Objective evaluations of resident performance can be difficult to simulate. A novel competency based surgical OSCE was developed to evaluate surgical skill. The goal of this study was to test the construct validity comparing previously validated Ottawa scores (O-scores) and Orthopaedic in-training evaluation scores (OITE).

An OSCE designed to simulate typical general orthopaedic surgical cases was developed to evaluate resident surgical performance. Post-graduate year (PGY) 3–5 trainees have an encounter (interview and physical exam) with a standardized patient and perform a correlating surgery on a cadaver. Examiners evaluate all components of the treatment plan and provide an overall score on the OSCE and also provide an O-score on overall surgical performance. Convergent and divergent validity was assessed comparing OSCE scores to O-scores and OITE scores. SPSS was used for statistical analysis. ANOVA was used to compare PGY averages and Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to compare OSCE versus O-score and OITE scores.

A total of 96 simulated surgical cases were evaluated over a 3 year period for 24 trainees. There was a significant difference in OSCE scores based on year of training. (PGY3 − 6.06/15, PGY4 − 8.16/15 and PGY5 − 11.14/15, p < 0 .001). OSCE and O-scores demonstrated a strong positive correlation of +0.89 while OSCE and OITE scores demonstrated a moderate positive correlation of 0.68.

OSCE scores demonstrated strong convergent and moderate divergent correlation. A positive trajectory based on level of training and stronger correlations with established, validated scores supports the construct validity of the novel surgical OSCE.

Purpose

Bone morphogenic protein (BMP-2) is used in spinal arthrodesis to induce bone growth. Studies have demonstrated that it achieves similar fusion rates compared to iliac crest bone graft when used in instrumented fusions. Our study aims at evaluating the requirement for instrumentation in one and two-level spinal arthrodeses when BMP-2 is used in conjunction with local bone to achieve fusion.

The referral time for spine surgery consultation in Halifax is approximately one year. We currently do not understand the significance of delay in surgical consultation, nor do we have documentation of patient-perceived effects of this delay. Identifying patient characteristics associated with spine pathology mandating earlier surgical intervention would have obvious benefit in streamlining this population in our referral pattern. Furthermore, outlining patient characteristics who are unlikely to benefit from orthopaedic surgical assessment for spine surgery may facilitate community management of spinal pathology and accordingly improve wait times for surgical consultation.

The aim of this study was to Identify patient variables that are predictive of need for early surgical evaluation. Also, to assess patient and surgeon satisfaction with wait times for consultation.

Demographic data and questionnaires were prospectively collected on all consenting patients seen by two orthopaedic spine surgeons over a two week period. Patient and surgeon impression of wait was documented, in addition to Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) to document pain. Surgeon reasons for scheduling or delaying surgical planning were also documented and correlated to patient scores.

The average wait time for surgical consultation was 9.7 months, with a mode of sixteen months. 62.8% of patients felt that earlier consultation would be more appropriate, while 31.1% felt that they had deteriorated due to the delay. In addition, 26% felt that the delay negatively influenced their prognosis. Treating surgeons felt that the patient should have been seen sooner in 39% of cases, and that delay in consultation negatively affected prognosis in 6.2% of cases. Of two hundred and forty-two patients completing the survey over the two week period, only ten (4.1%) were scheduled for surgery.

Both patients and physicians felt that prolonged referral-consultation wait times were unacceptable, and deleteriously affected prognosis in a significant proportion of cases. The majority of patients seen were not deemed surgical candidates, indicating room for improvement in referral patterns.

Purpose: To develop a regression equation using preoperative variables to predict the likelihood of transfusion intra- or post- operatively for patients undergoing elective spinal fusion surgery.

Methods: This study was a retrospective chart review of patients (n=774; 51% female; mean age=56 years; mean BMI=29) who underwent elective spinal fusion surgery between February 2001 and May 2005 at the QEII Health Sciences Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The variables recorded were incidence of allogeneic and autologous transfusions (intra- and post-operatively), body mass index, age, gender, number of spinal levels fused, preoperative hemoglobin and hematocrit, ASA grade and pedicle screw and bone graft use.

Results: Spinal fusion of 4 or more levels (n=24) resulted in a transfusion rate of 83%, therefore, the regression equation was calculated using only spinal fusions of 1 to 3 levels (n=750; transfusion rate=14%). The number of spinal levels fused and preoperative hemoglobin levels were found to be significantly related to the likelihood of receiving a transfusion. A predictive logistic regression equation was derived (Prediction = 3.615 + 1.018 x Levels fused–0.052 x Preop Hgb) where a probability cutoff of 0.160 gave a sensitivity of 63.5% and a specificity of 81.2%.

Conclusions: The high sensitivity and specificity of the regression equation suggest that the results are clinically useful for determining whether alternatives to allogeneic transfusions should be investigated preoperatively for each patient undergoing elective spinal fusion surgery. The results could also have economic implications because implementing the use of a cell salvage device would be less costly than allogeneic units if the patient required a transfusion.