) that will prevent learning and practicing progressive muscle relaxation exercises,\n* Patients who do not know and practice progressive relaxation exercises before will be included in the study.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients who will undergo emergency surgery,\n* Do not want to apply progressive relaxation exercises,\n* Do not apply them as desired during the working process,\n* Those have health problems (neurological, psychiatric, orthopedic) that may affect their ability to do the exercises",{"count":212,"type":20},70,[23],"This study was planned as a randomized controlled experimental study to determine the effect of progressive muscle relaxation exercises on pain and disability in patients undergoing spinal surgery.",[26],[217,218,219],"Lumbar Surgery","Progressive muscle relaxation","Pain","2024-11-16",{"date":222,"type":39},"2024-11-19",{"date":224,"type":39},"2022-05-01",{"date":226,"type":20},"2025-05-01",{"name":228,"class":46},"Istanbul Medeniyet University",{"id":230,"slug":231,"hasResults":11,"nctId":232,"briefTitle":233,"officialTitle":234,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":235,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":236,"enrollmentInfo":237,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":239,"briefSummary":240,"conditions":241,"keywords":243,"overallStatus":35,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":247,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":248,"startDateStruct":250,"completionDateStruct":252,"leadSponsor":254,"locationsCount":256},"100546363","relief-of-lumbar-spinal-stenosis-symptoms-100546363","NCT06393959","Relief of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Symptoms","Comparison of Pulsed Radiofrequency Stimulation Versus Dexamethasone Applied to the Caudal Epidural Space for the Relief of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Symptoms","Inclusion Criteria:\n\nAmong the patients with lumbar spinal stenosis findings and narrowing of the spinal canal detected by examination and imaging methods, those whose back and leg pain persists for at least 3 months\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\nPrevious lumbar surgery, pregnancy, history of ongoing malignant disease, autoimmune diseases, active infection of the injection site, hematologic disorders, antiplatelet drug use","90 Years",{"count":238,"type":20},50,[23],"The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of caudal epidural steroid injection and caudal epidural pulsed radiofrequency stimulation in the relief of symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis.\n\nThis evaluation used the numerical rating scale (NRS) to assess pain relief and the Medication Quantification Scale III (MQS III) to assess the effectiveness of the interventions on medication consumption. The rates of adverse events related to the interventions were also compared.",[26,242],"Low Back Pain",[244,245,246],"Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment","Lomber spinal Stenosis","Caudal epidural steroid injection","2024-07-18",{"date":249,"type":39},"2024-07-22",{"date":251,"type":39},"2024-02-15",{"date":253,"type":20},"2024-07-20",{"name":255,"class":46},"Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital",2,{"id":258,"slug":259,"hasResults":11,"nctId":260,"briefTitle":261,"officialTitle":262,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":263,"healthyVolunteers":157,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":183,"enrollmentInfo":264,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":266,"briefSummary":267,"conditions":268,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":66,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":271,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":272,"startDateStruct":274,"completionDateStruct":276,"leadSponsor":278,"locationsCount":4},"100462119","phase-4-efficacy-of-activematrix-on-spinal-ssi-rate-100462119","NCT05297513","Efficacy of ActiveMatrix on Spinal SSI Rate","Efficacy of ActiveMatrix on Spinal Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Reduction: A Single-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Provision of signed and dated informed consent form\n2. Stated willingness to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study\n3. Male or female, ≥ 18 years of age to 100 years of age\n4. Have a clinical diagnosis of thoracic and or lumbosacral spinal disease indicated for decompression and\u002For fusion\n5. Have no contraindications or allergies to the treatment administered\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Subject is involved with a worker's compensation, personal injury, or other legal matters related to their health\n2. Subject does not provide full consent\n3. Known history of allergy to allografts\n4. Pregnancy or lactation\n5. Minimally invasive spinal surgery\n6. Non-fusion instrumented cases requiring drains\n\nThere is no intended distribution or restriction of subjects by racial and ethnic origin. No vulnerable subjects are included in this protocol.",{"count":265,"type":20},275,[160],"This clinical trial seeks to provide high level of evidence on the efficacy of ActiveMatrix primarily on spinal surgical site infection rate.",[26,269,270],"Surgical Site Infection","Back Pain Lower Back Chronic","2022-03-30",{"date":273,"type":39},"2022-04-07",{"date":275,"type":20},"2022-07",{"date":277,"type":20},"2026-07",{"name":279,"class":46},"Baylor College of Medicine"]