Montenegro Thiago S, Elia Christopher, Hines Kevin, Buser Zorica, Wilson Jefferson, Ghogawala Zoher, Kurpad Shekar N, Sciubba Daniel M, Harrop James S
Department of Neurosurgery, Thomas Jefferson University and Jefferson Hospital for Neuroscience, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Neurospine. 2021 Jun;18(2):389-396. doi: 10.14245/ns.2142136.068. Epub 2021 Jun 30.
To evaluate the use of guidelines for lumbar spine fusions among spine surgeons in North America.
An anonymous survey was electronically sent to all AO Spine North America members. Survey respondents were asked to indicate their opinion surrounding the suitability of instrumented fusion in a variety of clinical scenarios. Fusion indications in accordance with North America Spine Society (NASS) guidelines for lumbar fusion were considered NASS-concordant answers. Respondents were considered to have a NASS-concordant approach if ≥ 70% (13 of 18) of their answers were NASS-concordant answers. Comparisons were performed using bivariable statistics.
A total of 105 responses were entered with complete data available on 70. Sixty percent of the respondents (n = 42) were considered compliant with NASS guidelines. NASS-discordant responses did not differ between surgeons who stated that they include the NASS guidelines in their decision-making algorithm (5.10 ± 1.96) and those that did not (4.68 ± 2.09) (p = 0.395). The greatest number of NASS-discordant answers in the United States. was in the South (5.75 ± 2.09), with the lowest number in the Northeast (3.84 ± 1.70) (p < 0.01). For 5 survey items, rates of NASS-discordant answers were ≥ 40%, with the greatest number of NASS-discordant responses observed in relation to indications for fusion in spinal deformity (80%). Spine surgeons utilizing a NASS-concordant approach had a significant lower number of NASS-discordant answers for synovial cysts (p = 0.03), axial low back pain (p < 0.01), adjacent level disease (p < 0.01), recurrent stenosis (p < 0.01), recurrent disc herniation (p = 0.01), and foraminal stenosis (p < 0.01).
This study serves an important role in clarifying the rates of uptake of clinical practice guidelines in spine surgery as well as to identify barriers to their implementation.
评估北美脊柱外科医生对腰椎融合术指南的应用情况。
通过电子邮件向北美AO脊柱学会的所有成员发送了一份匿名调查问卷。调查对象被要求表明他们对各种临床情况下器械辅助融合术适用性的看法。符合北美脊柱学会(NASS)腰椎融合术指南的融合指征被视为与NASS一致的答案。如果回答者≥70%(18个中的13个)的答案与NASS一致,则认为其采用了与NASS一致的方法。采用双变量统计进行比较。
共录入105份回复,其中70份有完整数据。60%的受访者(n = 42)被认为符合NASS指南。在决策算法中表示纳入NASS指南的外科医生(5.10 ± 1.96)和未纳入的外科医生(4.68 ± 2.09)之间,与NASS不一致的回答没有差异(p = 0.395)。美国与NASS不一致回答数量最多的地区是南部(5.75 ± 2.09),东北部最少(3.84 ± 1.70)(p < 0.01)。对于5个调查项目,与NASS不一致的回答率≥40%,其中与脊柱畸形融合指征相关的与NASS不一致的回答数量最多(80%)。采用与NASS一致方法的脊柱外科医生在滑膜囊肿(p = 0.03)、轴性下腰痛(p < 0.01)、相邻节段疾病(p < 0.01)、复发性狭窄(p < 0.01)、复发性椎间盘突出(p = 0.01)和椎间孔狭窄(p < 0.01)方面与NASS不一致的回答数量显著较少。
本研究在明确脊柱外科临床实践指南的采用率以及识别其实施障碍方面发挥了重要作用。