Surgery for spinal deformity was previously carried out only in teaching hospitals in the United Kingdom. With increasing numbers of patients especially adults, seeking treatment for spinal deformity, the number of centres offering treatment for spinal deformity is going to have to increase.

The deformity part of the Spinal Surgical Service in the District General Hospital in Taunton started in 2005. This paper is an audit of this deformity service. It looks at two key areas – that of patient satisfaction and patient reported outcomes of surgery. Patient satisfaction was assessed by a validated questionnaire that evaluated a patient's perception of consultations, consent, preoperative assessment, operative and post operative experience and follows up visits. Patient reported outcomes were evaluated using the SRS 30 questionnaire. 104 patients were contacted and 95 patients (91%) responded. The overall patient satisfaction rate was 96%, with 87% very pleased with the result of surgery, 80% felt that their body shape had improved considerably, 62% had an increased ability to carry out day to day activities to a much higher level and 78% had significantly decreased pain after surgery. The results of the different domains of the SRS questionnaire also supported this.

The authors believe that this audit proves that it is possible to provide a spinal deformity service in a District General Hospital in the United Kingdom safely and effectively with a high degree of patient satisfaction. Audits of this kind are required to compare results of treatment between different centres and establish standards.

Use of epidural analgesia post-operatively in spinal surgery is becoming increasingly common. We have conducted a prospective study examining the side-effects associated with epidurals and the need for additional analgesia in 36 adult patients undergoing either lumbar spine decompression, lumbar spine fusion, or a combination of decompression and fusion. A mixture of bupivacaine and fentanyl was used for up to 72 hours post-operatively via an epidural catheter placed under direct vision at the time of surgery. All patients had urinary catheters inserted peri-operatively.

15 patients experienced one or more side-effects; 6 patients had a subjectively unpleasant sensory block, 3 patients developed a motor block, 4 patients had pruritus, 3 developed hypotension, and 2 had episodes of nausea or vomiting. All these features resolved upon reduction of the epidural rate or cessation of the epidural. All patients required additional oral analgesia at some point during their observation. There were no serious complications, such as infection, permanent neurological deficit, or cord compression.

We conclude epidural analgesia following lumbar spine surgery is a safe practice, although the high rate of side-effects necessitates close observation by fully trained staff. It appears additional oral analgesia is required to obtain satisfactory levels of analgesia.