The Digital Impact of Neurosurgery Awareness Month: Retrospective Infodemiology Study

BackgroundNeurosurgery Awareness Month (August) was initiated by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons with the aim of bringing neurological conditions to the forefront and educating the public about these conditions. Digital media is an important tool for disseminating information and connecting with influencers, general public, and other stakeholders. Hence, it is crucial to understand the impact of awareness campaigns such as Neurosurgery Awareness Month to optimize resource allocation, quantify the efficiency and reach of these initiatives, and identify areas for improvement. ObjectiveThe purpose of our study was to examine the digital impact of Neurosurgery Awareness Month globally and identify areas for further improvement. MethodsWe used 4 social media (Twitter) assessment tools (Sprout Social, SocioViz, Sentiment Viz, and Symplur) and Google Trends to extract data using various search queries. Using regression analysis, trends were studied in the total number of tweets posted in August between 2014 and 2022. Two search queries were used in this analysis: one specifically targeting tweets related to Neurosurgery Awareness Month and the other isolating all neurosurgery-related posts. Total impressions and top influencers for #neurosurgery were calculated using Symplur’s machine learning algorithm. To study the context of the tweets, we used SocioViz to isolate the top 100 popular hashtags, keywords, and collaborations between influencers. Network analysis was performed to illustrate the interactions and connections within the digital media environment using ForceAtlas2 model. Sentiment analysis was done to study the underlying emotion of the tweets. Google Trends was used to study the global search interest by studying relative search volume data. ResultsA total of 10,007 users were identified as tweeting about neurosurgery during Neurosurgery Awareness Month using the “#neurosurgery” hashtag. These tweets generated over 29.14 million impressions globally. Of the top 10 most influential users, 5 were faculty neurosurgeons at US university hospitals. Other influential users included notable organizations and journals in the field of neurosurgery. The network analysis of the top 100 influencers showed a collaboration rate of 81%. However, only 1.6% of the total neurosurgery tweets were advocating about neurosurgery awareness during Neurosurgery Awareness Month, and only 13 tweets were posted by verified users using the #neurosurgeryawarenessmonth hashtag. The sentiment analysis revealed that the majority of the tweets about Neurosurgery Awareness Month were pleasant with subdued emotion. ConclusionsThe global digital impact of Neurosurgery Awareness Month is nascent, and support from other international organizations and neurosurgical influencers is needed to yield a significant digital reach. Increasing collaboration and involvement from underrepresented communities may help to increase the global reach. By better understanding the digital impact of Neurosurgery Awareness Month, future health care awareness campaigns can be optimized to increase global awareness of neurosurgery and the challenges facing the field

The Differences Between Same-Day and Staged (Circumferential) Fusion Surgery in Adult Spinal Deformity: Protocol for a Systematic Review

BackgroundAdult spinal deformity (ASD) is a deformity in the curvature of the adult spine. ASD includes a range of pathology that leads to decreased quality of life for patients as well as debilitating morbidities. Treatment can range from nonoperative management to long-segment surgical corrections and depends greatly on the deformity and patient profiles. If surgical treatment is indicated, circumferential (a combined anterior and posterior approach) fusion is one of the tools in the spine surgeon’s armamentarium. Depending on the complexity, the procedure is either completed on the same day or staged. Determining whether to perform a circumferential surgery in a staged fashion is based largely on the surgeon’s preference and perception of the individual case complexity; at present, there is no high-quality evidence that can be used to support that decision. ObjectiveThis paper presents the protocol for a systematic review that aims to investigate the differences between same-day versus staged circumferential fusion surgery in ASD both in patient selection and in outcomes. MethodsSearches will be performed on MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus. Gray literature and the reference lists of articles included in the full-text screening will also be screened for inclusion. Results will be exported to Covidence. Data will be collected on demographics, type of procedures performed, surgery levels, blood loss, total operation time, length of stay, disposition, readmissions (30 days and 90 days), and perioperative complications. Patient-reported outcomes will also be assessed. Data quality assessment of randomized controlled trials will be performed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials, and nonrandomized studies will be assessed with the ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) tool. All screening, quality assessment, and data extraction will be done by 2 independent reviewers. A descriptive synthesis will be performed, and data will be evaluated for further analysis. ResultsThis study is currently in the screening phase. There are no results yet. The search strategy has been developed and documented. Information has been exported to Covidence. Upon conclusion of the critical appraisal stage, screening and extraction, as well as a synthesis of the results, will be performed. ConclusionsThe intended review will summarize the differences in perioperative outcomes and complications between same-day and staged (circumferential) fusion surgery in adult spinal deformity. It will also describe the patients selected for such procedures based on their demographics and pathology. Identified gaps in knowledge will provide insight into current limitations and guide further studies on this topic. Trial RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42022339764; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=339764 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)PRR1-10.2196/4233

Determining Differences in Perioperative Functional Mobility Patterns in Lumbar Decompression Versus Fusion Patients Using Smartphone Activity Data

Smartphone activity data recorded through high-fidelity accelerometry can provide accurate postoperative assessments of patient mobility. The "big data" available through smartphones allows for advanced analyses, yielding insight into patient well-being. This study compared rate of change in functional activity data between lumbar fusion (LF) and lumbar decompression (LD) patients to determine preoperative and postoperative course differences. Twenty-three LF and 18 LD patients were retrospectively included. Activity data (steps per day) recorded in Apple Health, encompassing over 70 000 perioperative data points, was classified into 6 temporal epochs representing distinct functional states, including acute preoperative decline, immediate postoperative recovery, and postoperative decline. The daily rate of change of each patient's step counts was calculated for each perioperative epoch. Patients undergoing LF demonstrated steeper preoperative declines than LD patients based on the first derivative of step count data (P = .045). In the surgical recovery phase, LF patients had slower recoveries (P = .041), and LF patients experienced steeper postoperative secondary declines than LD patients did (P = .010). The rate of change of steps per day demonstrated varying perioperative trajectories that were not explained by differences in age, comorbidities, or levels operated. Patients undergoing LF and LD have distinct perioperative activity profiles characterized by the rate of change in the patient daily steps. Daily steps and their rate of change is thus a valuable metric in phenotyping patients and understanding their postsurgical outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to expand upon these data and establish causal links between preoperative patient mobility, patient characteristics, and postoperative functional outcomes

Defining the minimal clinically important difference in smartphone-based mobility after spine surgery: correlation of survey questionnaire to mobility data

OBJECTIVE: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the gold standard for assessing postoperative outcomes in spine surgery. However, PROMs are also limited by the inherent subjectivity of self-reported qualitative data. Recent literature has highlighted the utility of patient mobility data streamed from smartphone accelerometers as an objective measure of functional outcomes and complement to traditional PROMs. Still, for activity-based data to supplement existing PROMs, they must be validated against current metrics. In this study, the authors assessed the relationships and concordance between longitudinal smartphone-based mobility data and PROMs. METHODS: Patients receiving laminectomy (n = 21) or fusion (n = 10) between 2017 and 2022 were retrospectively included. Activity data (steps-per-day count) recorded in the Apple Health mobile application over a 2-year perioperative window were extracted and subsequently normalized to allow for intersubject comparison. PROMS, including the visual analog scale (VAS), Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D, collected at the preoperative and 6-week postoperative visits were retrospectively extracted from the electronic medical record. Correlations between PROMs and patient mobility were assessed and compared between patients who did and those who did not achieve the established minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for each measure. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients receiving laminectomy (n = 21) or fusion (n = 10) were included. Change between preoperative and 6-week postoperative VAS and PROMIS-PI scores demonstrated moderate (r = -0.46) and strong (r = -0.74) inverse correlations, respectively, with changes in normalized steps-per-day count. In cohorts of patients who achieved PROMIS-PI MCID postoperatively, indicating subjective improvement in pain, there was a 0.784 standard deviation increase in normalized steps per day, representing a 56.5% improvement (p = 0.027). Patients who did achieve the MCID of improvement in either PROMIS-PI or VAS after surgery were more likely to experience an earlier sustained improvement in physical activity commensurate to or greater than their preoperative baseline (p = 2.98 × 10-18) than non-MCID patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a strong correlation between changes in mobility data extracted from patient smartphones and changes in PROMs following spine surgery. Further elucidating this relationship will allow for more robust supplementation of existing spine outcome measure tools with analyzed objective activity data