Healthcare Professionals' Decision-Making Regarding Lumbar Fusion Surgery or Conservative Care for Adults With Severe, Persistent Low Back Pain: An Australian Cross-Sectional Survey Using Case Vignettes.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Global Spine Journal Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-25 DOI:10.1177/21925682251323865
Peter Window, Eniola Bada, Matthew G Stovell, Sashin Ahuja, David J Beard, Adrian Gardner, Nadine E Foster
{"title":"Healthcare Professionals' Decision-Making Regarding Lumbar Fusion Surgery or Conservative Care for Adults With Severe, Persistent Low Back Pain: An Australian Cross-Sectional Survey Using Case Vignettes.","authors":"Peter Window, Eniola Bada, Matthew G Stovell, Sashin Ahuja, David J Beard, Adrian Gardner, Nadine E Foster","doi":"10.1177/21925682251323865","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Study DesignCross-sectional Survey.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to describe clinicians' decision-making regarding suitability of patient cases for lumbar fusion surgery or conservative care and the level of equipoise to randomise participants into a randomised controlled trial (RCT).MethodsAn online survey distributed via Australian professional networks to clinicians involved in low back pain care, collected data on clinical discipline, clinical experience, practice setting and preferred care of five patient case vignettes (ranging in age, pain duration, BMI, imaging findings, neurological signs/symptoms). Clinicians were asked about preferred clinical care and willingness to randomise each case.ResultsOf 101 respondents (31 orthopaedic surgeons, 17 neurosurgeons, 50 allied health professionals (AHPs), 1 pain physician, 1 nurse), 44% worked in public health services only, 36.4% in both public and private, 19.2% in private only. 46.5% had over 20 years clinical experience. Conservative care was preferred for all cases (83.1%-90.9%). Surgeons preferred an anterior approach to lumbar fusion (range 40.6%-68.4%). On average 51.9% (range: 47%-55%) indicated willingness to randomise cases, with orthopaedic (61.5%) and neurosurgeons (64.9%) more willing than AHPs (44.4%). Willingness to randomise was highest in younger cases with shorter pain duration, no neurological symptoms/signs and localised degeneration, and lowest when cases had high BMI, longer pain duration, and inadequate conservative management. Willingness to randomise was higher in those in private (70.3%) vs public health care services (43.6%).ConclusionsOver half of respondents reported willingness to randomise cases, indicating sufficient clinical equipoise for a future RCT.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"3311-3322"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11863196/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682251323865","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study DesignCross-sectional Survey.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to describe clinicians' decision-making regarding suitability of patient cases for lumbar fusion surgery or conservative care and the level of equipoise to randomise participants into a randomised controlled trial (RCT).MethodsAn online survey distributed via Australian professional networks to clinicians involved in low back pain care, collected data on clinical discipline, clinical experience, practice setting and preferred care of five patient case vignettes (ranging in age, pain duration, BMI, imaging findings, neurological signs/symptoms). Clinicians were asked about preferred clinical care and willingness to randomise each case.ResultsOf 101 respondents (31 orthopaedic surgeons, 17 neurosurgeons, 50 allied health professionals (AHPs), 1 pain physician, 1 nurse), 44% worked in public health services only, 36.4% in both public and private, 19.2% in private only. 46.5% had over 20 years clinical experience. Conservative care was preferred for all cases (83.1%-90.9%). Surgeons preferred an anterior approach to lumbar fusion (range 40.6%-68.4%). On average 51.9% (range: 47%-55%) indicated willingness to randomise cases, with orthopaedic (61.5%) and neurosurgeons (64.9%) more willing than AHPs (44.4%). Willingness to randomise was highest in younger cases with shorter pain duration, no neurological symptoms/signs and localised degeneration, and lowest when cases had high BMI, longer pain duration, and inadequate conservative management. Willingness to randomise was higher in those in private (70.3%) vs public health care services (43.6%).ConclusionsOver half of respondents reported willingness to randomise cases, indicating sufficient clinical equipoise for a future RCT.

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
医疗保健专业人员对患有严重、持续性腰痛的成人腰椎融合手术或保守护理的决策:一项使用病例小插图的澳大利亚横断面调查。
研究设计:横断面调查。目的:本研究的目的是描述临床医生对腰椎融合手术或保守治疗患者的适宜性的决策,以及将参与者随机纳入随机对照试验(RCT)的平衡水平。方法:通过澳大利亚专业网络对参与腰痛护理的临床医生进行在线调查,收集5例患者病例的临床学科、临床经验、实践环境和首选护理数据(包括年龄、疼痛持续时间、BMI、影像学表现、神经体征/症状)。临床医生被问及首选的临床护理和随机选择每个病例的意愿。结果:101名被调查者(31名骨科医生、17名神经外科医生、50名专职医疗人员(AHPs)、1名疼痛医生、1名护士)中,仅有44%的人在公共卫生机构工作,36.4%的人在公立和私立医院工作,19.2%的人仅在私立医院工作。46.5%临床经验超过20年。所有病例均首选保守治疗(83.1% ~ 90.9%)。外科医生倾向于前路腰椎融合术(范围40.6%-68.4%)。平均51.9%(范围:47%-55%)表示愿意随机化病例,骨科(61.5%)和神经外科(64.9%)比ahp(44.4%)更愿意。在疼痛持续时间较短、无神经系统症状/体征和局部变性的年轻患者中,随机化意愿最高,而在BMI高、疼痛持续时间较长、保守治疗不充分的患者中,随机化意愿最低。私人医疗保健服务(70.3%)比公共医疗保健服务(43.6%)的随机意愿更高。结论:超过一半的受访者表示愿意将病例随机化,这表明未来的RCT有足够的临床公平性。
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
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
期刊最新文献
The AO Spine TL Injury Classification System Drives Clinical Decision Making in Acute Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Implementation. Association Between BMI Z-Score and Postoperative Complications in Pediatric Neuromuscular Scoliosis Surgery. Predictive Value of the Preoperative Screw Trajectory-to-Vertebral Body Hounsfield Unit Ratio and the Combined Model Incorporating MRI-Based Pedicle Bone Quality Score for Pedicle Screw Loosening After Pedicle Screw Fixation. Corrigendum to "Segmental Spinal Aplasia: Anatomical Variations and Treatment Insights". Pre-Operative Bone Health in Elective Spine Surgery, From Risk Assessment to Optimization Strategies: A Narrative Review.
×
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:604180095
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