Window Peter, Bada Eniola, Stovell Matthew G, Ahuja Sashin, Beard David J, Gardner Adrian, Foster Nadine E
STARS Education and Research Alliance, Surgical Treatment and Rehabilitation Service (STARS), The University of Queensland and Metro North Health, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Physiotherapy Department, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Global Spine J. 2025 Feb 25:21925682251323865. doi: 10.1177/21925682251323865.
Cross-sectional Survey.
The objective of this study was to describe clinicians' decision-making regarding suitability of patient cases for lumbar fusion surgery or conservative care and the level of equipoise to randomise participants into a randomised controlled trial (RCT).
An online survey distributed via Australian professional networks to clinicians involved in low back pain care, collected data on clinical discipline, clinical experience, practice setting and preferred care of five patient case vignettes (ranging in age, pain duration, BMI, imaging findings, neurological signs/symptoms). Clinicians were asked about preferred clinical care and willingness to randomise each case.
Of 101 respondents (31 orthopaedic surgeons, 17 neurosurgeons, 50 allied health professionals (AHPs), 1 pain physician, 1 nurse), 44% worked in public health services only, 36.4% in both public and private, 19.2% in private only. 46.5% had over 20 years clinical experience. Conservative care was preferred for all cases (83.1%-90.9%). Surgeons preferred an anterior approach to lumbar fusion (range 40.6%-68.4%). On average 51.9% (range: 47%-55%) indicated willingness to randomise cases, with orthopaedic (61.5%) and neurosurgeons (64.9%) more willing than AHPs (44.4%). Willingness to randomise was highest in younger cases with shorter pain duration, no neurological symptoms/signs and localised degeneration, and lowest when cases had high BMI, longer pain duration, and inadequate conservative management. Willingness to randomise was higher in those in private (70.3%) vs public health care services (43.6%).
Over half of respondents reported willingness to randomise cases, indicating sufficient clinical equipoise for a future RCT.
横断面调查。
本研究的目的是描述临床医生对于患者病例适合腰椎融合手术或保守治疗的决策情况,以及将参与者随机分组至随机对照试验(RCT)中的 equipoise 水平。
通过澳大利亚专业网络向参与腰痛治疗的临床医生进行在线调查,收集有关临床学科、临床经验、执业环境以及五个患者病例 vignettes(年龄、疼痛持续时间、BMI、影像学检查结果、神经体征/症状各不相同)的首选治疗方法的数据。询问临床医生每个病例的首选临床治疗方法以及随机分组的意愿。
在 101 名受访者中(31 名骨科医生、17 名神经外科医生、50 名专职医疗人员(AHPs)、1 名疼痛科医生、1 名护士),44%仅在公共卫生服务机构工作,36.4%在公共和私人机构均工作,19.2%仅在私人机构工作。46.5%有超过 20 年的临床经验。所有病例均首选保守治疗(83.1%-90.9%)。外科医生更倾向于前路腰椎融合术(范围为 40.6%-68.4%)。平均而言,51.9%(范围:47%-55%)表示愿意将病例随机分组,骨科医生(61.5%)和神经外科医生(64.9%)比专职医疗人员(44.4%)更愿意。在年龄较小、疼痛持续时间较短、无神经症状/体征且有局部退变的病例中,随机分组的意愿最高;而在 BMI 高、疼痛持续时间长且保守治疗不充分的病例中,意愿最低。在私人机构工作的人员(70.3%)比在公共卫生服务机构工作的人员(43.6%)随机分组的意愿更高。
超过一半的受访者表示愿意将病例随机分组,表明为未来的 RCT 有足够的临床 equipoise。