Managing the Complex Patient with Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: How to Handle the Aging Spine, the Obese Patient, and Individuals with Medical Comorbidities.

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the most common cause of nontraumatic spinal cord injury worldwide. Even relatively mild impairment in functional scores can significantly impact daily activities. Surgery is an effective treatment for DCM, but outcomes are dependent on more than technique and preoperative neurologic deficits

A Brief History of Quality Improvement in Health Care and Spinal Surgery.

While medical and technological advances continue to shape and advance health care, there has been growing emphasis on translating these advances into improvement in overall health care quality outcomes in the United States. Innovators such as Abraham Flexner and Ernest Codman engaged in rigorous reviews of systems and patient outcomes igniting wider spread interest in quality improvement in health care. Codman\u27s efforts even contributed to the founding of the American College of Surgeons. This society catalyzed a quality improvement initiative across the United States and the formation of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals. Since that time, those such as Avedis Donabedian and the Institute of Medicine have worked to structure the process of improving both the quality and delivery of health care. Significant advances include the defining of minimum standards for hospital accreditation, 7 pillars of quality in medicine, and the process by which quality in medicine is evaluated. All of these factors have affected current practice more each day. In a field such as spinal surgery, cost and quality measures are continually emphasized and led to large outcome databases to better evaluate outcomes in complex, heterogeneous populations. Going forward, these databases will be instrumental in developing practice patterns and improving spinal surgery outcomes

Whiplash: diagnosis, treatment, and associated injuries

Study design Focused review of the current literature. Objective To identify and synthesize the most current data pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment of whiplash and whiplash-associated disorders (WAD), and to report on whiplash-related injuries. Methods A search of OVID Medline (1996–January 2007) and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews was performed using the keywords whiplash and WAD. Articles under subheadings for pathology, diagnosis, treatment, and epidemiology were chosen for review after identification by the authors. Results A total of 485 articles in the English language literature were identified. Thirty-six articles pertained to the diagnosis, treatment, epidemiology of whiplash, and WAD, and were eligible for focused review. From these, 21 primary and 15 secondary sources were identified for full review. In addition, five articles were found that focused on whiplash associated cervical injuries. These five articles were also primary sources. Conclusions Whiplash is a common injury associated most often with motor vehicle accidents. It may present with a variety of clinical manifestations, collectively termed WAD. Whiplash is an important cause of chronic disability. Many controversies exist regarding the diagnosis and treatment of whiplash injuries. The multifactorial etiology, believed to underly whiplash injuries, make management highly variable between patients. Radiographic evidence of injury often cannot be identified in the acute phase. Recent studies suggest early mobilization may lead to improved outcomes. Ligamentous and bony injuries may go undetected at initial presentation leading to delayed diagnosis and inappropriate therapies

Improving the Army's joint platform allocation tool (JPAT)

The U.S. Army's joint platform allocation tool (JPAT) is an integer linear program that was developed by the Army's Training and Doctrine Command Analysis Center and the Naval Postgraduate School to help inform acquisition decisions involving aerial reconnaissance and surveillance (R&S) resources. JPAT evaluates inputs such as mission requirements, locations of available equipment, and budgetary constraints to determine an effective assignment of unmanned aerial R&S assets to missions. As of September 2013, JPAT is solved using a rolling horizon approach, which produces a sub-optimal solution, and requires substantial computational resources to solve a problem of realistic size. Because JPAT is an integer linear program, it is a suitable candidate for using decomposition techniques to improve its computational efficiency. This thesis conducts an analysis of multiple approaches for increasing JPAT's computational efficiency. First, we reformulate JPAT using Benders decomposition. Then, we solve both the original and decomposed formulations using the simplex and barrier algorithms with multiple size datasets. In addition, we experiment with an initial heuristic solution and other techniques in our attempts to improve JPAT's runtime. We find that while Benders decomposition does not result in significant improvements in computation time for the instances considered in this thesis, initial solution heuristics and other modifications to the model improve JPAT's performance.http://archive.org/details/improvingarmysjo1094537635Lieutenant, United States NavyApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited

Why do patients decline surgical trials? Findings from a qualitative interview study embedded in the Cancer Research UK BOLERO trial (Bladder cancer: Open versus Lapararoscopic or RObotic cystectomy)

Background Surgical trials have typically experienced recruitment difficulties when compared with other types of oncology trials. Qualitative studies have an important role to play in exploring reasons for low recruitment, although to date few such studies have been carried out that are embedded in surgical trials. The BOLERO trial (Bladder cancer: Open versus Lapararoscopic or RObotic cystectomy) is a study to determine the feasibility of randomisation to open versus laparoscopic access/robotic cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer. We describe the results of a qualitative study embedded within the clinical trial that explored why patients decline randomisation. Methods Ten semi-structured interviews with patients who declined randomisation to the clinical trial, and two interviews with recruiting research nurses were conducted. Data were analysed for key themes. Results The majority of patients declined the trial because they had preferences for a particular treatment arm, and in usual practice could choose which surgical method they would be given. In most cases the robotic option was preferred. Patients described an intuitive ‘sense’ that favoured the new technology and had carried out their own inquiries, including Internet research and talking with previous patients and friends and family with medical backgrounds. Medical histories and lifestyle considerations also shaped these personalised choices. Of importance too, however, were the messages patients perceived from their clinical encounters. Whilst some patients felt their surgeon favoured the robotic option, others interpreted ‘indirect’ cues such as the ‘established’ reputation of the surgeon and surgical method and comments made during clinical assessments. Many patients expressed a wish for greater direction from their surgeon when making these decisions. Conclusion For trials where the ‘new technology’ is available to patients, there will likely be difficulties with recruitment. Greater attention could be paid to how messages about treatment options and the trial are conveyed across the whole clinical setting. However, if it is too difficult to challenge such messages, then questions should be asked about whether genuine and convincing equipoise can be presented and perceived in such trials. This calls for consideration of whether alternative methods of generating evidence could be used when evaluating surgical techniques which are established and routinely available

Return to Play after Cervical Spine Injuries: A Consensus of Opinion

Study Design: Survey. Objective: Sports-related spinal cord injury (SCI) represents a growing proportion of total SCIs but lacks evidence or guidelines to guide clinical decision-making on return to play (RTP). Our objective is to offer the treating physician a consensus analysis of expert opinion regarding RTP that can be incorporated with the unique factors of a case for clinical decision-making. Methods: Ten common clinical scenarios involving neurapraxia and stenosis, atlantoaxial injury, subaxial injury, and general cervical spine injury were presented to 25 spine surgeons from level 1 trauma centers for whom spine trauma is a significant component of their practice. We evaluated responses to questions about patient RTP, level of contact, imaging required for a clinical decision, and time to return for each scenario. The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis, with p \u3c 0.05 considered significant. Results: Evaluation of the surgeons’ responses to these cases showed significant consensus regarding return to high-contact sports in cases of cervical cord neurapraxia without symptoms or stenosis, surgically repaired herniated disks, and nonoperatively healed C1 ring or C2 hangman’s fractures. Greater variability was found in recommendations for patients showing persistent clinical symptomatology. Conclusion: This survey suggests a consensus among surgeons for allowing patients with relatively normal imaging and resolution of symptoms to return to high-contact activities; however, patients with cervical stenosis or clinical symptoms continue to be a challenge for management. This survey may serve as a basis for future clinical trials and consensus guidelines