Best practices guidelines in the postoperative management of patients who underwent cervical and lumbar fusions.

Q1 Medicine Journal of spine surgery Pub Date : 2024-09-23 Epub Date: 2024-07-18 DOI:10.21037/jss-23-136
Rami Elsabeh, John M Abrahams
{"title":"Best practices guidelines in the postoperative management of patients who underwent cervical and lumbar fusions.","authors":"Rami Elsabeh, John M Abrahams","doi":"10.21037/jss-23-136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a lack of standardization in spine surgery in particular, as relates to postoperative care for the most common spine procedures such as cervical and lumbar fusions. The goal of this study was to develop a standardized postoperative treatment protocol for common spine procedures such as cervical and lumbar fusion to reduce unnecessary visits, imaging studies, and create a standard for all spine surgeons to adhere while maintaining quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a best practices protocol (BPP) for postoperative spine care for anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). We compared outcome to retrospective controls (pre-BPP) and a national database [Quality Outcomes Database (QOD)/American Spine Registry (ASR)].</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pre-BPP retrospective controls (n=1,010) were compared to patients enrolled in BPP (n=750). BPP reduced postoperative visits (POV) from 2,201 to 1,061 (52%). Total additional imaging studies computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) beyond standard X-ray were reduced from 192 studies to 57 (70%); 53% for lumbar fusion and 67% for cervical fusion. Comparing pre-BPP to BPP groups for complications, the number of adverse events was reduced by 52% overall; 45% for lumbar fusion, and 62% for cervical fusion. A subset of BPP patients (n=450) with available data were compared to a national registry QOD and ASR where lumbar and cervical fusion patients showed comparable less lengths of stay, lower 3-month complication rates and lower readmission rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is one of the first studies to standardize postoperative spine care as a first step towards creating uniformly accepted models for value-based care (VBC) in spine surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":17131,"journal":{"name":"Journal of spine surgery","volume":"10 3","pages":"514-520"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11467291/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of spine surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jss-23-136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is a lack of standardization in spine surgery in particular, as relates to postoperative care for the most common spine procedures such as cervical and lumbar fusions. The goal of this study was to develop a standardized postoperative treatment protocol for common spine procedures such as cervical and lumbar fusion to reduce unnecessary visits, imaging studies, and create a standard for all spine surgeons to adhere while maintaining quality.

Methods: We developed a best practices protocol (BPP) for postoperative spine care for anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). We compared outcome to retrospective controls (pre-BPP) and a national database [Quality Outcomes Database (QOD)/American Spine Registry (ASR)].

Results: Pre-BPP retrospective controls (n=1,010) were compared to patients enrolled in BPP (n=750). BPP reduced postoperative visits (POV) from 2,201 to 1,061 (52%). Total additional imaging studies computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) beyond standard X-ray were reduced from 192 studies to 57 (70%); 53% for lumbar fusion and 67% for cervical fusion. Comparing pre-BPP to BPP groups for complications, the number of adverse events was reduced by 52% overall; 45% for lumbar fusion, and 62% for cervical fusion. A subset of BPP patients (n=450) with available data were compared to a national registry QOD and ASR where lumbar and cervical fusion patients showed comparable less lengths of stay, lower 3-month complication rates and lower readmission rates.

Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to standardize postoperative spine care as a first step towards creating uniformly accepted models for value-based care (VBC) in spine surgery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
颈椎和腰椎融合术患者术后管理最佳实践指南。
背景:脊柱手术缺乏标准化,尤其是最常见的脊柱手术(如颈椎和腰椎融合术)的术后护理。本研究的目的是为颈椎和腰椎融合术等常见脊柱手术制定标准化的术后治疗方案,以减少不必要的就诊和影像学检查,并为所有脊柱外科医生制定一个在保证质量的前提下必须遵守的标准:我们为颈椎前路椎间盘切除与融合术(ACDF)和腰椎后路椎体间融合术(PLIF)的术后脊柱护理制定了最佳实践方案(BPP)。我们将结果与回顾性对照组(BPP前)和国家数据库[质量结果数据库(QOD)/美国脊柱登记处(ASR)]进行了比较:结果:BPP前回顾性对照组(n=1,010)与BPP入组患者(n=750)进行了比较。BPP将术后就诊次数(POV)从2201次减少到1061次(52%)。除标准X光检查外,额外的计算机断层扫描(CT)和磁共振成像(MRI)检查总数从192次减少到57次(70%);腰椎融合术减少了53%,颈椎融合术减少了67%。在并发症方面,将BPP前组别与BPP组别进行比较,不良事件的数量总体上减少了52%;腰椎融合术减少了45%,颈椎融合术减少了62%。将具有可用数据的BPP患者子集(n=450)与全国登记的QOD和ASR进行比较,结果显示腰椎和颈椎融合术患者的住院时间相当短,3个月并发症发生率较低,再入院率也较低:这是首批将脊柱术后护理标准化的研究之一,也是脊柱手术中建立统一认可的价值导向护理(VBC)模式的第一步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of spine surgery
Journal of spine surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
A comparative cadaveric biomechanical study of bilateral FacetFuse® transfacet pedicle screws versus bilateral or unilateral pedicle screw-rod construct. Advancing the design of interspinous fixation devices for improved biomechanical performance: dual vs. single-locking set screw mechanisms and symmetrical vs. asymmetrical plate designs. Best practices guidelines in the postoperative management of patients who underwent cervical and lumbar fusions. Blood loss during three column osteotomies: influence on outcomes and mitigation strategies. Bone graft substitutes used in anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a contemporary systematic review of fusion rates and complications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1