3 research outputs found

    Regional variability in use of a novel assessment of thoracolumbar spine fractures: United States versus international surgeons

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Considerable variability exists in clinical approaches to thoracolumbar fractures. Controversy in evaluation and nomenclature contribute to this confusion, with significant differences found between physicians, between different specialties, and in different geographic regions. A new classification system for thoracolumbar injuries, the Thoracolumbar Injury Severity Score (TLISS), was recently described by Vaccaro. No assessment of regional differences has been described. We report regional variability in use of the TLISS system between United States and non-US surgeons.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Twenty-eight spine surgeons (8 neurosurgeons and 20 orthopedic surgeons) reviewed 56 clinical thoracolumbar injury case histories, which included pertinent imaging studies. Cases were classified and scored using the TLISS system. After a three month period, the case histories were re-ordered and the physicians repeated the exercise; 22 physicians completed both surveys and were used to assess intra-rater reliability. The reliability and treatment validity of the TLISS was assessed. Surgeons were grouped into US (n = 15) and non-US (n = 13) cohorts. Inter-rater (both within and between different geographic groups) and intra-rater reliability was assessed by percent agreement, Cohen's kappa, kappa with linear weighting, and Spearman's rank-order correlation.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Non-US surgeons were found to have greater inter-rater reliability in injury mechanism, while agreement on neurological status and posterior ligamentous complex integrity tended to be higher among US surgeons. Inter-rater agreement on management was moderate, although it tended to be higher in US-surgeons. Inter-rater agreement between US and non-US surgeons was similar to within group inter-rater agreement for all categories. While intra-rater agreement for mechanism tended to be higher among US surgeons, intra-rater reliability for neurological status and PLC was slightly higher among non-US surgeons. Intra-rater reliability for management was substantial in both US and non-US surgeons. The TLISS incorporates generally accepted features of spinal injury assessment into a simple patient evaluation tool. The management recommendation of the treatment algorithm component of the TLISS shows good inter-rater and substantial intra-rater reliability in both non-US and US based spine surgeons. The TLISS may improve communication between health providers and may contribute to more efficient management of thoracolumbar injuries.</p

    Surgical Decision Making for Unstable Thoracolumbar Spine Injuries: Results of a Consensus Panel Review by the Spine Trauma Study Group

    Get PDF
    Objectives: The optimal surgical approach and treatment of unstable thoracolumbar spine injuries are poorly defined owing to a lack of widely accepted level I clinical literature. This lack of evidence based standards has led to varied practice patterns based on individual surgeon preferences. The purpose of this study was to survey the leaders in the field of spine trauma to define the major characteristics of thoracolumbar injuries that influence their surgical decision making. In the absence of good scientific data, expert consensus opinions may provide surgeons with a practical framework to guide therapy and to conduct future research. Methods: A panel of 22 leading spinal surgeons from 20 level I trauma centers in seven countries met to discuss the indications for surgical approach selection in unstable thoracolumbar injuries. Injuries were presented to the surgeons in a case scenario survey format. Preferred surgical approaches to the clinical scenarios were tabulated and comments weighed. Results: All members of the panel agreed that three independent characteristics of thoracolumbar injuries carry primary importance in surgical decision making: the injury morphology, the neurologic status of the patient, and the integrity of the posterior ligaments. Six clinical scenarios based on the neurologic status of the patient (intact, incomplete, or complete) and on the status of the posterior ligamentous complex (intact or disrupted) were created, and consensus treatment approaches were described. Additional circumstances capable of altering the treatments were acknowledged. Conclusions: Decision making for the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar injuries is largely dependent on three patient characteristics: injury morphology, neurologic status, and posterior ligament integrity. A logical and practical decision-making process based on these characteristics may guide treatment even for the most complicated fracture patterns

    The Sub-axial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System (SLIC): A Novel Approach to Recognize The Importance of Morphology, Neurology and Integrity of the Disco-ligamentous complex

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Context Despite technological advances in spine surgery, classification of sub-axial cervical spine injuries remains largely descriptive, lacking standardization and any relationship to prognosis or clinical decision making. Purpose The primary purpose of this paper is to define a classification system for sub-axial cervical spine trauma that conveys information about injury pattern and severity as well as treatment considerations and prognosis. The proposed system is designed to be both comprehensive and easy to use. The secondary objective is to evaluate the classification system in the basic principles of classification construction, namely reliability and validity. Study Design/Setting Derivation of the classification was from a synthesis of the best cervical classification parameters gleaned from an exhaustive literature review and expert opinion of experienced spine surgeons. Multi-center reliability and validity study of a cervical classification system using previously collected CT, MRI, and plain film x-ray images of sub-axial cervical trauma. Methods Important clinical and radiographic variables encountered in sub-axial cervical trauma were identified by a working section of the Spine Trauma Study Group (STSG). Significant limitations of existing injury classification systems were defined and addressed within the new system. It was then introduced to the STSG and applied to 11 cervical trauma cases selected to represent a spectrum of subaxial injury. Six weeks later, the cases were randomly re-ordered and again scored using the novel classification system. Twenty surgeons completed both intervals. Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability and several forms of validity were assessed. For comparison, the reliability of both the Harris and the Ferguson & Allen systems were also evaluated. Results Each of three main categories (injury morphology; disco-ligamentous complex integrity; and neurological status) identified as integrally important to injury description, treatment, and prognosis was assigned an ordinal score range, weighted according to its perceived contribution to overall injury severity. A composite injury severity score was modeled by summing the scores from all three categories. Treatment options were assigned based upon threshold values of the severity score. Inter-rater agreement as assessed by ICC of the DLC, Morphology, and Neurological Status scores was 0.49, 0.57, and 0.87, respectively. Intra-rater agreement as assessed by ICC of the DLC, Morphology, and Neurological Status scores was 0.66, 0.75, and 0.90, respectively. Raters agreed with treatment recommendations of the algorithm in 93.3 % of cases, suggesting high construct validity. The reliability if the SLIC treatment algorithm compared favorably to the earlier classification systems of Harris and Ferguson & Allen. Conclusions The Sub-axial Injury Classification (SLIC) and Severity Scale provides a comprehensive classification system for sub-axial cervical trauma, incorporating pertinent characteristics for generating prognoses and courses of management. Early data on validity and reliability are encouraging. Further testing is necessary before introducing the SLIC score into clinical practice
    corecore