Using Multimodal Assessments to Reevaluate Depression Designations for Spine Surgery Candidates

Abstract

Background: Depression is common in spine surgery candidates and may influence postoperative outcomes. Ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) can overcome limitations of existing depression screening methods (e.g., recall bias, inaccuracy of historical diagnoses) by longitudinally monitoring depression symptoms in daily life. In this study, we compared EMA-based depression assessment with retrospective self-report (a 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]) and chart-based depression diagnosis in lumbar spine surgery candidates. We further examined the associations of each depression assessment method with surgical outcomes. Methods: Adult patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery (n = 122) completed EMAs quantifying depressive symptoms up to 5 times daily for 3 weeks preoperatively. Correlations (rank-biserial or Spearman) among EMA means, a chart-based depression history, and 1-time preoperative depression surveys (PHQ-9 and Psychache Scale) were analyzed. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to categorize PHQ-9 questions as somatic or non-somatic; subscores were compared with a propensity score-matched general population cohort. The associations of each screening modality with 6-month surgical outcomes (pain, disability, physical function, pain interference) were analyzed with multivariable regression. Results: The association between EMA Depression scores and a depression history was weak (rrb = 0.34 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.14 to 0.52]). Moderate correlations with EMA-measured depression symptoms were observed for the PHQ-9 (rs = 0.51 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.63]) and the Psychache Scale (rs = 0.68 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.76]). Compared with the matched general population cohort, spine surgery candidates endorsed similar non-somatic symptoms but significantly greater somatic symptoms on the PHQ-9. EMA Depression scores had a stronger association with 6-month surgical outcomes than the other depression screening modalities did. Conclusions: A history of depression in the medical record is not a reliable indication of preoperative depression symptom severity. Cross-sectional depression assessments such as PHQ-9 have stronger associations with daily depression symptoms but may conflate somatic depression symptoms with spine-related disability. As an alternative to these methods, mobile health technology and EMAs provide an opportunity to collect real-time, longitudinal data on depression symptom severity, potentially improving prognostic accuracy. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.