Publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the AANS/CNS Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the AANS/CNS Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves (Spine Summit).

METHODS

The authors used a search algorithm in PubMed to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the Spine Summit from 2007 to 2012. The variables assessed were presentation modality, topic, meeting year, publication year, destiny journal and its 5-year impact factor (IF), country, and citation count (retrieved from the Scopus database).

RESULTS

One thousand four hundred thirty-six abstracts were analyzed; 502 were oral presentations and 934 were digital poster presentations. The publication rate was 53.97% (775/1436). The mean time from presentation to publication was 1.35 ± 1.97 years (95% CI 1.21-1.49 years). The mean citation count of published articles was 40.55 ± 55.21 (95% CI 36.66-44.44). Oral presentations had a higher publication rate (71.51%, 359/502) than digital posters (44.54%, 416/934; OR 3.13, 95% CI 2.48-3.95, p < 0.001). Oral presentations had a higher number of citations (55.51 ± 69.00, 95% CI 48.35-62.67) than digital posters (27.64 ± 34.88, 95% CI 24.28-31.00, p < 0.001). The mean IF of published articles was 3.48 ± 2.91 (95% CI 3.27-3.70). JNS: Spine (191/775, 24.64%), Spine (103/775, 13.29%), and Neurosurgery (56/775, 7.23%) had the greatest number of published articles. The US represented the highest number of published articles (616/775, 79.48%).

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of the Spine Summit is among the highest compared to other spine meetings. Many of the abstracts initially presented at the meeting are further published in high-IF journals and had a high citation count. Therefore, the Spine Summit maintains its high standards of scientific papers, which reflects the high quality of the research performed in the spine surgery field in North America.

A predictive model and nomogram for predicting return to work at 3 months after cervical spine surgery: an analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database

OBJECTIVEBack pain and neck pain are two of the most common causes of work loss due to disability, which poses an economic burden on society. Due to recent changes in healthcare policies, patient-centered outcomes including return to work have been increasingly prioritized by physicians and hospitals to optimize healthcare delivery. In this study, the authors used a national spine registry to identify clinical factors associated with return to work at 3 months among patients undergoing a cervical spine surgery.METHODSThe authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database registry for information collected from April 2013 through March 2017 for preoperatively employed patients undergoing cervical spine surgery for degenerative spine disease. Covariates included demographic, clinical, and operative variables, and baseline patient-reported outcomes. Multiple imputations were used for missing values and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with higher odds of returning to work. Bootstrap resampling (200 iterations) was used to assess the validity of the model. A nomogram was constructed using the results of the multivariable model.RESULTSA total of 4689 patients were analyzed, of whom 82.2% (n = 3854) returned to work at 3 months postoperatively. Among previously employed and working patients, 89.3% (n = 3443) returned to work compared to 52.3% (n = 411) among those who were employed but not working (e.g., were on a leave) at the time of surgery (p < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression the authors found that patients who were less likely to return to work were older (age > 56-65 years: OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.85, p < 0.001; age > 65 years: OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.97, p = 0.02); were employed but not working (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.20-0.29, p < 0.001); were employed part time (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.76, p < 0.001); had a heavy-intensity (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.32-0.54, p < 0.001) or medium-intensity (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.76, p < 0.001) occupation compared to a sedentary occupation type; had workers' compensation (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.28-0.53, p < 0.001); had a higher Neck Disability Index score at baseline (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.51-0.70, p = 0.017); were more likely to present with myelopathy (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.42-0.63, p < 0.001); and had more levels fused (3-5 levels: OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.61, p < 0.001). Using the multivariable analysis, the authors then constructed a nomogram to predict return to work, which was found to have an area under the curve of 0.812 and good validity.CONCLUSIONSReturn to work is a crucial outcome that is being increasingly prioritized for employed patients undergoing spine surgery. The results from this study could help surgeons identify at-risk patients so that preoperative expectations could be discussed more comprehensively.

How do physician demographics, training, social media usage, online presence, and wait times influence online physician review scores for spine surgeons?

OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this study was to assess the impact of certain demographics, social media usage, and physician review website variables for spine surgeons across Healthgrades.com (Healthgrades), Vitals.com (Vitals), and Google.com (Google).METHODSThrough a directory of registered North American Spine Society (NASS) physicians, we identified spine surgeons practicing in Texas (107 neurosurgery trained, 192 orthopedic trained). Three physician rating websites (Healthgrades, Vitals, Google) were accessed to obtain surgeon demographics, training history, practice setting, number of ratings/reviews, and overall score (January 2, 2018-January 16, 2018). Using only the first 10 search results from Google.com, we then identified whether the surgeon had a website presence or an accessible social media account on Facebook, Twitter, and/or Instagram.RESULTSPhysicians with either a personal or institutional website had a higher overall rating on Healthgrades compared to those who did not have a website (p < 0.01). Nearly all spine surgeons had a personal or institutional website (90.3%), and at least 1 accessible social media account was recorded for 43.5% of the spine surgeons in our study cohort (39.5% Facebook, 10.4% Twitter, 2.7% Instagram). Social media presence was not significantly associated with overall ratings across all 3 sites, but it did significantly correlate with more comments on Healthgrades. In multivariable analysis, increasing surgeon age was significantly associated with a lower overall rating across all 3 review sites (p < 0.05). Neurosurgeons had higher overall ratings on Vitals (p = 0.04). Longer wait times were significantly associated with a lower overall rating on Healthgrades (p < 0.0001). Overall ratings from all 3 websites correlated significantly with each other, indicating agreement between physician ratings across different platforms.CONCLUSIONSLonger wait times, increasing physician age, and the absence of a website are indicative of lower online review scores for spine surgeons. Neurosurgery training correlated with a higher overall review score on Vitals. Having an accessible social media account does not appear to influence scores, but it is correlated with increased patient feedback on Healthgrades. Identification of ways to optimize patients' perception of care are important in the future of performance-based medicine.

Full-endoscopic uniportal decompression in disc herniations and stenosis of the thoracic spine using the interlaminar, extraforaminal, or transthoracic retropleural approach

OBJECTIVE Surgery for thoracic disc herniation and spinal canal stenosis is comparatively rare and often challenging. Individual planning and various surgical techniques and approaches are required. The key factors for selecting the technique and approach are anatomical location, consistency of the pathology, general condition of the patient, and the surgeon's experience. The objective of the study was to evaluate the technical implementation and outcomes of a full-endoscopic uniportal technique via the interlaminar, extraforaminal, or transthoracic retropleural approach in patients with symptomatic disc herniation and stenosis of the thoracic spine, taking specific advantages and disadvantages and literature into consideration. METHODS Between 2009 and 2015, decompression was performed in 55 patients with thoracic disc herniation or stenosis using a full-endoscopic uniportal technique via an interlaminar, extraforaminal, or transthoracic retropleural approach. Imaging and clinical data were collected during follow-up examinations for 18 months. RESULTS Sufficient decompression was achieved in the full-endoscopic uniportal technique. One patient required revision due to secondary bleeding, and another exhibited persistent deterioration on myelopathy. No other serious complications were observed. All but one patient experienced regression or improvement of their symptoms. CONCLUSIONS The full-endoscopic uniportal technique with an interlaminar, extraforaminal, or transthoracic retropleural approach was found to be a sufficient and minimally invasive method. To cover the entire range of thoracic disc herniations and stenosis within the criteria named, all full-endoscopic approaches are required.

The role of physical therapy and rehabilitation after lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative disease: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to provide a systematic and comprehensive review of the existing literature regarding postfusion rehabilitation. METHODS Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the authors conducted an exhaustive review of multiple electronic databases. Potential articles were screened using inclusion/exclusion criteria. Two authors independently analyzed these studies using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators such as level of evidence and availability of accepted patient-reported outcomes measures. These findings were synthesized in a narrative format. A third author resolved disagreements regarding the inclusion of a study. RESULTS Twenty-one articles with I or II levels of evidence were included in the review. The authors divided the findings of the literature review into several groups: rehabilitation terminology, timing and duration of postfusion rehabilitation, the need for rehabilitation relative to surgery-related morbidity, rehabilitation's relationship to outcomes, and cognitive and psychosocial aspects of postsurgical rehabilitation. Current evidence generally supports formal rehabilitation after lumbar fusion surgery. Starting physical therapy at the 12-week postoperative mark results in better outcomes at lower cost than an earlier, 6-week start. Where available, psychosocial support improves outcomes. However, a number of the questions could not be answered with high-grade evidence. In these cases, the authors used "best evidence available" to make recommendations. There are many cases in which different types of caregivers use clinical terminology differently. The data supporting an optimal protocol for postfusion rehabilitation remains elusive but, using the data available, the authors have crafted recommendations and a model protocol, which is currently undergoing prospective study. CONCLUSIONS Rehabilitation has long been a common feature in the postoperative management of patients undergoing spinal fusion. Although caregivers from multiple disciplines agree that the majority of their patients will benefit from this effort, the supporting data remain sparse. In creating a model protocol for postlumbar fusion rehabilitation, the authors hope to share a starting point for future postoperative lumbar fusion rehabilitation research.

Influence of depression symptoms on patient expectations and clinical outcomes in the surgical management of spinal stenosis

OBJECT

This prospective cohort study was designed to determine the influence of depressive symptoms on patient expectations and the clinical outcomes of the surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

Patients with an age > 45 years, a diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis at one level, and an indication for decompressive surgery were included in this study. Data for all of the following parameters were recorded: age, sex, highest level of education, and employment status. Depression symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and back and leg pain (visual analog scale) were assessed before surgery and at 12 months thereafter. The reasons for surgery and patient expectations (North American Spine Society lumbar spine questionnaire) were noted before surgery. The global effectiveness of surgery (Likert scale) was assessed at the 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were divided into two groups based on the presence (Group 1) or absence (Group 2) of depressive symptoms preoperatively; each group comprised 29 patients. Demographic data were similar in both groups before surgery. The main reason to undergo surgery was "fear of a worse situation" in 34% of the patients in Group 1 and "to reduce pain" in 24% of the patients in Group 2. The most prevalent expectation was to improve my social life and my mental health in both groups. Surgery had a relieving effect on the depressive symptoms in 14 patients (48%). Thus, in the postoperative period, the number of patients who were free of depressive symptoms was 43 compared with the 15 who were depressed (p = 0.001). The 15 patients with persistent depression symptoms after surgery had a worse clinical outcome compared with the 43 patients free of depression symptoms at the 1-year follow-up in terms of severe back pain (20% vs. 0%, respectively), severe leg pain (40% vs. 2.3%, respectively), and severe disability (53% vs. 9.3%, respectively). Only 33% of patients with persistent depression symptoms after surgery chose the option "surgery helped a lot" compared with 76% of patients without depression symptoms. Moreover, in terms of expectations regarding improvement in back pain, leg pain, walking capacity, independence, physical duties, and social activities, fewer patients were "completely satisfied" in the group with persistent depression symptoms after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery for spinal stenosis had a relieving effect on preoperative depression symptoms at the 1-year follow-up. The persistence of depressive symptoms after surgery correlated with a worse clinical outcome and a higher rate of unmet expectations. Screening measures to detect and treat depression symptoms in the perioperative period could lead to better clinical results and increased patient satisfaction.

Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 1: introduction and methodology

Fusion procedures are an accepted and successful management strategy to alleviate pain and/or neurological symptoms associated with degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. In 2005, the first version of the "Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine" was published in the Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. In an effort to incorporate evidence obtained since the original publication of these guidelines, an expert panel of neurosurgical and orthopedic spine specialists was convened in 2009. Topics reviewed were essentially identical to the original publication. Selected manuscripts from the first iteration of these guidelines as well as relevant publications between 2005 through 2011 were reviewed. Several modifications to the methodology of guideline development were adopted for the current update. In contrast to the 2005 guidelines, a 5-tiered level of evidence strategy was employed, primarily allowing a distinction between lower levels of evidence. The qualitative descriptors (standards/guidelines/options) used in the 2005 recommendations were abandoned and replaced with grades to reflect the strength of medical evidence supporting the recommendation. Recommendations that conflicted with the original publication, if present, were highlighted at the beginning of each chapter. As with the original guideline publication, the intent of this update is to provide a foundation from which an appropriate treatment strategy can be formulated.