Adjunctive Use of Bone Growth Stimulation Increases Cervical Spine Fusion Rates in Patients at Risk for Pseudarthrosis

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective multicenter clinical trial (NCT03177473) was conducted with a retrospective cohort used as a control arm.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate cervical spine fusion rates in subjects with risk factors for pseudarthrosis who received pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) treatment.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Certain risk factors predispose patients to pseudarthrosis, which is associated with prolonged pain, reduced function, and decreased quality of life.

METHODS

Subjects in the PEMF group were treated with PEMF for 6 months postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was fusion status at the 12-month follow-up period. Fusion status was determined using anterior/posterior, lateral, and flexion/extension radiographs and computed tomography (without contrast).

RESULTS

A total of 213 patients were evaluated (PEMF, n=160; Control, n=53). At baseline, the PEMF group had a higher percentage of subjects who used nicotine ( P =0.01), had osteoporosis ( P <0.05), multi-level disease ( P <0.0001), and were >65 years of age ( P =0.01). The PEMF group showed over two-fold higher percentage of subjects that had ≥3 risk factors (n=92/160, 57.5%) compared with the control group (n=14/53, 26.4%). At the 12-month follow-up, the PEMF group demonstrated significantly higher fusion rates compared with the control (90.0% vs. 60.4%, P <0.05). A statistically significant improvement in fusion rate was observed in PEMF subjects with multi-level surgery ( P <0.0001) and high BMI (>30 kg/m 2 ; P =0.0021) when compared with the control group. No significant safety concerns were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive use of PEMF stimulation provides significant improvements in cervical spine fusion rates in subjects having risk factors for pseudarthrosis. When compared with control subjects that did not use PEMF stimulation, treated subjects showed improved fusion outcomes despite being older, having more risk factors for pseudarthrosis, and undergoing more complex surgeries.

The impact of anxiety and depression on lumbar spine surgical outcomes: a Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative study

OBJECTIVE

The presence of depression and anxiety has been associated with negative outcomes in spine surgery patients. While it seems evident that a history of depression or anxiety can negatively influence outcome, the exact additive effect of both has not been extensively studied in a multicenter trial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between a patient's history of anxiety and depression and their patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after lumbar surgery.

METHODS

Patients in the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry undergoing lumbar spine surgery between July 2016 and December 2021 were grouped into four cohorts: those with a history of anxiety only, those with a history of depression only, those with both, and those with neither. Primary outcomes were achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function 4-item Short Form (PROMIS PF), EQ-5D, and numeric rating scale (NRS) back pain and leg pain, and North American Spine Society patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included surgical site infection, hospital readmission, and return to the operating room. Multivariate Poisson generalized estimating equation models were used to report incidence rate ratios (IRRs) from patient baseline variables.

RESULTS

Of the 45,565 patients identified, 3941 reported a history of anxiety, 5017 reported a history of depression, 9570 reported both, and 27,037 reported neither. Compared with those who reported having neither, patients with both anxiety and depression had lower patient satisfaction at 90 days (p = 0.002) and 1 year (p = 0.021); PROMIS PF MCID at 90 days (p < 0.001), 1 year (p < 0.001), and 2 years (p = 0.006); EQ-5D MCID at 90 days (p < 0.001), 1 year (p < 0.001), and 2 years (p < 0.001); NRS back pain MCID at 90 days (p < 0.001) and 1 year (p < 0.001); and NRS leg pain MCID at 90 days (p < 0.001), 1 year (p = 0.024), and 2 years (p = 0.027). Patients with anxiety only (p < 0.001), depression only (p < 0.001), or both (p < 0.001) were more likely to be readmitted within 90 days. Additionally, patients with anxiety only (p = 0.015) and both anxiety and depression (p = 0.015) had higher rates of surgical site infection. Patients with anxiety only (p = 0.006) and depression only (p = 0.021) also had higher rates of return to the operating room.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors observed an association between a history of anxiety and depression and negative outcome after lumbar spine surgery. In addition, they found an additive effect of a history of both anxiety and depression with an increased risk of negative outcome when compared with either anxiety or depression alone.

Do Patients Accurately Recall Pain Levels Following Sacroiliac Joint Steroid Injection? A Cohort Study of Recall Bias in Patient-reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injections are crucial in the diagnostic toolkit for evaluating SIJ pathology. Recall bias is an important component in patient-reported outcomes that has not been well studied in SIJ injection.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to characterize the accuracy, direction, and magnitude of pain level recall bias following SIJ steroid injection and study the factors that affect patient recollection.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Level 1 academic medical center.

METHODS

Using standardized questionnaires, baseline Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) scores were recorded for patients undergoing SIJ steroid injections at preinjection, at 4 hours postinjection, and at 24 hours postinjection. At a minimum of 2 weeks postinjection, patients were asked to recall their preinjection, 4-hour, and 24-hour postinjection NRS-11 scores. Actual and recalled NRS-11 scores were compared using paired t tests for each time interval. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify factors that correlated with consistent recall.

RESULTS

Sixty patients with a mean age of 66 years (65% women) were included. Compared to their preinjection pain score, patients showed considerable improvement at both 4 hours (mean difference [MD] = 3.28; 95% CI, 2.68 - 3.89), and 24 hours (MD = 3.23; 95% CI, 2.44 - 4.03) postinjection. Patient recollection of preinjection symptoms was more severe than actual (MD = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31 - 0.99). Patient recollection of symptoms was also more severe than actual at 4 hours (MD = 0.50; 95% CI .04 - 1.04) as well as at 24 hours postinjection (MD = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.16 - 1.44). The magnitude of recall bias was mild and did not exceed the minimal clinically important difference. There was a moderate correlation between actual and recalled pain levels when comparing preinjection with the 4-hour postinjection NRS-11 score (correlation coefficient [r] =0.64; P < 0.001) and moderate correlation when comparing preinjection with the 24-hour postinjection NRS-11 score (r = 0.62; P < 0.001). Linear regression models showed that at preinjection, patients with a lower body mass index and the presence of coexisting psychiatric diagnoses were better at recalling their pain (P < 0.05). Patients with a higher body mass index also experienced less pain relief when comparing preinjection with the 4-hour postinjection NRS-11 score (P < 0.05).

LIMITATIONS

Recall pain scores were obtained via telephone surveys, which can lead to interview bias. One patient died, and 3 were lost to follow-up. We did not control for patient use of adjunctive pain relief modalities, which may modulate the overall response to injection. SIJ injections can also be diagnostic, so some patients may not have shared the same indication for injection or pain-generating diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients had favorable pain level responses to their SIJ steroid injection for both actual and recall surveys. Although patients demonstrated poor recall of absolute pain scores at preinjection, 4-hour postinjection, and 24-hour postinjection, they demonstrated robust recall of their net pain score improvement at both 4- and 24-hours postinjection. These findings suggest that there is utility in using patient recollection to describe the magnitude of pain relief following treatment for sacroiliac joint dysfunction.

Risk factors for not reaching minimal clinically important difference at 90 days and 1 year after elective lumbar spine surgery: a cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Patient-perceived functional improvement is a core metric in lumbar surgery for degenerative disease. It is important to identify both modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors that can be evaluated and possibly optimized prior to elective surgery. This case-control study was designed to study risk factors for not achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Function 4-item Short Form (PROMIS PF) score.

METHODS

The authors queried the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative database to identify patients who underwent elective lumbar surgical procedures with PROMIS PF scores. Cases were divided into two cohorts based on whether patients achieved MCID at 90 days and 1 year after surgery. Patient characteristics and operative details were analyzed as potential risk factors.

RESULTS

The authors captured 10,922 patients for 90-day follow-up and 4453 patients (40.8%) did not reach MCID. At the 1-year follow-up period, 7780 patients were identified and 2941 patients (37.8%) did not achieve MCID. The significant demographic characteristic-adjusted relative risks (RRs) for both groups (RR 90 day, RR 1 year) included the following: symptom duration > 1 year (1.34, 1.41); previous spine surgery (1.25, 1.30); African American descent (1.25, 1.20); chronic opiate use (1.23, 1.25); and less than high school education (1.20, 1.34). Independent ambulatory status (0.83, 0.88) and private insurance (0.91, 0.85) were associated with higher likelihood of reaching MCID at 90 days and 1 year, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Several key unique demographic risk factors were identified in this cohort study that precluded optimal postoperative functional outcomes after elective lumbar spine surgery. With this information, appropriate preoperative counseling can be administered to assist in shaping patient expectations.

Risk factors of emergency department visits following elective cervical and lumbar surgical procedures: a multi-institution analysis from the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative

OBJECTIVE

Emergency department visits 90 days after elective spinal surgery are relatively common, with rates ranging from 9% to 29%. Emergency visits are very costly, so their reduction is of importance. This study's objective was to evaluate the reasons for emergency department visits and determine potentially modifiable risk factors.

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed data queried from the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) registry from July 2020 to November 2021. MSSIC is a multicenter (28-hospital) registry of patients undergoing cervical and lumbar degenerative spinal surgery. Adult patients treated for elective cervical and/or lumbar spine surgery for degenerative pathology (spondylosis, intervertebral disc disease, low-grade spondylolisthesis) were included. Emergency department visits within 90 days of surgery (outcome measure) were analyzed utilizing univariate and multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 16,224 patients, 2024 (12.5%) presented to the emergency department during the study period, most commonly for pain related to spinal surgery (31.5%), abdominal problems (15.8%), and pain unrelated to the spinal surgery (12.8%). On multivariate analysis, age (per 5-year increase) (relative risk [RR] 0.94, 95% CI 0.92-0.95), college education (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.96), private insurance (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.89), and preoperative ambulation status (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.97) were associated with decreased emergency visits. Conversely, Black race (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13-1.51), current diabetes (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.26), history of deep venous thromboembolism (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.16-1.43), history of depression (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03-1.25), history of anxiety (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.19-1.46), history of osteoporosis (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.09-1.34), history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.34), American Society of Anesthesiologists class > II (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.08-1.29), and length of stay > 3 days (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.16-1.44) were associated with increased emergency visits.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common reasons for emergency department visits were surgical pain, abdominal dysfunction, and pain unrelated to index spinal surgery. Increased focus on postoperative pain management and bowel regimen can potentially reduce emergency visits. The risks of diabetes, history of osteoporosis, depression, and anxiety are areas for additional preoperative screening.

Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Stimulation in Lumbar Spine Fusion for Patients With Risk Factors for Pseudarthrosis

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal fusion surgeries are increasing steadily due to an aging and ever-growing population. Patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery may present with risk factors that contribute to complications, pseudarthrosis, prolonged pain, and reduced quality of life. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) stimulation represents an adjunct noninvasive treatment intervention that has been shown to improve successful fusion and patient outcomes following spinal surgery.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter study investigated PEMF as an adjunct therapy to lumbar spinal fusion procedures in patients at risk for pseudarthrosis. Patients with at least 1 of the following risk factors were enrolled: prior failed fusion, multilevel fusion, nicotine use, osteoporosis, or diabetes. Fusion status was determined by radiographic imaging, and patient-reported outcomes were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were included in the analysis. Fusion status was assessed at 12 months follow-up where 88.0% (n = 125/142) of patients demonstrated successful fusion. Fusion success for patients with 1, 2+, or 3+ risk factors was 88.5%, 87.5%, and 82.3%, respectively. Significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes using the Short Form 36, EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) survey, Oswestry Disability Index, and visual analog scale for back and leg pain were also observed compared with baseline scores (P < 0.001). A favorable safety profile was observed. PEMF treatment showed a positive benefit-risk profile throughout the 6-month required use period.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of PEMF as an adjunct treatment in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery provided a high rate of successful fusion with significant improvements in pain, function, and quality of life, despite having risk factors for pseudarthrosis.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

PEMF represents a useful tool for adjunct treatment in patients who have undergone lumbar spinal surgery. Treatment with PEMF may result in improved fusion and patient-reported outcomes, regardless of risk factors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03176303.

The Duration of Symptoms Influences Outcomes After Lumbar Microdiscectomies: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort.

OBJECTIVE

We investigate whether duration of symptoms a patient experiences prior to lumbar microdiscectomy affects pain, lifestyle, and return to work metrics after surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with a diagnosis of lumbar radiculopathy undergoing microdiscectomy was conducted using a statewide registry. Patients were grouped based on self-reported duration of symptoms prior to surgical intervention (Group 1: symptoms less than 3 months; Group 2: symptoms between 3 months and 1 year; and Group 3: symptoms greater than 1 year). Radicular pain scores, PROMIS PF Physical Function measure (PROMIS PF), EQ-5D scores, and return to work rates at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

There were 2408 patients who underwent microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation for radiculopathy with 532, 910, and 955 in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Postoperative leg pain was lower for Group 1 at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years compared to Groups 2 and 3 (P < .05). Postoperative PROMIS PF and EQ-5D scores were higher for Group 1 at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years compared to Groups 2 and 3 (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with prolonged symptoms prior to surgical intervention experience smaller improvements in postoperative leg pain, PROMIS PF, and EQ-5D than those who undergo surgery earlier. Patients undergoing surgery within 3 months of symptom onset have the highest rates of return to work at 1 year after surgery.

Multilevel Cervical Disk Arthroplasty: Moving Beyond Two Levels

Cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) is well-studied for 1-level and 2-level cervical pathology. There is an increasing trend towards its utilization for greater than 2-level disease as an alternative to the gold standard, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The number of high-level, prospective studies or randomized trials regarding multilevel CDA is limited but continues to grow as the procedure gains popularity. In appropriately indicated patients with multilevel disease caused by disk herniations or spondylosis without extensive facet arthropathy, CDA shows promising results. Multilevel CDA should be avoided in patients with prior spinal trauma, significant degenerative spondylolisthesis with translation, arthrodesis without mobility, severely incompetent facet joints, ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, or kyphotic deformity. With overall similar risk profiles to ACDF but lower theoretical rates of pseudarthrosis and adjacent segment disease, multilevel CDA has been shown to preserve, or perhaps even increase, preoperative cervical range of motion. There are negligible differences in postoperative neck and arm pain, VAS scores, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores, and Neck Disability Index scores when comparing multilevel CDA and ACDF. Despite current indications for multilevel CDA largely being based on single and 2-level data, careful patient selection is critical. Expansion of indications can be expected as literature continues to emerge regarding outcomes and complications in multilevel CDA, as well as with improvements in prosthesis design.

Association of prolonged symptom duration with poor outcomes in lumbar spine surgery: a Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative study

OBJECTIVE

There is a scarcity of large multicenter data on how preoperative lumbar symptom duration relates to postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The objective of this study was to determine the effect of preoperative and baseline symptom duration on PROs at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years after lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry was queried for all lumbar spine operations between January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021, with a follow-up of 2 years. Patients were stratified into three subgroups based on symptom duration: < 3 months, 3 months to < 1 year, and ≥ 1 year. The primary outcomes were reaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the PROs (i.e., leg pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF), EQ-5D, North American Spine Society satisfaction, and return to work). The EQ-5D score was also analyzed as a continuous variable to calculate quality-adjusted life years. Multivariable Poisson generalized estimating equation models were used to report adjusted risk ratios, with the < 3-month cohort used as the reference.

RESULTS

There were 37,223 patients (4670 with < 3-month duration, 9356 with 3-month to < 1-year duration, and 23,197 with ≥ 1-year duration) available for analysis. Compared with patients with a symptom duration of < 1 year, patients with a symptom duration of ≥ 1 year were significantly less likely to achieve an MCID in PROMIS PF, EQ-5D, back pain relief, and leg pain relief at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Similar trends were observed for patient satisfaction and return to work. With the EQ-5D score as a continuous variable, a symptom duration of ≥ 1 year was associated with 0.04, 0.05, and 0.03 (p < 0.001) decreases in EQ-5D score at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A symptom duration of ≥ 1 year was associated with poorer outcomes on several outcome metrics. This suggests that timely referral and surgery for degenerative lumbar pathology may optimize patient outcome.

Operative Technique for Sacral Insufficiency Fractures Causing Spinopelvic Dissociation: A Case Report

CASE

We present a case of a 54-year-old man with atraumatic, U-type sacral insufficiency and L5 compression fractures leading to spinopelvic dissociation, inability to ambulate, and bowel/bladder compromise. The patient underwent L3-4 percutaneous pedicle screw fixation with bilateral iliac bolts and percutaneous iliosacral screw fixation. Postoperatively, the patient had return of bowel/bladder function and independent ambulation at 2.5 years.

CONCLUSION

Atraumatic spinopelvic dissociation is an underappreciated pathology in older patients. Here, we describe the result of our preferred treatment strategy, triangular osteosynthesis, to preserve function and independence. Despite optimal, prompt treatment, these injuries pose a difficult rehabilitation process for patients.

Patient satisfaction with follow-up after spinal fusion

Background

Postoperative follow-up visits (PFUs) allow providers to track patient recovery but can be costly to patients. With the advent of the novel coronavirus pandemic, virtual/phone visits have been utilized as an alternative to in-person PFUs. Patients were surveyed to elucidate patient satisfaction with postoperative care in the setting of increased virtual follow-up visits. A prospective survey with retrospective cohort analysis of chart data was conducted to better understand the factors influencing patient satisfaction related to their PFUs after spine fusion with the goal of improving the value of postoperative care.

Methods

Adult patients at least 1 year postoperative from cervical or lumbar fusion surgery completed a telephone survey related to their postoperative clinic experience. Medical record data including complications, number of visits and length of follow-up, and presence of phone/virtual visits were abstracted and analyzed.

Results

Fifty patients (54% female) were included. Univariate analysis demonstrated no association between satisfaction and patient demographics, rates of complication, mean length or number of PFUs, or incidence of phone/virtual visits. Patients "very satisfied" with their clinic experience were more likely to be "very satisfied" with their outcome (P<0.01), and to feel their concerns were "very well addressed" (P<0.01). Multivariate analysis additionally demonstrated that satisfaction was positively associated with how well patient concerns were addressed (P<0.01) and the incidence of virtual/phone visits (P=0.01), and negatively associated with age (P=0.01) and level of education (P=0.01).

Conclusions

After spinal fusion, patient satisfaction is positively related to virtual/phone visits and to how well their concerns are addressed. As long as patient concerns remain adequately addressed, surgeons can eliminate excess PFUs which are not clinically beneficial without adversely impacting patients' postoperative experience.

Clinical outcomes after bracing for vertebral compression fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Background

Vertebral compression fractures are common and result in significant pain and loss of function. Treatment strategy, however, remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials to elucidate the impact of bracing on these injuries.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review utilizing Embase, OVID MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify randomized trials evaluating brace therapy for adult patients with thoracic and lumbar compression fractures. Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of studies and risk of bias. The primary assessed outcome was pain after injury. Secondary outcomes were function, quality of life, opioid use, and kyphotic progression [anterior vertebral body compression percentage (AVBCP)]. Continuous variables were analyzed using mean differences and standardized mean differences, and dichotomous variables were analyzed using odds ratios in random-effects models. GRADE criteria were applied.

Results

Of 1,502 articles, a total of 3 studies with 447 patients (96% female) were included. Fifty-four patients were managed without a brace, and 393 with a brace (195 rigid, 198 soft). At 3 to 6 months post-injury, rigid bracing resulted in significantly less pain compared to no brace (SMD =-1.32, 95% CI: -1.89 to -0.76, P<0.05, I2=41%), though this diminished at long-term follow-up of 48 weeks. Radiographic kyphosis, opioid use, function, or quality of life were not significantly different at any timepoint.

Conclusions

Moderate quality evidence demonstrates rigid bracing of vertebral compression fractures may decrease pain up to 6 months post-injury, though there is no difference in radiographic parameters, opioid use, function, or quality of life at short- or long-term follow-up. No difference was found between rigid and soft bracing; therefore, soft bracing may be an adequate alternative.

Correlation of mJOA, PROMIS physical function, and patient satisfaction in patients with cervical myelopathy: an analysis of the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) database

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly utilized to evaluate the efficacy and value of spinal procedures. Among patients with cervical myelopathy, the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) remains the standard instrument, with Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) and patient satisfaction also frequently assessed. These outcomes have not all been directly compared using a large spine registry at 2 years follow-up for cervical myelopathic patients undergoing surgery.

PURPOSE

To determine the correlation and association of PROMIS PF, mJOA, and patient satisfaction outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for cervical myelopathy.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective review of a multicenter spine registry database.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Adult patients with cervical myelopathy who underwent cervical spine surgery between 2/26/2018 and 4/17/2021.

OUTCOME MEASURES

PROMIS PF, mJOA, and North American Spine Society (NASS) patient satisfaction index.

METHODS

The MSSIC database was accessed to gather pre- and postoperative outcome data on patients with cervical myelopathy. Spearman's correlation coefficients relating mJOA and PROMIS PF were quantified up to 2 years postoperatively. The correlations between patient satisfaction with mJOA and PROMIS were determined. Kappa statistics were used to evaluate for agreement between those reaching the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for mJOA and PROMIS PF. Odds ratios were calculated to determine the association between patient satisfaction and those reaching MCID for mJOA and PROMIS PF. Support for MSSIC is provided by BCBSM and Blue Care Network as part of the BCBSM Value Partnerships program.

RESULTS

Data from 2,023 patients were included. Moderate to strong correlations were found between mJOA and PROMIS PF at all time points (p<.001). These outcomes had fair agreement at all postoperative time points when comparing those who reached MCID. Satisfaction was strongly related to changes from baseline for both mJOA and PROMIS PF at all time points (p<.001). Odds ratios associating satisfaction with PROMIS PF MCID were higher at all time points compared with mJOA, although the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS PF has a strong positive correlation with mJOA up to 2 years postoperatively in patients undergoing surgery for cervical myelopathy, with similar odds of achieving MCID with both instruments. Patient satisfaction is predicted similarly by these outcome measures by 2 years postoperatively. These results affirm the validity of PROMIS PF in the cervical myelopathic population. Given its generalizability and ease of use, PROMIS PF may be a more practical outcome measure for clinical use compared with mJOA.

Do Patients Accurately Recall Their Preoperative Symptoms After Elective Orthopedic Procedures?

Patient-reported outcome measures are a frequent tool used to assess orthopedic surgical outcomes. However, recall bias is a potential limitation of these tools when used retrospectively, as they rely on patients to accurately recall their preoperative symptoms. A database search of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline Ovid, and Scopus until May 2021 was completed in duplicate by two reviewers. Studies considered eligible for inclusion were those which reported on patient recall bias associated with orthopedic surgery. The primary outcome of interest investigated was the accuracy of patient recollection of preoperative health status. Any factors that were identified as affecting patient recall were secondary outcomes of interest. Of the 4,065 studies initially screened, 20 studies with 3,454 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, there were 2,371 (69%) knee and hip patients, 422 (12%) shoulder patients, 370 (11%) spine patients, 208 (6%) other upper extremity patients, and 83 (2%) foot and ankle patients. Out of the eight studies that evaluated patient recall within three months postoperatively, seven studies concluded that patient recall is accurate. Out of the 13 studies that evaluated patient recall beyond three months postoperatively, nine studies concluded that patient recall is inaccurate. The accuracy of patient recall of preoperative symptoms after elective orthopedic procedures is not reliable beyond three months postoperatively.

The Utility of Postoperative Bracing on Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Following Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the radiographic and clinical utility of postoperative orthoses following cervical spine surgery.

METHODS

We performed a search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline Ovid, and SCOPUS databases from inception until November 2021. Eligible studies included outcomes of postoperative bracing vs no bracing following cervical spine surgery. The primary outcome of interest was fusion rates after cervical surgery in braced vs unbraced patients. Secondary outcomes included patient reported outcomes and complication rates.

RESULTS

A total of 3232 titles were initially screened. After inclusion criteria were applied, 7 studies (550 patients) were included, which compared results of braced vs unbraced patients after cervical spine surgery. These studies showed acceptable reliability for inclusion based on the Methodical Index for Non-Randomized studies and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme assessment tools. There were no significant differences in fusion rates or complications between braced vs unbraced patients identified in any study. Patient reported pain and quality of life measures between braced and unbraced groups varied amongst studies, without any clear overall advantages favoring either method.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found that external bracing, though widely used following cervical spine surgery, may not offer any advantages in patient-reported outcomes, as compared to not bracing. In regard to the effect of bracing on fusion rates, no strong consensus can be made as the methods of fusion assessment in the included studies were heterogenous and suboptimal. Future high-quality studies using recommended methods of fusion assessment are needed to adequately address this important question.

The Potential Negative Effects of Smoking on Cervical and Lumbar Surgery Beyond Pseudarthrosis: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative Study

OBJECTIVE

To review the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry to investigate the long-term associations between current smoking status and outcomes after elective cervical and lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

Using the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative, we captured all cases from January 1, 2017, to November 21, 2020, with outcomes data available; 19,251 lumbar cases and 7936 cervical cases were included. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship of smoking with the clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Current smoking status was associated with lower urinary retention and satisfaction for patients after lumbar surgery and was associated with less likelihood of achieving minimal clinically important difference in primary outcome measures including Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, back pain, leg pain, and EuroQol-5D at 90 days and 1 year after surgery. Current smokers were also less likely to return to work at 90 days and 1 year after surgery. Among patients who underwent cervical surgery, current smokers were less likely to have urinary retention and dysphagia postoperatively. They were less likely to be satisfied with the surgery outcome at 1 year. Current smoking was associated with lower likelihood of achieving minimal clinically important difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, neck pain, arm pain, and EuroQol-5D at various time points. There was no difference in return-to-work status.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that smoking is negatively associated with functional improvement, patient satisfaction, and return-to-work after elective spine surgery.

Postoperative opioid prescription and patient-reported outcomes after elective spine surgery: a Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative study

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to assess how postoperative opioid prescription dosage could affect patient-reported outcomes after elective spine surgery.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) from January 2020 to September 2021 were included in this study. Opioid prescriptions at discharge were converted to total morphine milligram equivalents (MME). A reference value of 225 MME per week was used as a cutoff. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on prescribed total MME: ≤ 225 MME and > 225 MME. Primary outcomes included patient satisfaction, return to work status after surgery, and whether improvement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 4-question short form for physical function (PROMIS PF) and EQ-5D was met. Generalized estimated equations were used for multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Regression analysis revealed that patients who had postoperative opioids prescribed with > 225 MME were less likely to be satisfied with surgery (adjusted OR [aOR] 0.81) and achieve PROMIS PF MCID (aOR 0.88). They were also more likely to be opioid dependent at 90 days after elective spine surgery (aOR 1.56).

CONCLUSIONS

The opioid epidemic is a serious threat to national public health, and spine surgeons must practice conscientious postoperative opioid prescribing to achieve adequate pain control. The authors' analysis illustrates that a postoperative opioid prescription of 225 MME or less is associated with improved patient satisfaction, greater improvement in physical function, and decreased opioid dependence compared with those who had > 225 MME prescribed.

Investigating the Association of Patient Body Mass Index With Posterior Subcutaneous Fat Thickness in the Cervical Spine: A Retrospective Radiographic Study

INTRODUCTION

Although BMI is often used as a surrogate for posterior cervical subcutaneous fat thickness (SFT), the association of BMI with cervical SFT is unknown. We performed a retrospective radiographic study to analyze the relationship between BMI and cervical SFT.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cervical CT scans. SFT was assessed by measuring the distance (mm) from the spinous processes of C2-C7 to the skin edge. Pearson correlations and linear regression were used to analyze the relationship between BMI and SFT. One-way ANOVA was used to analyze differences in C2-C7 distances while stratifying by BMI.

RESULTS

A total of 96 patients were included. BMI had a moderate correlation with average C2-C7 (r=0.546, p < 0.05) SFT, and a weak to moderate correlation with each individual C2-C7 distance. The strongest correlation was at the C7 level (r= 0.583, p < 0.05). These analyses remained significant controlling for potential confounders of patient age, sex, and diabetes. No difference was found in the average C2-C7 distance in patients with BMIs of 25-30 compared to those with BMIs of 30-40 (p=0.996), whereas in patients with BMI <25 and BMI >40, differences were significant (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

BMI is not strongly correlated with SFT in the cervical spine. Although BMI less than 25 or greater than 40 is correlated with respectively decreased or increased cervical SFT, BMI of 25-40 is not correlated with cervical SFT. This is clinically important information for surgeons counseling patients on perioperative risk before undergoing cervical spine procedures, namely infection. Further research delineating the relationship between posterior SFT and surgical site infection in the cervical spine is warranted.

Rates and reasons for reoperation within 30 and 90 days following cervical spine surgery: a retrospective cohort analysis of the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) registry

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Reoperation following cervical spinal surgery negatively impacts patient outcomes and increases health care system burden. To date, most studies have evaluated reoperations within 30 days after spine surgery and have been limited in scope and focus. Evaluation within the 90-day period, however, allows a more comprehensive assessment of factors associated with reoperation.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to assess the rates and reasons for reoperations after cervical spine surgery within 30 and 90 days.

DESIGN

We performed a retrospective analysis of a state-wide prospective, multi-center, spine-specific database of patients surgically treated for degenerative disease.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients 18 years of age or older who underwent cervical spine surgery for degenerative pathologies from February 2014 to May 2019. Operative criteria included all degenerative cervical spine procedures, including those with cervical fusions with contiguous extension down to T3.

OUTCOME MEASURES

We determined causes for reoperation and independent surgical and demographic risk factors impacting reoperation.

METHODS

Patient-specific and surgery-specific data was extracted from the registry using ICD-10-DM codes. Reoperations data was obtained through abstraction of medical records through 90 days. Univariate analysis was done using chi-square tests for categorical variables, t-tests for normally distributed variables, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for variables with skewed distributions. Odds ratios for return to the operating room (OR) were evaluated in multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 13,435 and 13,440 patients underwent cervical spine surgery and were included in the 30 and 90-day analysis, respectively. The overall reoperation rate was 1.24% and 3.30% within 30 and 90 days, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed within 30 days, procedures involving four or more levels, posterior only approach, and longer length of stay had increased odds of returning to the OR (p<.05), whereas private insurance had a decreased odds of return to OR (p<.05). Within 90 days, male sex, coronary artery disease (CAD), previous spine surgery, procedures with 4 or more levels, and longer length of stay had significantly increased odds of returning to the OR (p<.05). Non-white race, independent ambulatory status pre-operatively, and having private insurance had decreased odds of return to the OR (p<.05). The most common specified reasons for return to the OR within 30 days was hematoma (19%), infection (17%), and wound dehiscence (11%). Within 90 days, reoperation reasons were pain (10%), infection (9%), and hematoma (8%).

CONCLUSION

Reoperation rates after elective cervical spine surgery are 1.24% and 3.30% within 30 and 90 days, respectively. Within 30 days, four or more levels, posterior approach, and longer length of stay were risk factors for reoperation. Within 90 days, male sex, CAD, four or more levels, and longer length of hospital stay were risk factors for reoperation. Non-white demographic and independent preoperative ambulatory status were associated with decreased reoperation rates.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery for axial back pain in the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The indications for surgical intervention of axial back pain without leg pain for degenerative lumbar disorders have been limited in the literature, as most study designs allow some degree of leg symptoms in the inclusion criteria.

PURPOSE

To determine the outcome of surgery (decompression only vs. fusion) for pure axial back pain without leg pain.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Prospectively collected data in the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC).

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients with pure axial back pain without leg pain underwent lumbar spine surgery for primary diagnoses of lumbar disc herniation, lumbar stenosis, and isthmic or degenerative spondylolisthesis ≤ grade II.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Minimally clinically important difference (MCID) for back pain, Numeric Rating Scale of back pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), MCID of PROMIS-PF, and patient satisfaction on the North American Spine Surgery Patient Satisfaction Index were collected at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery.

METHODS

Log-Poisson generalized estimating equation models were constructed with patient-reported outcomes as the independent variable, reporting adjusted risk ratios (RR_adj).

RESULTS

Of the 388 patients at 90 days, multi-level versus single level lumbar surgery decreased the likelihood of obtaining a MCID in back pain by 15% (RR_adj=0.85, p=.038). For every one-unit increase in preoperative back pain, the likelihood for a favorable outcome increased by 8% (RR_adj=1.08, p<.001). Of the 326 patients at 1 year, symptom duration > 1 year decreased the likelihood of a MCID in back pain by 16% (RR_adj=0.84, p=.041). The probability of obtaining a MCID in back pain increased by 9% (RR_adj=1.09, p<.001) for every 1-unit increase in baseline back pain score and by 14% for fusions versus decompression alone (RR_adj=1.14, p=.0362). Of the 283 patients at 2 years, the likelihood of obtaining MCID in back pain decreased by 30% for patients with depression (RR_adj=0.70, p<.001) and increased by 8% with every one-unit increase in baseline back pain score (RR_adj=1.08, p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Only the severity of preoperative back pain was associated with improvement in MCID in back pain at all time points, suggesting that surgery should be considered for selected patients with severe axial pain without leg pain. Fusion surgery versus decompression alone was associated with improved patient-reported outcomes at 1 year only, but not at the other time points.

Validation of the Benefits of Ambulation Within 8 Hours of Elective Cervical and Lumbar Surgery: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative Study

BACKGROUND

Early ambulation is considered a key element to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol after spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether ambulation less than 8 hours after elective spine surgery is associated with improved outcome.

METHODS

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative database was queried to track all elective cervical and lumbar spine surgery between July 2018 and April 2021. In total, 7647 cervical and 17 616 lumbar cases were divided into 3 cohorts based on time to ambulate after surgery: (1) <8 hours, (2) 8 to 24 hours, and (3) >24 hours.

RESULTS

For cervical cases, patients who ambulated 8 to 24 hours (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.38; 95% CI 1.11-1.70; P = .003) and >24 hours (aOR 2.20; 95% CI 1.20-4.03; P = .011) after surgery had higher complication rate than those who ambulated within 8 hours of surgery. Similar findings were noted for lumbar cases with patients who ambulated 8 to 24 hours (aOR 1.31; 95% CI 1.12-1.54; P < .001) and >24 hours (aOR 1.96; 95% CI 1.50-2.56; P < .001) after surgery having significantly higher complication rate than those ambulated <8 hours after surgery. Analysis of secondary outcomes for cervical cases demonstrated that <8-hour ambulation was associated with home discharge, shorter hospital stay, lower 90-day readmission, and lower urinary retention rate. For lumbar cases, <8-hour ambulation was associated with shorter hospital stay, satisfaction with surgery, lower 30-day readmission, home discharge, and lower urinary retention rate.

CONCLUSION

Ambulation within 8 hours after surgery is associated with significant improved outcome after elective cervical and lumbar spine surgery.

A Matched Cohort Analysis of Drain Usage in Elective Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) Study

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective, cohort analysis of multi-institutional database.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to analyze the impact of drain use following elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgeries.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

After ACDF, a drain is often placed to prevent postoperative hematoma. However, there has been no high quality evidence to support its use with ACDF despite the theoretical benefits and risks of drain placement.

METHODS

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative database was queried to identify all patients undergoing elective ACDF between February 2014 and October 2019. Cases were divided into two cohorts based on drain use. Propensity-score matching was utilized to adjust for inherent differences between the two cohorts. Measured outcomes included surgical site hematoma, length of stay, surgical site infection, dysphagia, home discharge, readmission within 30 days, and unplanned reoperation.

RESULTS

We identified 7943 patients during the study period. Propensity-score matching yielded 3206 pairs. On univariate analysis of matched cohorts, there were no differences in rate of postoperative hematoma requiring either return to OR or readmission. We noted patients with drains had a higher rate of dysphagia (4.6% vs. 6.3%; P = 0.003) and had longer hospital stay (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, drain use was associated with significantly increased length of stay (relative risk 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.34; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in other outcomes measured.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis demonstrated that drain use is associated with significant longer hospital stay.Level of Evidence: 3.

Analysis of Factors Associated with Return-to-Work After Lumbar Surgery up to 2-Years Follow-up: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) Study

STUDY DESIGN

Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) prospectively collects data on all patients undergoing operations for degenerative and/or deformity indications.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify which factors are significantly associated with return-to-work after lumbar surgery at long-term follow-up.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Prior publications have created a clinically relevant predictive model for return-to-work, wherein education, gender, race, comorbidities, and preoperative symptoms increased likelihood of return-to-work at 3 months after lumbar surgery. We sought to determine if these trends 1) persisted at 1 year and 2 years postoperatively; or 2) differed among preoperatively employed versus unemployed patients.

METHODS

MSSIC was queried for all patients undergoing lumbar operations (2014-2019). All patients intended to return-to-work postoperatively. Patients were followed for up to 2 years postoperatively. Measures of association were calculated with multivariable generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

Return-to-work increased from 63% (3542/5591) at 90 days postoperatively to 75% (3143/4147) at 1 year and 74% (2133/2866) at 2 years postoperatively. Following generalized estimating equations, neither clinical nor surgical variables predicted return-to-work at all three time intervals: 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Only socioeconomic factors reached statistical significance at all follow-up points. Preoperative employment followed by insurance status had the greatest associations with return-to-work. In a subanalysis of patients who were preoperatively employed, insurance was the only factor with significant associations with return-to-work at all three follow-up intervals. The return-to-work rates among unemployed patients at baseline increased from 29% (455/1100) at 90 days, 44% (495/608) at 1 year, and 46% (366/426) at 2 years postoperatively. The only two significant factors associated with return-to-work at all three follow-up intervals were Medicaid, as compared with private insurance, and male gender.

CONCLUSION

In patients inquiring about long-term return-to-work after lumbar surgery, insurance status represents the important determinant of employment status.Level of Evidence: 2.

Do Patients Accurately Recall Their Pain Levels Following Epidural Steroid Injection? A Cohort Study of Recall Bias in Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have become important in the evaluation of spine surgery patients, the accuracy of patient recall of pre- or post-intervention  symptoms following epidural steroid injection remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to: 1) characterize the accuracy of patient recollection of back/leg pain following epidural steroid injection; 2) characterize the direction and magnitude of recall bias; and 3) characterize factors that impact patient recollection.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Level 1 Academic Medical Center.

METHODS

Using standardized questionnaires, we recorded numeric pain scores for patients undergoing lumbar epidural steroid injections at our institution. Baseline pain scores were obtained prior to injection, 4-hours and 24-hours postinjection. At a minimum of 2 weeks following the injection, patients were asked to recall their symptoms preinjection and at 4 hours and 24-hours postinjection. Actual and recalled scores, at each time point, were compared using paired t tests. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify factors that impacted recollection.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients with a mean age of 61.4 years (56% women) were included. Compared to their preinjection pain score, patients showed considerable improvement at both 4 hours (Mean Difference [MD] = 2.18, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.42 to 2.94) and 24 hours (MD = 2.64, 95% CI 1.91 to 3.34) postinjection. Patient recollection of preinjection symptoms was significantly more severe than actual at the 2-week time point (MD = 1.39, 95% CI 4.82 to 6.08). The magnitude of recall bias was mild and exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). No significant recall bias was noted on patient recollection of postinjection symptoms at 4 hours (MD = 0.41, 95% CI -1.05 to 0.23). Patient recollection of symptoms was also significantly more severe than actual at 24 hours (MD = 0.63, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.07), mild magnitude of bias that did not exceed MCID. Linear regression models for differences between actual and recalled pain scores reveal that for recall at 4 hours postinjection, older patients were better at recalling pain.

LIMITATIONS

Baseline pain scores were completed in person, in front of a provider. The short-term pain scores were completed while at home, and then recalled scores were obtained by phone call encounter. Telephone surveys can lead to interview bias. All patients received incentive for completion of study. It is unclear if patient incentives have any impact on patient recall. Patients were contacted 2 weeks postinjection; this time point is standard at our institution, but could vary depending on practice location. Lastly, the enrolled patients did not all share the same indication for injection, and pain was not stratified between back and leg pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Relying on patient recollection does not provide an accurate measure of preinjection status after lumbar epidural steroid injection, although patients did recall their 4-hour postinjection status. These findings support previous studies indicating that relying on patient recollection does not provide an accurate measure of preintervention symptoms. Patient recollection of postintervention symptoms, however, may have some clinical utility and requires further study.

The association of patient education level with outcomes after elective lumbar surgery: a Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative study

OBJECTIVE

Socioeconomic factors have been shown to impact a host of healthcare-related outcomes. Level of education is a marker of socioeconomic status. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between patient education level and outcomes after elective lumbar surgery and to characterize any education-related disparities.

METHODS

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry was queried for all lumbar spine operations. Primary outcomes included patient satisfaction determined by the North American Spine Society patient satisfaction index, and reaching the minimum clinically important difference of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function score and return to work up to 2 years after surgery. Multivariate Poisson generalized estimating equation models reported adjusted risk ratios.

RESULTS

A total of 26,229 lumbar spine patients had data available for inclusion in this study. On multivariate generalized estimating equation analysis all comparisons were done versus the high school (HS)/general equivalency development (GED)-level cohort. For North American Spine Society satisfaction scores after surgery the authors observed the following: at 90 days the likelihood of satisfaction significantly decreased by 11% (p < 0.001) among < HS, but increased by 1% (p = 0.52) among college-educated and 3% (p = 0.011) among postcollege-educated cohorts compared to the HS/GED cohort; at 1 year there was a decrease of 9% (p = 0.02) among < HS and increases of 3% (p = 0.02) among college-educated and 9% (p < 0.001) among postcollege-educated patients; and at 2 years, there was an increase of 5% (p = 0.001) among postcollege-educated patients compared to the < HS group. The likelihood of reaching a minimum clinically important difference of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function score at 90 days increased by 5% (p = 0.005) among college-educated and 9% (p < 0.001) among postcollege-educated cohorts; at 1 year, all comparison cohorts demonstrated significance, with a decrease of 12% (p = 0.007) among < HS, but an increase by 6% (p < 0.001) among college-educated patients and 14% (p < 0.001) among postcollege-educated compared to the HS/GED cohort; at 2 years, there was a significant decrease by 19% (p = 0.003) among the < HS cohort, an increase by 8% (p = 0.001) among the college-educated group, and an increase by 16% (p < 0.001) among the postcollege-educated group. For return to work, a significant increase was demonstrated at 90 days and 1 year when comparing the HS or less group with college or postcollege cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated negative associations on all primary outcomes with lower levels of education. This finding suggests a potential disparity linked to education in elective spine surgery.

The effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications on spinal fracture healing: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications (NSAIDs) on fracture healing is a topic of debate. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the effect of NSAID medications on spinal fracture healing rates.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline Ovid, and SCOPUS databases from inception until April 2021, and additionally searched the NIH Clinical Trials Database. Eligible studies included those which reported on spinal fracture healing rates in patients taking NSAIDs. Two reviewers independently assessed all potential studies for eligibility and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed with validated tools by two reviewers. The primary outcome of interest was healing rates of spinal fractures in patients taking NSAIDs. Secondary outcomes of interest included healing rates stratified by NSAID selectivity.

RESULTS

A total of 1,715 studies were initially screened. After inclusion criteria were applied, three studies (214 patients) were included which discussed spinal fracture healing rates in patients taking NSAIDs. These studies showed acceptable reliability for inclusion. The 3 studies reported heterogeneous results, with one study reporting a 96% healing rate, and another study reporting over 90% non-union rate. The types of fracture, NSAID type, and dosage/duration of NSAID use varied widely amongst studies.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review identified a significant paucity in the literature on the effect of NSAID medications on spinal fracture healing rates. Given the limited number of studies, as well as the heterogeneous results and methods from these studies, no consensus statement can be made on the safety profile of NSAIDs in the context of spinal fractures. Further studies are needed to better address this question.

Challenges to the orthopedic resident workforce during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learnt from a global cross-sectional survey

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented concerns on the safety, well-being, quality of life(QOL), and training of the orthopedic resident physician workforce worldwide. Although orthopedic residency programs across the globe have attempted to redefine resident roles, educational priorities, and teaching methods, the global orthopedic residents’ perspective with regards to their safety, well-being, QOL, and training, taking into account regional variances remains unknown.

Methods

A 56-item-questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey was conducted online during the COVID-19 pandemic involving 1193 orthopedic residents from 29 countries across six geographical regions to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being, safety, and training of orthopedic residents at a global level, as well as to analyze the challenges confronted by orthopedic residency programs around the world to safeguard and train their resident workforce during this period.

Results

The total response rate was 90.3%(1077/1193). Time spent on residency-training activities decreased by 24.7 h/week (95% CI, −26.5 to −22.9,p < 0.001), with 50.2% (n = 541) residents performing duties outside their residency curriculum. 80.5% (n = 869) residents had no prior experience working in infectious outbreaks. A greater percentage of residents from Middle East, Asia and Europe were redeployed to the COVID-19 frontlines, p < 0.001. Only 46.5% (n = 491) and 58.4% (n = 600) of residents underwent training in critical care or PPE (Personal Protective equipment) usage, respectively; 28.5% (n = 302) residents (majority from Africa, Middle East, South America) reported lack of institutional guidelines to handle infectious outbreaks; 15.4% (n = 160) residents (majority from Africa, Asia, Europe) had concerns regarding availability of PPE and risk of infection. An increase in technology-based virtual teaching modalities was observed. The most significant stressor for residents was the concern for their family's health. Residents' QOL significantly decreased from 80/100 (IQR 70–90) to 65/100 (IQR 50–80) before and during the pandemic, p < 0.001.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the safety, well-being, QOL, and training of the global orthopedic resident physician workforce to different extents across geographical regions. The findings of this study will aid educators, program leaderships, and policy makers globally in formulating flexible, generalizable, and sustainable strategies to ensure resident safety, well-being, and training, while maintaining patient care.

Physical Examination of the Spine Using Telemedicine: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

This is a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review (1) the reliability of the physical examination of the spine using telehealth as it pertains to spinal pathology and (2) patient satisfaction with the virtual spine physical examination.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, PubMed, Medline Ovid, and SCOPUS databases from inception until April 2020. Eligible studies included those that reported on performing a virtual spine physical examination. Two reviewers independently assessed all potential studies for eligibility and extracted data. The primary outcome of interest was the reliability of the virtual spine physical exam. Secondary outcomes of interest were patient satisfaction with the virtual encounter.

RESULTS

A total of 2321 studies were initially screened. After inclusion criteria were applied, 3 studies (88 patients) were included that compared virtual with in-person spine physical examinations. These studies showed acceptable reliability for portions of the low back virtual exam. Patient satisfaction surveys were conducted in 2 of the studies and showed general satisfaction (>80% would recommend).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the virtual spine examination may be comparable to the in-person physical examination for low back pain, though there is a significant void in the literature regarding the reliability of the physical examination as it pertains to specific surgical pathology of the spine. Because patients are overall satisfied with virtual spine assessments, validating a virtual physical examination of the spine is an important area that requires further research.

Preoperative HbA1c > 8% Is Associated With Poor Outcomes in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative Study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is a useful screening tool since a significant portion of diabetic patients in the United States are undiagnosed and the prevalence of diabetes continues to increase. However, there is a paucity of literature analyzing comprehensive association between HbA1c and postoperative outcome in lumbar spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prognostic value of preoperative HbA1c > 8% in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) database was queried to track all elective lumbar spine surgeries between January 2018 and December 2019. Cases were divided into 2 cohorts based on preoperative HbA1c level (≤8% and >8%). Measured outcomes include any complication, surgical site infection (SSI), readmission (RA) within 30 d (30RA) and 90 d (90RA) of index operation, patient satisfaction, and the percentage of patients who achieved minimum clinically important difference (MCID) using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System.

RESULTS

We captured 4778 patients in this study. Our multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with HbA1c > 8% were more likely to experience postoperative complication (odds ratio [OR] 1.81, 95% CI 1.20-2.73; P = .005) and be readmitted within 90 d of index surgery (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.08-2.54; P = .021). They also had longer hospital stay (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.23; P = .009) and were less likely to achieve functional improvement after surgery (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.92; P = .016).

CONCLUSION

HbA1c > 8% is a reliable predictor of poor outcome in elective lumbar spine surgery. Clinicians should consider specialty consultation to optimize patients' glycemic control prior to surgery.

Congenital defect of the posterior arch of C1: a case report

Odontoid fractures are one of the most common injuries to the cervical spine in geriatric patients. Congenital C1 arch absence, however, is a very rare anomaly found in the population. We describe the first reported case of a congenital C1 posterior arch absence and C1 anterior cleft presenting with odontoid fracture. We present the case of a 58-year-old male who was found to have a comminuted type III odontoid fracture with significant angulation and displacement. CT scan demonstrated this fracture and also demonstrated congenital cleft of his left anterior arch and absence of left C1 posterior arch. Given his anatomic anomaly, we elected to perform occipitocervical fusion. The patient underwent occipito-cervical fusion to avoid iatrogenic vertebral artery injury. He was also immobilized in a halo vest given patient-specific social factors and compromised bone quality. The patient had no intra- or post-operative complications, but a prolonged hospital stay due to alcohol withdrawal. At 3-month postoperatively the patient had no neck pain and return to baseline function. This case highlights the importance of obtaining a CT scan preoperatively to not only to further characterize the fracture but also for surgical planning and recognition of anatomic anomalies as this may significantly impact the operative strategy.

Return-to-Play Outcomes in Elite Athletes After Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Return-to-play (RTP) outcomes in elite athletes after cervical spine surgery are currently unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review RTP outcomes in elite athletes after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc replacement (CDR), or posterior foraminotomy (PF) surgery.

DATA SOURCES

EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, and Medline databases from inception until April 2020. Keywords included elite athletes, return to play, ACDF, foraminotomy, and cervical disc replacement.

STUDY SELECTION

Eligible studies included those that reported RTP outcomes in elite athletes after cervical spine surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers.

RESULTS

The primary outcomes of interest were rates and timing of RTP. Secondary outcomes included performance on RTP. A total of 1720 studies were initially screened. After inclusion criteria were applied, 13 studies with a total of 349 patients were included. A total of 262 (75%) played football, 37 (11%) played baseball, 19 (5%) played rugby, 10 (3%) played basketball, 10 (3%) played hockey, 9 (3%) were wresters, and 2 (1%) played soccer. ACDF was reported in 13 studies, PF in 3 studies, and CDR in 2 studies. The majority of studies suggest that RTP after surgical management is safe in elite athletes who are asymptomatic after their procedure and may lead to higher rates and earlier times of RTP. There is limited evidence regarding RTP or outcomes after CDR or multilevel surgery.

CONCLUSION

The management and RTP in elite athletes after cervical spine injury is a highly complex and multifactorial topic. The overall evidence in this review suggests that RTP in asymptomatic athletes after both ACDF and PF is safe, and there is little evidence for decreased performance postoperatively. Surgical management results in a higher RTP rate compared with athletes managed conservatively.

Return to Play After Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation in Elite Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment

Context:

The prevalence of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in athletes can be as high as 75%. For elite athletes diagnosed with LDH, return to play (RTP) is a major concern, and thus comparing surgical with nonoperative care is essential to guide practitioners and athletes, not just in terms of recovery rates but also speed of recovery.

Objective:

The purpose of this systematic review is to provide an update on RTP outcomes for elite athletes after lumbar discectomy versus nonoperative treatment of LDHs.

Data Sources:

A search of the literature was conducted using 3 online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed) to identify pertinent studies.

Study Selection:

Yielded studies were screened according to the inclusion criteria.

Study Design:

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Level of Evidence:

Level 4.

Data Extraction:

Relevant data were extracted. A meta-analysis was performed comparing RTP rate for all comparative studies.

Results:

Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Overall, 663 out of 799 patients (83.0%) returned to play in the surgical group and 251 out of 308 patients (81.5%) returned to play in the nonoperative group. No statistically significant difference for RTP rate was found (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.58-3.34; P = 0.46; I2, 71%). The mean time to RTP for patients undergoing lumbar discectomy was 5.19 months (range 1.00-8.70 months), and 4.11 months (range 3.60-5.70 months) for those treated conservatively.

Conclusion:

There was no significant difference in RTP rate between athletes treated with operative or nonoperative management of LDHs, nor did operative management have a faster time to RTP. Athletes should consider the lack of difference in RTP rate in addition to the potential risks associated with spinal surgery when choosing a treatment option. Future randomized controlled trials are needed on this topic to allow for high-powered conclusions.

The efficacy of teriparatide on lumbar spine bone mineral density, vertebral fracture incidence and pain in post-menopausal osteoporotic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Teriparatide has been increasingly utilized in the management of osteoporosis. The efficacy of low and high dose teriparatide on lumbar spine bone mineral density, vertebral fracture incidence and pain is unknown. We sought to determine the efficacy of teriparatide on these patient-important outcomes using a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluate teriparatide to any comparator for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. The Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria were used by two independent reviewers to assess the strength and quality of evidence.

Results

A total of 20 studies (n = 6024) were included in this review, with 2855 patients receiving teriparatide and 3169 patients receiving placebo or control treatment. A teriparatide dose of 20 μg/day increased lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.34 standard deviation (SD) units higher (95% CI 0.19–0.48 SDs higher) in comparison to placebo. Relative to anti-resorptive agents, 20 μg/day of teriparatide had a range from 0.14 SD units to 0.96 SD units higher (95% CI, 0.08 SDs lower to 0.36 SDs higher, CI, 0.33–1.59 SDs higher, respectively). 20 μg/day teriparatide had a significant effect on pain severity to placebo or control (SMD 0.80, 95% CI, 1.16–0.43 SDs lower) and also decreased the incidence of vertebral fractures compared to placebo (relative risk 0.31, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.46). Arthralgia and extremity pain incidence were also calculated; there were 15 and 8 fewer events per 1000 patients with the use of 20 μg/day of teriparatide compared to placebo or control, respectively.

Conclusion

High quality evidence supports the utilization of teriparatide 20 μg/day dose to significantly improve lumbar spine BMD and decrease incidence of vertebral fractures and pain severity relative to all comparators. 40 μg/day dose of teriparatide demonstrated significantly better results with prolonged treatment. This data is valuable for clinicians involved in the care of this growing demographic of patients. Further investigation on the safety and efficacy of teriparatide in higher doses for the long-term treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women should be conducted through high-quality clinical trials.

•

Teriparatide (20 μg/day) significantly improves lumbar spine bone mineral density.

•

Teriparatide (20 μg/day) reduces vertebral fracture incidence and pain.

•

Increased teriparatide dose (40 μg/day) may have even greater clinical efficacy.

•

Further investigation on safety profiles for longer-term treatment is warranted.

Stereotactic navigation in anterior cervical spine surgery: surgical setup and technique

Intraoperative stereotactic navigation in spine surgery is quickly becoming popularized for accurate placement of spinal instrumentation as well as assisting in the verification of anatomic landmarks. Navigation is less commonly utilized in anterior cervical spine surgery due to instrumentation being able to be placed under direct visualization. The utility of navigation in anterior cervical spine surgery is its ability to aid in the verification of anatomic location, particularly when anatomy is distorted or pathology comes close to critical neurovascular structures. We present a technique guide for anterior cervical spine navigation that we have applied at our institution and have found to be very beneficial in select patients, particularly those with complex anatomy, large body mass index, undergoing revision surgery, sustained spinal trauma and those patients with severe anterior ossification where depth or medial-lateral landmarks are difficult to visualize. We describe utilization of the technique using a case examples and specifically in a patient with significant ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament and severe spinal cord compression that underwent multilevel cervical corpectomy. The described technique was found to be reproducible and effective, allowing cervical spine surgeons to perform more complex or minimally invasive procedures with safety and accuracy. We emphasize that navigation does not replace knowledge of anatomy or technical aspects of the procedure.

Occipital condyle screws: indications and technique

Occipitocervical instability is a life threatening and disabling disorder caused by a myriad of pathologies. Restoring the anatomical integrity and stability of the occipitocervical junction (OCJ) is essential to achieve optimal clinical outcomes. Surgical stabilization of the OCJ is challenging and technically demanding. There is a paucity of options available for anchorage in the cephalad part of the construct in occipitocervical fixation systems due to the intricate topography of the craniocervical junction combined with the risk of injury to the surrounding anatomical structures. Surgical techniques and instrumentation for stabilizing the unstable OCJ have undergone several modifications over the years and have primarily depended on occipital squama-based fixations. At present, the occipital-plate-screw-rod construct is the most commonly adopted technique of stabilizing the OCJ. In certain distinct scenarios like posterior fossa craniectomy (absence of occipital squama for screw placement), malignancy and infection of occipital squama (poor screw purchase in the diseased occipital bone) and in revision surgery for failed occipitocervical stabilization, occipital plate-based instrumentation is not feasible. To overcome these difficulties, recently, a novel technique of occipitocervical stabilization, using the occipital condyle (OC) as the cephalad anchor, namely the direct occipital condyle screw (OCS) fixation was described. Several cadaveric and biomechanical studies have suggested that OCSs are feasible options as additional augmentative anchors in a standard occipital plate-screw-rod construct or as salvage cephalad anchors in previous failed occipital-plate-screw-rod constructs. The OCS placement technique has a steep learning curve. We have done a review of the techniques of OCS fixation and have described the indications, biomechanical and technical considerations, preoperative planning, surgical technique, complications, advantages and limitations of OCS based occipitocervical fixation.

Is dental prophylaxis required following spinal fusion?-a systematic review and call for evidence

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the need for antimicrobial prophylaxis prior to dental procedures following spinal fusion. In this review, we attempt to synthesize a comprehensive summary of the published literature to provide recommendations on the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis before dental procedures in patients with a history of spinal fusion.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases from inception to February 2018. Eligible studies included patients with a history of spinal fusion treated with or without antimicrobial prophylaxis in preparation for dental procedures. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of potential studies and extracted data. Outcomes of interest were the indications and efficacy of antimicrobial prophylaxis to protect against infection of spinal prostheses with dental origin.

RESULTS

A total of 1,909 articles were initially screened. After inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, one study was found specifically relating to dental prophylaxis and spine surgery. The survey, as well as objective studies and professional organization guidelines on dental prophylaxis in patients with total hip and knee replacements, were reviewed to add context to the controversy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant paucity of literature regarding dental prophylaxis in spine surgery patients. Although there has been a recent movement away from recommending antimicrobial prophylaxis before dental work in patients with other forms of orthopaedic prostheses, the gap in the literature addressing spine patients represents an important question that requires more targeted and specific research.

Adverse events and their risk factors 90 days after cervical spine surgery: analysis from the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative

OBJECTIVEThe Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) is a statewide, multicenter quality improvement initiative. Using MSSIC data, the authors sought to identify 90-day adverse events and their associated risk factors (RFs) after cervical spine surgery.METHODSA total of 8236 cervical spine surgery cases were analyzed. Multivariable generalized estimating equation regression models were constructed to identify RFs for adverse events; variables tested included age, sex, diabetes mellitus, disc herniation, foraminal stenosis, central stenosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Classification System (ASA) class > II, myelopathy, private insurance, anterior versus posterior approach, revision procedures, number of surgical levels, length of procedure, blood loss, preoperative ambulation, ambulation day of surgery, length of hospital stay, and discharge disposition.RESULTSNinety days after cervical spine surgery, adverse events identified included radicular findings (11.6%), readmission (7.7%), dysphagia requiring dietary modification (feeding tube or nothing by mouth [NPO]) (6.4%), urinary retention (4.7%), urinary tract infection (2.2%), surgical site hematoma (1.1%), surgical site infection (0.9%), deep vein thrombosis (0.7%), pulmonary embolism (0.5%), neurogenic bowel/bladder (0.4%), myelopathy (0.4%), myocardial infarction (0.4%), wound dehiscence (0.2%), claudication (0.2%), and ileus (0.2%). RFs for dysphagia included anterior approach (p < 0.001), fusion procedures (p = 0.030), multiple-level surgery when considering anterior procedures only (p = 0.037), and surgery duration (p = 0.002). RFs for readmission included ASA class > II (p < 0.001), while preoperative ambulation (p = 0.001) and private insurance (p < 0.001) were protective. RFs for urinary retention included increasing age (p < 0.001) and male sex (p < 0.001), while anterior-approach surgery (p < 0.001), preoperative ambulation (p = 0.001), and ambulation day of surgery (p = 0.001) were protective. Preoperative ambulation (p = 0.010) and anterior approach (p = 0.002) were protective of radicular findings.CONCLUSIONSA multivariate analysis from a large, multicenter, prospective database identified the common adverse events after cervical spine surgery, along with their associated RFs. This information can lead to more informed surgeons and patients. The authors found that early mobilization after cervical spine surgery has the potential to significantly decrease adverse events.

Efficacy of Combined Magnetic Field Treatment on Spinal Fusion: A Review of the Literature

Vertebral fractures place significant burdens on patients, caregivers, and the healthcare system at large. Nonunion is a frequent complication following vertebral fracture treatment, often resulting in significant patient pain and morbidity. Bone growth stimulators are an adjunct treatment modality proposed to increase rates of fracture healing. Combined magnetic field (CMF) bone growth stimulators have specifically been shown to increase union rates in patients with vertebral fractures. Certain populations, such as the elderly, postmenopausal women, and smokers, have demonstrated a preferentially greater response to CMF treatment. The present review focuses on the mechanism of action, efficacy, cost effectiveness, indications, contraindications, and safety of CMF treatment as an adjunct treatment for vertebral fractures. Future large high-quality investigations of adjunct CMF treatment for spine fusion patients focusing on patient-important outcomes are warranted.

Strategies to improve the credibility of meta-analyses in spine surgery: a systematic survey

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Meta-analyses are powerful tools that can synthesize existing research, inform clinical practice, and support evidence-based care. These studies have become increasingly popular in the spine surgery literature, but the rigor with which they are being conducted has not yet been evaluated.

PURPOSE

Our primary objectives were to evaluate the methodological quality (credibility) of spine surgery meta-analyses and to propose strategies to improve future research. Our secondary objectives were to evaluate completeness of reporting and identify factors associated with higher credibility and completeness of reporting.

STUDY DESIGN

This study is based on a systematic survey of meta-analyses.

OUTCOME MEASURES

We evaluated credibility according to the Users' Guide to the Medical Literature and completeness of reporting according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library, and two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, credibility, and completeness of reporting. We used multivariable linear regression to evaluate potential associations. Interrater agreement was quantified using kappa and intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficients.

RESULTS

We identified 132 eligible meta-analyses of spine surgery interventions. The mean credibility score was 3 of 7 (standard deviation [SD], 1.4; ICC, 0.86), with agreement for each item ranging from 0.54 (moderate) to 0.83 (almost perfect). Clinical questions were judged as sensible in 125 (95%), searches were exhaustive in 102 (77%), and risk of bias assessments were undertaken in 91 (69%). Seven (5%) meta-analyses addressed possible explanations for heterogeneity using a priori subgroup hypotheses and 24 (18%) presented results that were immediately clinically applicable. Investigators undertook duplicate assessments of eligibility, risk of bias, and data extraction in 46 (35%) and rated overall confidence in the evidence in 24 (18%). Later publication year, increasing Journal Impact Factor, increasing number of databases, inclusion of Randomized Controlled Trials, and inclusion of non-English studies were significantly associated with higher credibility scores (p<.05). The mean score for reporting was 18 of 27 (SD, 4.4; ICC, 0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

The credibility of many current spine surgery meta-analyses is limited. Researchers can improve future meta-analyses by performing exhaustive literature searches, addressing possible explanations of heterogeneity, presenting results in a clinically useful manner, reproducibly selecting and assessing primary studies, addressing confidence in the pooled effect estimates, and adhering to guidelines for complete reporting.

Musculoskeletal trauma and all-cause mortality in India: a multicentre prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

There is little data in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) quantifying the burden of fractures and describing current practices. The aim of the study was describe the severity of musculoskeletal injuries in LMICS and identify modifiable factors that predict subsequent early all-cause mortality.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, prospective, observational study of patients who presented to 14 hospitals across India for musculoskeletal trauma (fractures or dislocations). Patients were recruited during an 8-week period, between November, 2011, and June, 2012, and were followed for 30-days or hospital discharge, whichever occurred first. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality with secondary outcomes of reoperation and infection. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with all-cause mortality.

FINDINGS

We enrolled 4822 patients, but restricted analyses to 4612 (96%) patients who had complete follow-up. The majority (56·2% younger than 40 years old) of trauma patients were young (mean age 40·9 years [SD 16·9]) and 3148 (68%) were men. 2344 (518%) patients sustained trauma as a result of a road traffic accident. The most common musculoskeletal injury was a fracture (4514 [98%]) and 707 patients (15%) incurred an open fracture. Less than a third of musculoskeletal trauma patients (1374 [29%]) were transported to hospital by ambulance, and one in six patients (18%) arrived at the hospital later than 24 h after sustaining their injury. Over a third (239 [35%] of 707) of open fractures were definitively stabilised later than 24 h. 30-day mortality was 1·7% (95% CI 1·4-2·2) for all patients and 2·1% (95% CI 1·5-2·7) among road traffic victims (p=0·005). Musculoskeletal trauma severity including the number of fractures (3·1 [95% CI 2·4-3·9]) and presence of an open fracture (2·1 [95% CI 1·2-3·4]) significantly increased the odds of all-cause mortality.

INTERPRETATION

Musculoskeletal trauma severity, particularly road related, is a key predictor of subsequent mortality. Improvement in road safety policies, and improvements in access to emergency medical services and timely orthopaedic care are critical to mitigate the burden of injury worldwide.

FUNDING

Regional Medical Associates, AO International, Hamilton Health Sciences Trauma Fund.