Conservative treatment of main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Full-time or nighttime bracing?

Purpose: To compare treatment efficacy between the Boston full-time brace and the Providence part-time brace in main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Methods: Patients were treated with either the Boston brace (n = 37) or the Providence brace (n = 40). Inclusion criteria were Risser grade = 45 degrees. Results: Median age was 12.6 years and median treatment length at follow-up was 25 months (interquartile range (IQR): 18-32)) with no difference between the groups (p >= 0.116). Initial median main Cobb angle was 29 degrees (IQR: 27-33) and 36 degrees (IQR: 33-38) in the Boston and Providence groups, respectively (p = 45 degrees in the Boston group versus 16 patients (40%) in the Providence group (p = 0.838). Twenty-three patients (62%) had progressed by more than 5 degrees in the Boston group versus 22 patients (55%) in the Providence group (p = 0.685). The secondary thoracolumbar/lumbar curve progressed by more than 5 degrees in 14 (38%) and 18 (45%) in the Boston and Providence groups, respectively (p = 0.548). Conclusions: Despite a larger initial curve size in the Providence group, progression of more than 5 degrees or to surgical indication area was similar in the Boston group. Our results indicate that nighttime bracing is a viable alternative to full-time bracing also in main thoracic AIS

Reproducibility of thoracic kyphosis measurements in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

BACKGROUND: Current surgical treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) involves correction in both the coronal and sagittal plane, and thorough assessment of these parameters is essential for evaluation of surgical results. However, various definitions of thoracic kyphosis (TK) have been proposed, and the intra- and inter-rater reproducibility of these measures has not been determined. As such, the purpose of the current study was to determine the intra- and inter-rater reproducibility of several TK measurements used in the assessment of AIS. METHODS: Twenty patients (90% females) surgically treated for AIS with alternate-level pedicle screw fixation were included in the study. Three raters independently evaluated pre- and postoperative standing lateral plain radiographs. For each radiograph, several definitions of TK were measured as well as L1–S1 and nonfixed lumbar lordosis. All variables were measured twice 14 days apart, and a mixed effects model was used to determine the repeatability coefficient (RC), which is a measure of the agreement between repeated measurements. Also, the intra- and inter-rater intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was determined as a measure of reliability. RESULTS: Preoperative median Cobb angle was 58° (range 41°–86°), and median surgical curve correction was 68% (range 49–87%). Overall intra-rater RC was highest for T2–T12 and nonfixed TK (11°) and lowest for T4–T12 and T5–T12 (8°). Inter-rater RC was highest for T1–T12, T1-nonfixed, and nonfixed TK (13°) and lowest for T5–T12 (9°). Agreement varied substantially between pre- and postoperative radiographs. Inter-rater ICC was highest for T4–T12 (0.92; 95% CI 0.88–0.95) and T5–T12 (0.92; 95% CI 0.88–0.95) and lowest for T1-nonfixed (0.80; 95% CI 0.72–0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable variation for all TK measurements was noted. Intra- and inter-rater reproducibility was best for T4–T12 and T5–T12. Future studies should consider adopting a relevant minimum difference as a limit for true change in TK. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13013-017-0112-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Prevention of surgical site infections in spine surgery: an international survey of clinical practices among expert spine surgeons

Study Design: Questionnaire-based survey.Objectives: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication in spine surgery but universal guidelines for SSI prevention are lacking. The objectives of this study are to depict a global status quo on implemented prevention strategies in spine surgery, common themes of practice and determine key areas for future research.Methods: An 80-item survey was distributed among spine surgeons worldwide via email. The questionnaire was designed and approved by an International Consensus Group on spine SSI. Consensus was defined as more than 60% of participants agreeing to a specific prevention strategy.Results: Four hundred seventy-two surgeons participated in the survey. Screening for Staphylococcus aureus (SA) is not common, whereas preoperative decolonization is performed in almost half of all hospitals. Body mass index (BMI) was not important for surgery planning. In contrast, elevated HbAIc level and hypoalbuminemia were often considered as reasons to postpone surgery. Cefazoline is the common drug for antimicrobial prophylaxis. Alcohol-based chlorhexidine is mainly used for skin disinfection. Double-gloving, wound irrigation, and tissue-conserving surgical techniques are routine in the operating room (OR). Local antibiotic administration is not common. Wound closure techniques and postoperative wound dressing routines vary greatly between the participating institutions.Conclusions: With this study we provide an international overview on the heterogeneity of SSI prevention strategies in spine surgery. We demonstrated a large heterogeneity for pre-, peri- and postoperative measures to prevent SSI. Our data illustrated the need for developing universal guidelines and for testing areas of controversy in prospective clinical trails.Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie

A proposed set of metrics for standardized outcome reporting in the management of low back pain

Background and purpose - Outcome measurement has been shown to improve performance in several fields of healthcare. This understanding has driven a growing interest in value-based healthcare, where value is defined as outcomes achieved per money spent. While low back pain (LBP) constitutes an enormous burden of disease, no universal set of metrics has yet been accepted to measure and compare outcomes. Here, we aim to define such a set. Patients and methods - An international group of 22 specialists in several disciplines of spine care was assembled to review literature and select LBP outcome metrics through a 6-round modified Delphi process. The scope of the outcome set was degenerative lumbar conditions. Results - Patient-reported metrics include numerical pain scales, lumbar-related function using the Oswestry disability index, health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire, and questions assessing work status and analgesic use. Specific common and serious complications are included. Recommended follow-up intervals include 6, 12, and 24 months after initiating treatment, with optional follow-up at 3 months and 5 years. Metrics for risk stratification are selected based on preexisting tools. Interpretation - The outcome measures recommended here are structured around specific etiologies of LBP, span a patient's entire cycle of care, and allow for risk adjustment. Thus, when implemented, this set can be expected to facilitate meaningful comparisons and ultimately provide a continuous feedback loop, enabling ongoing improvements in quality of care. Much work lies ahead in implementation, revision, and validation of this set, but it is an essential first step toward establishing a community of LBP providers focused on maximizing the value of the care we deliver

Degenerative changes of the sacroiliac joint after spinal fusion: an evidence-based systematic review

n/

AO-classification of thoracic and lumbar fractures—reproducibility utilizing radiographs and clinical information

This study was designed to assess the inter-observer reliability and intra-observer reproducibility of standard radiographic evaluation of 150 thoraco-lumbar fractures using the AO-classification. The influence of clinical information on agreement levels was also evaluated. Six observers (two junior and four senior residents) evaluated the radiographic images. The injuries were classified by each observer as either type A, B or C according to the AO-classification system and the levels of agreement were documented. After 3 months the injuries were again classified with the addition of the clinical findings of each patient and the level of agreement evaluated. The level of agreement was measured using Cohen’s κ-test. The overall inter-observer agreement was rated as fair (0.291) in the first session and moderate (0.403) in the second. Intra-observer values ranged from slight (0.181) to moderate (0.488). The increased level of agreement in the second session was attributed to the value of additional clinical information, the learning curve of the junior residents and the simplicity of the classification