Aims

Psychoeducative prehabilitation to optimize surgical outcomes is relatively novel in spinal fusion surgery and, like most rehabilitation treatments, they are rarely well specified. Spinal fusion patients experience anxieties perioperatively about pain and immobility, which might prolong hospital length of stay (LOS). The aim of this prospective cohort study was to determine if a Preoperative Spinal Education (POSE) programme, specified using the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) and designed to normalize expectations and reduce anxieties, was safe and reduced LOS.

Aims. With resumption of elective spine surgery services in the UK following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a multicentre British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) collaborative study to examine the complications and deaths due to COVID-19 at the recovery phase of the pandemic. The aim was to analyze the safety of elective spinal surgery during the pandemic. Methods. A prospective observational study was conducted from eight spinal centres for the first month of operating following restoration of elective spine surgery in each individual unit. Primary outcome measure was the 30-day postoperative COVID-19 infection rate. Secondary outcomes analyzed were the 30-day mortality rate, surgical adverse events, medical complications, and length of inpatient stay. Results. In all, 257 patients (128 males) with a median age of 54 years (2 to 88) formed the study cohort. The mean number of procedures performed from each unit was 32 (16 to 101), with 118 procedures (46%) done as category three prioritization level. The majority of patients (87%) were low-medium “risk stratification” category and the mean length of hospital stay was 5.2 days. None of the patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection, nor was there any mortality related to COVID-19 during the 30-day follow-up period, with 25 patients (10%) having been tested for symptoms. Overall, 32 patients (12%) developed a total of 34 complications, with the majority (19/34) being grade 1 to 2 Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications. No patient required postoperative care in an intensive care setting for any unexpected complication. Conclusion. This study shows that safe and effective planned spinal surgical services can be restored avoiding viral transmission, with diligent adherence to national guidelines and COVID-19-secure pathways tailored according to the resources of the individual spinal units. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1096–1101

Aims

As the population ages and the surgical complexity of lumbar spinal surgery increases, the preoperative stratification of risk becomes increasingly important. Understanding the risks is an important factor in decision-making and optimizing the preoperative condition of the patient. Our aim was to determine whether the modified five-item frailty index (mFI-5) and nutritional parameters could be used to predict postoperative complications in patients undergoing simple or complex lumbar spinal fusion.

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore risk factors for complications associated with dural tear (DT), including the types of DT, and the intra- and postoperative management of DT.

Informed consent is a very important part of surgical treatment. In this paper, we report a number of legal judgements in spinal surgery where there was no criticism of the surgical procedure itself. The fault that was identified was a failure to inform the patient of alternatives to, and material risks of, surgery, or overemphasizing the benefits of surgery. In one case, there was a promise that a specific surgeon was to perform the operation, which did not ensue. All of the faults in these cases were faults purely of the consenting process. In many cases, the surgeon claimed to have explained certain risks to the patient but was unable to provide proof of doing so. We propose a checklist that, if followed, would ensure that the surgeon would take their patients through the relevant matters but also, crucially, would act as strong evidence in any future court proceedings that the appropriate discussions had taken place. Although this article focuses on spinal surgery, the principles and messages are applicable to the whole of orthopaedic surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:355–360.

Introduction. Guidelines from the North American Spine Society (2009 and 2013) are the best evidence-based instructions on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and antibiotic prophylaxis in spinal surgery. NICE guidelines exist for VTE prophylaxis but do not specifically address spinal surgery. In addition, the ruling of the UK Supreme Court in 2015 resulted in new guidance on consent being published by the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSEng). This study assesses our compliance in antibiotic, VTE prophylaxis and consent in spinal surgery against both US and UK standards. Methods. Retrospective review of spinal operations performed between August and December 2016. Case notes, consent forms and operation notes were analysed for consent, peri-operative antibiotic prescribing and post-operative VTE instructions. Results. Four Spinal surgeons performed 45 operations during this period. 31 patients (69%) received a copy of the signed consent with this process being formally documented in 22 (71%) of those cases. All patients were consented by a competent surgeon. 82% of cases consented prior to the date of procedure were countersigned on the day of operation. There was a mean time of 25.3 days between initial consent and operation (Range: 0–170). 37 (82%) cases had clear instructions for VTE and antibiotic prophylaxis. All prescribed post-operative antibiotics were administered. Discussion. The North American Guidelines state that prophylactic antibiotic is appropriate in all spinal surgery with prolonged cases requiring intraoperative re-dosing and only complex cases needing a postoperative regimen. Eight patients underwent a complex procedure and 7 appropriately received postoperative antibiotics. Of the 29 patients that underwent a simple procedure, 12 did not receive post-operative regimen, in line with the guidelines. However, the remainder 17 were over treated. The US Guidelines recommend mechanical VTE prophylaxis only in elective spinal surgery except in high risk patients. All our patients received VTE mechanical prophylaxis. RCSEng guidelines require consent being taken prior to procedure by a competent surgeon and confirmed on day of procedure. All patients in our cohort were consented prior to the date of operation allowing time for considering options and independent research. 82% of patients had consent confirmed on day of operation. Conclusion. This study demonstrates that we met guideline advice for all patients with regards VTE prophylaxis. We have a tendency to over treat with post-operative antibiotics and not all patients had their consent confirmed on day of procedure but was consented well before day of operation. North America still lead the way with guidelines on spinal surgery to which we should adhere, with NICE guidelines providing limited instructions. New consenting guidelines from RCSEng may not be currently widely known and thus should be a source of education for all surgeons

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine whether the sequential application of povidone iodine-alcohol (PVI) followed by chlorhexidine gluconate-alcohol (CHG) would reduce surgical wound contamination to a greater extent than PVI applied twice in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

Aims. To evaluate the incidence of primary venous thromboembolism (VTE), epidural haematoma, surgical site infection (SSI), and 90-day mortality after elective spinal surgery, and the effect of two protocols for prophylaxis. Patients and Methods. A total of 2181 adults underwent 2366 elective spinal procedures between January 2007 and January 2012. All patients wore anti-embolic stockings, mobilised early and were kept adequately hydrated. In addition, 29% (689) of these were given low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) while in hospital. SSI surveillance was undertaken using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria. Results. In patients who only received mechanical prophylaxis, the incidence of VTE was 0.59% and that of SSI 2.1%. In patients who were additionally given LMWH, the incidence of VTE was 0% and that of SSI 0.7%. The unadjusted p-value was 0.04 for VTE and 0.01 for SSI. There were no cases of epidural haematoma or 90-day mortality in either group. When adjusted for case-mix, LMWH remained a significant factor (p = 0.006) for VTE, but not for SSI. Conclusion. A peri-operative protocol involving mechanical anti-embolism stockings, adequate hydration, and early post-operative mobilisation is effective in significantly reducing the incidence of VTE. The addition of LMWH is safe in patients at higher risk of developing VTE. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1204–9

Purpose of Study/Background. To identify whether patients were satisfied with the overall educational component of the specialist nurse (CNS)/occupational therapist (OT) led pre-operative assessment clinic in order to identify areas which required improvement. The pre-operative specialist nurse led clinic was set up in 2002. The aim was to provide high quality information to patients undergoing elective spinal surgery in order to manage expectations and optimise post-operative recovery. Initially the clinic was specialist nurse led however, in 2006 occupational therapy input was introduced in order to provide an increased depth of information in regard to function and activities of daily living post operatively. In addition this has allowed assistive equipment to be provided pre-operatively. The format of this clinic has enhanced the patient's journey by facilitating reduced length of stay and more timely discharge. Methodology. A questionnaire was forwarded to a random sample of two hundred patients who attended for pre-operative assessment in the twelve-month period between April 2014 & March 2015. Sixty questionnaires were returned (30% response rate). Results/Summary. Patients were asked 17 questions in total, 3 general, 6 regarding CNS and 8 regarding OT. The responses were rated ‘very good’; ‘good’ ‘average; ‘poor’. In the returned audits no ‘poor’ responses were recorded. Clarity of information given: Very Good-56%; Good-39%; Average-5%. Overall experience of pre-operative assessment: Very Good-66%; Good- 32%; Average-2%. Advice given by OT: Very Good-82%; Good-16%; Average-2%. Information given by CNS: Very Good-75%; Good-23%; Average-2%. Conclusions. The results indicate that the OT and CNS specialist education sessions are considered valuable by patients. We believe that we have achieved this through good team-working in a multidisciplinary setting. Patients who attend these clinics are often anxious regarding surgery, have un-realistic expectations in relation to what to expect post-operatively. A significant number of our patients are elderly and have multiple pathologies which we take into account. The education sessions link into our patient information leaflets which, expand on this allowing patients to clarify matters and ask questions. No Conflicts of Interest. No Funding Obtained

Many hospitals do not have a structured process of consent, the attainment of which can often be rather ‘last-minute’ and somewhat chaotic. This is a surprising state of affairs as spinal surgery is a high-risk surgical specialty with potential for expensive litigation claims. More recently, the Montgomery ruling by the United Kingdom Supreme Court has placed the subject of informed consent into the spotlight.

There is a paucity of practical guidance on how a consent process can be achieved in a busy clinical setting. The British Association of Spinal Surgeons (BASS) has convened a working party to address this need. To our knowledge this is the first example of a national professional body, representing a single surgical specialty, taking such a fundamental initiative.

In a hard-pressed clinical environment, the ability to achieve admission reliably on the day of surgery, in patients at ease with their situation and with little likelihood of late cancellation, will be of great benefit. It will reduce litigation and improve the patient experience.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1427–30.

Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in the scores of patient-reported outcome measures allow clinicians to assess the outcome of intervention from the perspective of the patient. There has been significant variation in their absolute values in previous publications and a lack of consistency in their calculation. The purpose of this study was first, to establish whether these values, following spinal surgery, vary depending on the surgical intervention and their method of calculation and secondly, to assess whether there is any correlation between the two external anchors most frequently used to calculate the MCID. . We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively gathered data of adult patients who underwent elective spinal surgery between 1994 and 2009. A total of 244 patients were included. There were 125 men and 119 women with a mean age of 54 years (16 to 84); the mean follow-up was 62 months (6 to 199) The MCID was calculated using three previously published methods. Our results show that the value of the MCID varies considerably with the operation and its method of calculation. There was good correlation between the two external anchors. The global outcome tool correlated significantly better. We conclude that consensus needs to be reached on the best method of calculating the MCID. This then needs to be defined for each spinal procedure. Using a blanket value for the MCID for all spinal procedures should be avoided. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:366–71

Aim

To investigate the role of websites in enhancing patients' understanding of reason and risk of surgery as a part of informed consent for elective un-instrumented lumbar spine surgery (EULSS).

Background. The majority of studies assessing minimal clinical important difference in outcome do so for management of chronic low back pain. Those that identify MCID following spinal surgical intervention fail to differentiate between the different pathologies and treatments or use variable methods and anchors in the calculation. Aim. To identify the MCID in scores across the most common spinal surgical procedures using standardised methods of calculation. Method. Prospective longitudinal study following elective lumbar spinal surgery. All patients had a complete set of spinal outcome assessments (ODI and VAS) and self perceived rating of the global and Mcnab criteria. MCID was calculated as defined by Hagg et al. Results. 244 patients of average age 53 years were followed up for 62 months post surgery. The MCID across the range of spinal surgeries was a 10 point change in ODI and 28 points for the VAS. A MCID following lumbar decompression surgery was a 3 point change in ODI and 29 points for VAS; 24 points in ODI and 37 points in the VAS for a discectomy, and 13 points in ODI and 23 point change in VAS for revision surgery. This value also varied depending on the anchor and method used for calculation. Conclusion. The MCID in score varies between different spinal procedures, method of calculation and the external anchor used. Standardised methods of calculating MCID in outcome measures should be used to allow comparative research and assessment. Generalisation of MCID in scores across a range of spinal procedures should be strongly discouraged. Conflicts of Interest. None. Source of Funding. None. This abstract has not been previously published in whole or substantial part nor has it been presented previously at a national meeting

The October 2012 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: a Japanese questionnaire at work in Iran; curve progression in degenerative lumbar scoliosis; the cause of foot drop; the issue of avoiding the spinal cord at scoliosis surgery; ballistic injuries to the cervical spine; minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion; readmission rates after spinal surgery; clinical complications and the severely injured cervical spine; and stabilising the thoracolumbar burst fracture.

BACKGROUND. From 1995 the cost of litigation to the National Health Service (NHS) from surgical procedures has been over 1.3 billion GBP. Spinal patients can present diagnostic challenges and the consequences of delayed diagnosis and surgical complications can be devastating. As a consequence these patients represent a high risk when surgeons seek to indemnify themselves. We therefore, aim to highlight the litigation patterns for these injuries within the United Kingdom. METHOD. Data was obtained from the NHS Litigation Authority from 2002 to 2010 which was analysed. RESULTS. Of the 236 claims, 144 were related to trauma or acute diagnostic issues and 92 from elective surgery. The total financial burden to the NHS came to 60.5 million GBP/72.5 million Euros. Of this sum 42.8 million GBP/51.3 million Euros were paid in damages, and the remaining 29% in legal costs. The financial costs were on average similar for trauma and elective cases. The most frequent cause of successful litigation for trauma were, missed fractures (41.7%), missed cauda equina (23.6%) and spinal infection (11.8%). The emergency department (43.8%), orthopaedic surgery (28.5%) and Medicine (13.9) bore the brunt of the claims. For elective surgery, Spinal Damage(19.8%), failure in Post-Operative Care (15.4%), Infection (11%) and Wrong Level Surgery, Cauda Equina and Surgical Failure at 9.9%. were likely to result in a successful claim, and the litigation burden was felt by the orthopaedic(60.4%), Neurosurgery(18.7%) and other surgical disciplines (11%). CONCLUSION. Acute spinal fractures, cord compression and infection should be considered in patients in the emergency department setting, with appropriate examination and investigations for uncertainty. A lack of awareness of at risk cases increases the likelihood of a pay-out and sums involved. For elective spinal surgery, a failure in the consenting process and the technical skill of the surgeon are likely to result in a pay-out. A failure to identify post-operative complications such as infection and thromboembolism are also indefensible. Protecting patients intra-operatively and maintaining high technical expertise and vigilance post-operative in an adequately consented patient may decrease litigation rates

Background. Surgical patients have cost the NHS 1.3 billion GBP from 1995. Spinal pathologies can present diagnostic challenges, and the consequences of delayed diagnosis or surgical complications can be devastating and so creating high indemnity costs. We aim to highlight the spinal associated litigation patterns within the United Kingdom. Method. Data was obtained from the NHS Litigation Authority from 2002 to 2010. Result. From 236 claims, 144 were related to trauma or acute diagnostic issues and 92 from elective surgery. The financial burden to the NHS came to 60.5 million GBP. Of this sum 42.8 million GBP were paid in damages, and the remaining 29% in legal costs. The financial costs were similar for trauma and elective cases. The most frequent cause of successful litigation for trauma were, missed fractures(41.7%), missed cauda equina(23.6%) and spinal infection(11.8%). The emergency department(43.8%), orthopaedic surgery(28.5%) and Medicine(13.9%) bore the brunt of the claims. For elective surgery, Spinal Damage(19.8%), failure in Post-Operative Care(15.4%), Infection(11%) and Wrong Level Surgery, Cauda Equina and Surgical Failure(9.9% each). were likely to result in a successful claim, and the litigation burden was felt by the orthopaedic(60.4%), Neurosurgery(18.7%) and other surgical disciplines(11%). Conclusion. Acute spinal fractures, cord compression and infection should be considered in patients in the emergency department setting, with appropriate examination and investigations for uncertainty. A lack of awareness of at risk cases increases the likelihood of a pay-out and sums involved. For elective spinal surgery, a failure in the consenting process and the technical skill of the surgeon are likely to result in a pay-out. A failure to identify post-operative complications such as infection and thromboembolism are also indefensible. Protecting patients intra-operatively and maintaining high technical expertise and vigilance post-operatively in an adequately consented patient may decrease litigation rates

To review blood transfusion practices during elective spinal surgery procedures. Prospective clinical audit. All patients who underwent elective spinal surgery between January 2009 and March 2009. Crossmatch: Transfusion ratio (C: T ratio); Transfusion index (TI) (Evaluates cost-effective crossmatch). British Haematological society standards are C:T ratio= 2.5:1 and TI>0.5. Data was collected from electronic records of blood bank, pathology system (NOTIS) and review of patient notes. A total of 194 patients underwent elective spinal surgery in our unit. (Cervical spine = 15, Thoracic spine = 3, Vertebroplasty = 10, Lumbar spine = 142, Deformity = 31, other = 8). Of these, 62 patients had 197 blood products crossmatched but only 37 units were used. C:T ratio in lumbar spine surgery was 22:1. However C: T ratio in cervical spine procedures, thoracic spine and deformity correction were 6:1, 11:0 and 4:1 respectively. TI was <0.5 in all procedures except deformity surgery (TI=1). Over- ordering of blood products is still common in spinal surgery as routine blood transfusion may not be required in most elective procedures. Therefore implementing Electronic Issue (EI) of blood products for elective spinal procedures for non deformity procedures can be a cost effective and safe practice