The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society
-
Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a common disorder, but its management and the role of surgery are still a matter of controversy. The assessment of surgical outcome is complicated by the lack of reliable and objective methods to assess the severity of the myelopathy and its evolution. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) are a useful and reliable tool to measure noninvasively the involvement of the corticospinal tract in patients with CSM. Recent evidence suggests that MEPs could also have a role in monitoring the effect of surgical therapy. ⋯ Early surgical intervention for CSM could produce a beneficial effect on spinal cord functionality that can be detected by MEPs.
-
Despite an increase in physician and public awareness and advances in infection control practices, surgical site infection (SSI) remains to be one of the most common complications after an operation. Surgical site infections have been shown to decrease health-related quality of life, double the risk of readmission, prolong the length of hospital stay, and increase hospital costs. ⋯ There is strong evidence in the literature that optimizing specific preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables can significantly lower the risk of developing an SSI.
-
Review
Level of evidence of clinical spinal research and its correlation with journal impact factor.
Over the past two decades, there has been a growing recognition and emphasis on the practice of evidence-based medicine (EBM). The level of evidence (LOE) is used to classify clinical studies based on their quality and design. To compare the quality of scientific journals, the impact factor (IF) is the most widely used ranking measure. However, the calculation of IF is not directly dependent on the quality or LOE of clinical articles published in a journal. ⋯ Spinal surgery journals with a higher IF contain a larger proportion of studies with high LOE, however most clinical articles provide level IV evidence of which the highest proportion are therapeutic studies. Clinicians, researchers, and journal editors should work hand in hand to enhance evidence-based practice in spinal care.
-
Given the unsustainable costs of the US health-care system, health-care purchasers, payers, and hospital systems are adopting the concept of value-based purchasing by shifting care away from low-quality providers or hospitals. Legislation now allows public reporting of these quality rankings. True measures of quality, such as surgical morbidity and validated questionnaires of effectiveness, are burdensome and costly to collect. Hence, patients' satisfaction with care has emerged as a commonly used metric as a proxy for quality because of its feasibility of collection. However, patient satisfaction metrics have yet to be validated as a measure of overall quality of surgical spine care. ⋯ Patient satisfaction is not a valid measure of overall quality or effectiveness of surgical spine care. Patient satisfaction metrics likely represent the patient's subjective contentment with health-care service, a distinct aspect of care. Satisfaction metrics are important patient-centered measures of health-care service but should not be used as a proxy for overall quality, safety, or effectiveness of surgical spine care.