• Medicina · Jan 2022

    Process Evaluation of Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgeries in Five Dutch Hospitals: A Qualitative Analysis.

    • Ruud Droeghaag, Inge J M H Caelers, PaulusAggie T GATG0000-0002-2086-6106CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.Department of Health Services Research, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.School of , van HemertWouter L WWLWDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, 6130 MB Heerlen, The Netherlands., Henk van Santbrink, and On Behalf Of The Lift-Study GroupDepartment of Neurosurgery, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital Nijmegen, 6532 SZ Nijmegen, The Netherlands.Department of Neurosurgery, Groningen University Medical Centre, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.Department of Orthopa.
    • CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.
    • Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Jan 9; 58 (1).

    AbstractBackground and Objectives: Only limited qualitative research concerning instrumented spine surgeries has been published, despite the increasing number of these surgeries and the evident importance of qualitative analysis of the processes surrounding these complex interventions. Current qualitative research is mainly limited to the experiences, emotions and expectations of patients. Insight into the full process, including experiences from the perspective of informal caregivers and healthcare professionals, remains scarce. Materials and Methods: Data were gathered by means of semi-structured face-to-face interviews. In total, there were 27 participants, including 11 patients, 7 informal caregivers and 9 healthcare professionals. The interview process was audiotaped, and each interview was transcribed verbatim. To systematically analyse the gathered data, software for qualitative analysis (NVivo) was used. After immersion in the raw data of transcripts and field notes, a list of broad categories for organising the data into meaningful clusters for analysis was developed. All interviews were coded by the first author, and 25% was independently assessed by the second author. Results: The results of our study describe several promoting and limiting factors concerning the process of lumbar fusion surgery from the perspective of patients, informal caregivers and healthcare providers. The most frequently mentioned promoting factors were: information and opportunities to ask questions during consultations; multidisciplinary consultations; good communication and guidance during hospitalization; and follow-up appointments. The most frequently mentioned limiting factors were: lack of educational material; lack of guidance and communication prior to, during and after hospitalisation. Conclusion: Overall, participants were satisfied with the current healthcare-process in lumbar fusion surgery. However, we found that lack of educational material and guidance during the process led to insecurity about complaints, surgery and recovery. To improve the process of lumbar interbody fusion and to increase patient satisfaction, healthcare providers should focus on guiding and educating patients and informal caregivers about the pre-operative trajectory, the surgery and the recovery. From the healthcare providers' perspective, the process could be improved by multidisciplinary consultations and a dedicated spine team in the operation room. Although this study focusses on lumbar fusion surgery, results could be translated to other fields of spine surgery and surgery in general.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.