Literature DB >> 32195432

Surgeon motivation, and obstacles to the implementation of minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques.

Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski1,2,3, José-Antonio Soriano-Sánchez4, Xifeng Zhang5, Jorge Felipe Ramírez León3,6, Sergio Soriano Solis4, José Gabriel Rugeles Ortíz3,6, Carolina Ramírez Martínez3, Gabriel Oswaldo Alonso Cuéllar7, Kaixuan Liu8, Qiang Fu9, Marlon Sudário de Lima E Silva10, Paulo Sérgio Teixeira de Carvalho11, Stefan Hellinger12, Álvaro Dowling13,14, Nicholas Prada15, Gun Choi16, Girish Datar17, Anthony Yeung18,19.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to analyze the motivators and obstacles to the implementation of minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques (MISST) by spinal surgeons. Motivators and detractors may impact the availability of MISST to patients and drive spine surgeons' clinical decision-making in the treatment of common degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine.
METHODS: The authors solicited responses to an online survey sent to spine surgeons by email, and chat groups in social media networks including Facebook, WeChat, WhatsApp, and Linkedin. Descriptive statistics were employed to count the responses and compared to the surgeon's training. Kappa statistics and linear regression analysis of agreement were performed.
RESULTS: A total of 430 surgeons accessed the survey. The completion rate was 67.4%. A total of 292 surveys were submitted by 99 neurosurgeons (33.9%), 170 orthopaedic surgeons (58.2%), and 23 surgeons of other postgraduate training (7.9%). Personal interest (82.5%) and patient demand (48.6%) were the primary motivators for MISST implementation. High equipment (48.3%) and disposables (29.1%) cost were relevant obstacles to MISST implementation. Local workshops (47.6%) and meetings in small groups (31.8%) were listed as the primary knowledge sources. Only 12% of surgeons were fellowship trained, but 46.3% of surgeons employed MISST in over 25% of their cases.
CONCLUSIONS: The rate of implementation of MISST reported by spine surgeons was found to be high but impeded by the high cost of equipment and disposables. The primary motivators for spine surgeons' desire to implement were personal interest and patient demand. 2020 Journal of Spine Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lumbar minimally invasive spinal surgery; motivators; obstacles to implementation

Year:  2020        PMID: 32195432      PMCID: PMC7063314          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2019.08.02

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  32 in total

1.  Emergency department visits after surgery are common for Medicare patients, suggesting opportunities to improve care.

Authors:  Keith E Kocher; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; John D Birkmeyer; Justin B Dimick
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Neonatologists and neonatal nurses have positive attitudes towards perinatal end-of-life decisions, a nationwide survey.

Authors:  Laure Dombrecht; Luc Deliens; Kenneth Chambaere; Saskia Baes; Filip Cools; Linde Goossens; Gunnar Naulaers; Ellen Roets; Veerle Piette; Joachim Cohen; Kim Beernaert
Journal:  Acta Paediatr       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 2.299

3.  Surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a survey among Norwegian spine surgeons.

Authors:  Clemens Weber; Greger Lønne; Vidar Rao; Asgeir S Jakola; Ole Solheim; Ulf Nerland; Ivar Rossvoll; Øystein P Nygaard; Wilco C Peul; Sasha Gulati
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.216

4.  Facing the challenge of pain management and opioid misuse, abuse and opioid-related fatalities.

Authors:  Martin D Cheatle
Journal:  Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 5.045

5.  Readmission rates after decompression surgery in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis among Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Urvij Modhia; Steven Takemoto; Mary Jo Braid-Forbes; Michael Weber; Sigurd H Berven
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Proportion of Expectations Fulfilled: A New Method to Report Patient-centered Outcomes of Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Carol A Mancuso; Roland Duculan; Frank P Cammisa; Andrew A Sama; Alexander P Hughes; Darren R Lebl; Federico P Girardi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 7.  Outpatient spine surgery: defining the outcomes, value, and barriers to implementation.

Authors:  Arjun Vivek Pendharkar; Maryam Nour Shahin; Allen Lin Ho; Eric Scott Sussman; David Arnold Purger; Anand Veeravagu; John Kevin Ratliff; Atman Mukesh Desai
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 4.047

8.  Findings from a National Survey of Medicare Beneficiary Perspectives on the Medicare Part D Medication Therapy Management Standardized Format.

Authors:  Nicole J Brandt; Catherine E Cooke; Kriti Sharma; Joshua Chou; Mary Jo Carden; Patty Kumbera; Karen Pellegrin
Journal:  J Manag Care Spec Pharm       Date:  2019-03

9.  Minimally Invasive versus Open Spine Surgery: What Does the Best Evidence Tell Us?

Authors:  Shearwood McClelland; Jeffrey A Goldstein
Journal:  J Neurosci Rural Pract       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

10.  Patient-reported outcome measurements in clinical routine of trauma, spine and craniomaxillofacial surgeons: between expectations and reality: a survey among 1212 surgeons.

Authors:  Alexander Joeris; Christian Knoll; Vasiliki Kalampoki; Andrea Blumenthal; George Gaskell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-06-11       Impact factor: 2.692

View more
  1 in total

1.  Durability of Endoscopes Used During Routine Lumbar Endoscopy: An Analysis of Use Patterns, Common Failure Modes, Impact on Patient Care, and Contingency Plans.

Authors:  Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski; Friedrich Tieber; Stefan Hellinger; Paulo Sérgio Teixeira de Carvalho; Max Rogério Freitas Ramos; Zhang Xifeng; André Luiz Calderaro; Thiago Soares Dos Santos; Jorge Felipe Ramírez León; Marlon Sudário de Lima E Silva; Girish Datar; Jin-Sung Kim; Hyeun Sung Kim; Anthony Yeung
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-12
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.