Literature DB >> 30453453

Variability in the utility of predictive models in predicting patient-reported outcomes following spine surgery for degenerative conditions: a systematic review.

Nicholas Dietz1, Mayur Sharma1, Ahmad Alhourani1, Beatrice Ugiliweneza1, Dengzhi Wang1, Miriam A Nuño2, Doniel Drazin3, Maxwell Boakye1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVEThere is increasing emphasis on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to quantitatively evaluate quality outcomes from degenerative spine surgery. However, accurate prediction of PROs is challenging due to heterogeneity in outcome measures, patient characteristics, treatment characteristics, and methodological characteristics. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current landscape of independently validated predictive models for PROs in elective degenerative spinal surgery with respect to study design and model generation, training, accuracy, reliability, variance, and utility.METHODSThe authors analyzed the current predictive models in PROs by performing a search of the PubMed and Ovid databases using PRISMA guidelines and a PICOS (participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design) model. They assessed the common outcomes and variables used across models as well as the study design and internal validation methods.RESULTSA total of 7 articles met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 17 validated predictive models of PROs after adult degenerative spine surgery. National registry databases were used in 4 of the studies. Validation cohorts were used in 2 studies for model verification and 5 studies used other methods, including random sample bootstrapping techniques. Reported c-index values ranged from 0.47 to 0.79. Two studies report the area under the curve (0.71-0.83) and one reports a misclassification rate (9.9%). Several positive predictors, including high baseline pain intensity and disability, demonstrated high likelihood of favorable PROs.CONCLUSIONSA limited but effective cohort of validated predictive models of spine surgical outcomes had proven good predictability for PROs. Instruments with predictive accuracy can enhance shared decision-making, improve rehabilitation, and inform best practices in the setting of heterogeneous patient characteristics and surgical factors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASA = American Society of Anesthesiologists; AUC = area under the curve; JOABPEQ = Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire; LBOS = Low Back Outcome Scale; MCID = minimum clinically important difference; NRS = numeric rating scale; ODI = Oswestry Disability Index; PICOS = participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design; PRO = patient-reported outcome; QOD = Quality Outcomes Database; QUADAS = Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies; ROC = receiver operating characteristic; RTW = return to work; VAS = visual analog scale; degeneration; patient reported outcomes; predictive models; spine surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30453453     DOI: 10.3171/2018.8.FOCUS18331

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Focus        ISSN: 1092-0684            Impact factor:   4.047


  3 in total

1.  The use of electronic PROMs provides same outcomes as paper version in a spine surgery registry. Results from a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Francesco Langella; Paolo Barletta; Alice Baroncini; Matteo Agarossi; Laura Scaramuzzo; Andrea Luca; Roberto Bassani; Giuseppe M Peretti; Claudio Lamartina; Jorge H Villafañe; Pedro Berjano
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Chronic opioid use after joint replacement surgery in seniors is associated with increased healthcare utilization and costs: a historical cohort study.

Authors:  Ana Johnson; Brian Milne; Narges Jamali; Matthew Pasquali; Ian Gilron; Steve Mann; Kieran Moore; Erin Graves; Joel Parlow
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 6.713

3.  SpineCloud: image analytics for predictive modeling of spine surgery outcomes.

Authors:  Tharindu De Silva; S Swaroop Vedula; Alexander Perdomo-Pantoja; Rohan Vijayan; Sophia A Doerr; Ali Uneri; Runze Han; Michael D Ketcha; Richard L Skolasky; Timothy Witham; Nicholas Theodore; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2020-02-18
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.