Limits...
Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery.

Ueda H, Cutler HS, Guzman JZ, Cho SK - Global Spine J (2015)

Bottom Line: Thirty-three of the PROIs were appeared in only 1 article.Among the included articles, 16% were of level 1 evidence and 32% were of level 4 evidence.A consensus on which instruments to use for a given diagnosis or procedure is lacking and may be necessary for better communication and comparison, as well as for the accumulation and analysis of vast clinical data across multiple studies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States.

ABSTRACT
Study Design Bibliometric analysis. Objective To determine trends, frequency, and distribution of patient-reported outcome instruments (PROIs) in degenerative cervical spine surgery literature over the past decade. Methods A search was conducted via PubMed from 2004 to 2013 on five journals (The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Spine Journal, European Spine Journal, and Spine), which were chosen based on their impact factors and authors' consensus. All abstracts were screened and articles addressing degenerative cervical spine surgery using PROIs were included. Articles were then analyzed for publication date, study design, journal, level of evidence, and PROI trends. Prevalence of PROIs and level of evidence of included articles were analyzed. Results From 19,736 articles published, 241 articles fulfilled our study criteria. Overall, 53 distinct PROIs appeared. The top seven most frequently used PROIs were: Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (104 studies), visual analog scale for pain (100), Neck Disability Index (72), Short Form-36 (38), Nurick score (25), Odom criteria (21), and Oswestry Disability Index (15). Only 11 PROIs were used in 5 or more articles. Thirty-three of the PROIs were appeared in only 1 article. Among the included articles, 16% were of level 1 evidence and 32% were of level 4 evidence. Conclusion Numerous PROIs are currently used in degenerative cervical spine surgery. A consensus on which instruments to use for a given diagnosis or procedure is lacking and may be necessary for better communication and comparison, as well as for the accumulation and analysis of vast clinical data across multiple studies.

No MeSH data available.


Trend of the use of each top-five patient-reported outcome instruments: (A) (JOA), (B) visual analog scale (VAS), (C) Neck Disability Index (NDI), (D) Short Form-36 (SF36), (E) Nurick score.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4836929&req=5

FI1500065-5: Trend of the use of each top-five patient-reported outcome instruments: (A) (JOA), (B) visual analog scale (VAS), (C) Neck Disability Index (NDI), (D) Short Form-36 (SF36), (E) Nurick score.

Mentions: With the advent of evidence-based medicine, research in the field of spine surgery increasingly requires objective statistical analyses of the treatment outcomes. Accordingly, researchers have responded by turning to PROIs to evaluate the health care outcomes.123 PROIs are powerful tools for evaluating clinical results and objectively quantifying outcome success. In this study, the use of PROIs in degenerative cervical spine surgery was found to be increasing in five top-impact orthopedic and spine surgery journals in the past 10 years. Among the PROIs used in these journals, ∼30% occurred in the previous 2 years (2012 to 2013) and ∼41% in the previous 3 years (2011 to 2013).6789101112 Among the 241 articles, PROIs were used 465 times, a mean of 1.9 PROIs per study. Among the top PROIs, the JOA and NDI were used the most over the past decade. Although increasing, the SF-36 was not utilized significantly over the past decade despite the value of this health-related quality-of-life instrument in calculating quality-adjusted life-years and analyzing cost-effectiveness. Given that cost-effectiveness studies will be of increasing interest in the coming years, investigators should consider using the SF-36 or other validated scales with the capability of providing cost-effectiveness data (Fig. 5).


Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery.

Ueda H, Cutler HS, Guzman JZ, Cho SK - Global Spine J (2015)

Trend of the use of each top-five patient-reported outcome instruments: (A) (JOA), (B) visual analog scale (VAS), (C) Neck Disability Index (NDI), (D) Short Form-36 (SF36), (E) Nurick score.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4836929&req=5

FI1500065-5: Trend of the use of each top-five patient-reported outcome instruments: (A) (JOA), (B) visual analog scale (VAS), (C) Neck Disability Index (NDI), (D) Short Form-36 (SF36), (E) Nurick score.
Mentions: With the advent of evidence-based medicine, research in the field of spine surgery increasingly requires objective statistical analyses of the treatment outcomes. Accordingly, researchers have responded by turning to PROIs to evaluate the health care outcomes.123 PROIs are powerful tools for evaluating clinical results and objectively quantifying outcome success. In this study, the use of PROIs in degenerative cervical spine surgery was found to be increasing in five top-impact orthopedic and spine surgery journals in the past 10 years. Among the PROIs used in these journals, ∼30% occurred in the previous 2 years (2012 to 2013) and ∼41% in the previous 3 years (2011 to 2013).6789101112 Among the 241 articles, PROIs were used 465 times, a mean of 1.9 PROIs per study. Among the top PROIs, the JOA and NDI were used the most over the past decade. Although increasing, the SF-36 was not utilized significantly over the past decade despite the value of this health-related quality-of-life instrument in calculating quality-adjusted life-years and analyzing cost-effectiveness. Given that cost-effectiveness studies will be of increasing interest in the coming years, investigators should consider using the SF-36 or other validated scales with the capability of providing cost-effectiveness data (Fig. 5).

Bottom Line: Thirty-three of the PROIs were appeared in only 1 article.Among the included articles, 16% were of level 1 evidence and 32% were of level 4 evidence.A consensus on which instruments to use for a given diagnosis or procedure is lacking and may be necessary for better communication and comparison, as well as for the accumulation and analysis of vast clinical data across multiple studies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States.

ABSTRACT
Study Design Bibliometric analysis. Objective To determine trends, frequency, and distribution of patient-reported outcome instruments (PROIs) in degenerative cervical spine surgery literature over the past decade. Methods A search was conducted via PubMed from 2004 to 2013 on five journals (The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Spine Journal, European Spine Journal, and Spine), which were chosen based on their impact factors and authors' consensus. All abstracts were screened and articles addressing degenerative cervical spine surgery using PROIs were included. Articles were then analyzed for publication date, study design, journal, level of evidence, and PROI trends. Prevalence of PROIs and level of evidence of included articles were analyzed. Results From 19,736 articles published, 241 articles fulfilled our study criteria. Overall, 53 distinct PROIs appeared. The top seven most frequently used PROIs were: Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (104 studies), visual analog scale for pain (100), Neck Disability Index (72), Short Form-36 (38), Nurick score (25), Odom criteria (21), and Oswestry Disability Index (15). Only 11 PROIs were used in 5 or more articles. Thirty-three of the PROIs were appeared in only 1 article. Among the included articles, 16% were of level 1 evidence and 32% were of level 4 evidence. Conclusion Numerous PROIs are currently used in degenerative cervical spine surgery. A consensus on which instruments to use for a given diagnosis or procedure is lacking and may be necessary for better communication and comparison, as well as for the accumulation and analysis of vast clinical data across multiple studies.

No MeSH data available.