Purpose of the Study and Background. With a strong political agenda for change towards patient-centred healthcare, the notion of shared decision-making is reported to substantially improve patient experience, adherence to treatment and health outcomes. In clinical practice however, observational studies have shown shared decision-making is rarely implemented and patient preferences are seldom met. The aim of this study was to measure the extent of shared decision-making in clinical encounters involving physiotherapists and patients with low back pain. Methods and Results. Eighty outpatient encounters (from 12 clinicians) were observed, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the OPTION instrument. This measures 12 decision-making items, rated on a scale 0–4, which are summated and scaled to give a percentage: The higher the score, the greater the shared decision-making competency. The mean OPTION score was 24.0% (range 10.4%–43.8%). Providing patients with a list of treatment options was the only behaviour exhibited by every clinician, however in 73.8%, this was not demonstrated beyond a perfunctory level. Failure to offer the choice of doing nothing, or deferring the decision precluded clinicians from attaining a higher OPTION score. Conclusion. Despite the political agenda, a paternalistic view of care was evident and shared decision-making was under-developed in this cohort of patients with back pain. Providing a comprehensive outline of the available treatment options forms part of the duty-of-care and, whilst clinicians may have altruistic motives and a strong desire to treat, depending on patient preference and clinical indicators, doing nothing could be a legitimate option

Aims

The aim of this study was to investigate whether including the stages of ulnar physeal closure in Sanders stage 7 aids in a more accurate assessment for brace weaning in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Aims. To develop and internally validate a preoperative clinical prediction model for acute adjacent vertebral fracture (AVF) after vertebral augmentation to support preoperative decision-making, named the after vertebral augmentation (AVA) score. Methods. In this prognostic study, a multicentre, retrospective single-level vertebral augmentation cohort of 377 patients from six Japanese hospitals was used to derive an AVF prediction model. Backward stepwise selection (p < 0.05) was used to select preoperative clinical and imaging predictors for acute AVF after vertebral augmentation for up to one month, from 14 predictors. We assigned a score to each selected variable based on the regression coefficient and developed the AVA scoring system. We evaluated sensitivity and specificity for each cut-off, area under the curve (AUC), and calibration as diagnostic performance. Internal validation was conducted using bootstrapping to correct the optimism. Results. Of the 377 patients used for model derivation, 58 (15%) had an acute AVF postoperatively. The following preoperative measures on multivariable analysis were summarized in the five-point AVA score: intravertebral instability (≥ 5 mm), focal kyphosis (≥ 10°), duration of symptoms (≥ 30 days), intravertebral cleft, and previous history of vertebral fracture. Internal validation showed a mean optimism of 0.019 with a corrected AUC of 0.77. A cut-off of ≤ one point was chosen to classify a low risk of AVF, for which only four of 137 patients (3%) had AVF with 92.5% sensitivity and 45.6% specificity. A cut-off of ≥ four points was chosen to classify a high risk of AVF, for which 22 of 38 (58%) had AVF with 41.5% sensitivity and 94.5% specificity. Conclusion. In this study, the AVA score was found to be a simple preoperative method for the identification of patients at low and high risk of postoperative acute AVF. This model could be applied to individual patients and could aid in the decision-making before vertebral augmentation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):97–102

Aims. Symptomatic spinal stenosis is a very common problem, and decompression surgery has been shown to be superior to nonoperative treatment in selected patient groups. However, performing an instrumented fusion in addition to decompression may avoid revision and improve outcomes. The aim of the SpInOuT feasibility study was to establish whether a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) that accounted for the spectrum of pathology contributing to spinal stenosis, including pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch and mobile spondylolisthesis, could be conducted. Methods. As part of the SpInOuT-F study, a pilot randomized trial was carried out across five NHS hospitals. Patients were randomized to either spinal decompression alone or spinal decompression plus instrumented fusion. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at baseline and three months. The intended sample size was 60 patients. Results. Of the 90 patients screened, 77 passed the initial screening criteria. A total of 27 patients had a PI-LL mismatch and 23 had a dynamic spondylolisthesis. Following secondary inclusion and exclusion criteria, 31 patients were eligible for the study. Six patients were randomized and one underwent surgery during the study period. Given the low number of patients recruited and randomized, it was not possible to assess completion rates, quality of life, imaging, or health economic outcomes as intended. Conclusion. This study provides a unique insight into the prevalence of dynamic spondylolisthesis and PI-LL mismatch in patients with symptomatic spinal stenosis, and demonstrates that there is a need for a definitive RCT which stratifies for these groups in order to inform surgical decision-making. Nonetheless a definitive study would need further refinement in design and implementation in order to be feasible. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(8):573–579

Aims. Repeated lumbar spine surgery has been associated with inferior clinical outcomes. This study aimed to examine and quantify the impact of this association in a national clinical register cohort. Methods. This is a population-based study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine surgery (NORspine). We included 26,723 consecutive cases operated for lumbar spinal stenosis or lumbar disc herniation from January 2007 to December 2018. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), presented as the proportions reaching a patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS; defined as an ODI raw score ≤ 22) and ODI raw and change scores at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were the Global Perceived Effect scale, the numerical rating scale for pain, the EuroQoL five-dimensions health questionnaire, occurrence of perioperative complications and wound infections, and working capability. Binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine how the number of previous operations influenced the odds of not reaching a PASS. Results. The proportion reaching a PASS decreased from 66.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 65.4 to 66.7) in cases with no previous operation to 22.0% (95% CI 15.2 to 30.3) in cases with four or more previous operations (p < 0.001). The odds of not reaching a PASS were 2.1 (95% CI 1.9 to 2.2) in cases with one previous operation, 2.6 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.0) in cases with two, 4.4 (95% CI 3.4 to 5.5) in cases with three, and 6.9 (95% CI 4.5 to 10.5) in cases with four or more previous operations. The ODI raw and change scores and the secondary outcomes showed similar trends. Conclusion. We found a dose-response relationship between increasing number of previous operations and inferior outcomes among patients operated for degenerative conditions in the lumbar spine. This information should be considered in the shared decision-making process prior to elective spine surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(4):422–430

Statement of purpose of study and background. As the treatment of low back pain (LBP) continues to evolve, there is greater recognition of the importance of optimising the therapeutic relationship to better deliver improved patient outcomes. Contextual effects, such as communication, have been shown to influence the therapeutic relationship, but it is not known how these factors evolve over time. This study analysed interviews from two studies (one cross-sectional and one longitudinal) to explore patients’ and physiotherapists’ perspectives of treatment outcomes and experiences in episodes of LBP in the same dialogic space. The objective was to explore the alignment between these perceptions to identify factors that influence the therapeutic relationship over time. Summary of methods used and results. Two secondary thematic analyses were undertaken, one analysing cross-sectional data and the other analysing longitudinal data, from an existing data set from the programme: “Exploring the relationship between communication and clinical decision-making in physiotherapy consultations for back pain”. All data were thematically analysed and organised using a framework approach. Six themes emerged from the cross-sectional data reporting consistency of opinion in the initial consultation stages, but highlighting inadequate patient involvement in shared decision making. Four main themes emerged from the longitudinal data, all of which reported interactional fears and anxieties identified on both the parts of the patient and the physiotherapist. Conclusion. These findings suggest that failing to involve the patient in adequately personalised treatment from the initial consultation may lead to diagnosis hunting and stereotyping behaviours within the therapeutic relationship, in turn leading to increased health resource usage. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of Funding. The primary data set was collected in a research programme funded by Arthritis Research UK (now Versus Arthritis)

Introduction. Vertebral compression fractures are the most common type of osteoporotic fracture. Though 89% of clinical fractures occur anteriorly, it is challenging to replicate these ex vivo with the underlying intervertebral discs (IVDs) present. Furthermore, the role of disc degeneration in this mechanism is poorly understood. Understanding how disc morphology alters vertebral strain distributions may lead to the utilisation of IVD metrics in fracture prediction, or inform surgical decision-making regarding instrumentation type and placement. Aim. To determine the effect of disc degeneration on the vertebral trabecular bone strain distributions in axial compression and flexion loading. Methods. Eight cadaveric thoracolumbar segments (T11-L3) were prepared (N=4 axial compression, N=4 flexion). µCT-based digital volume correlation was used to quantify trabecular strains. A bespoke loading device fixed specimens at the resultant displacement when loaded to 50N and 800N. Flexion was achieved by adding 6° wedges. Disc degeneration was quantified with Pfirrmann grading and T2 relaxation times. Results. Anterior axial strains were 80.9±39% higher than the posterior region in flexion (p<0.01), the ratio of which was correlated with T2 relaxation time (R. 2. =0.80, p<0.05). In flexion, the central-to-peripheral axial strain ratio in the endplate region was significantly higher when the underlying IVDs were non-degenerated relative to degenerated (+38.1±12%, p<0.05). No significant differences were observed in axial compression. Conclusion. Disc degeneration is a stronger determinant of the trabecular strain distribution when flexion is applied. Load transfer through non-degenerate IVDs under flexion appears to be more centralised, suggesting that disc degeneration predisposes flexion-type compression fractures by shifting high strains anteriorly. Conflicts of interest. The authors declare none. Sources of funding. This work was funded by the Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/V029452/1), and Back-to-Back

Background and Purpose. The UK's NIHR and Australia's NHMRC have funded two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to determine if lumbar fusion surgery (LFS) is more effective than best conservative care (BCC) for adults with persistent, severe low back pain (LBP) attributable to lumbar spine degeneration. We aimed to describe clinicians’ decision-making regarding suitability of patient cases for LFS or BCC and level of equipoise to randomise participants in the RCTs. Methods. Two online cross-sectional surveys distributed via UK and Australian professional networks to clinicians involved in LBP care, collected data on clinical discipline, practice setting and preferred care of five patient cases (ranging in age, pain duration, BMI, imaging findings, neurological signs/symptoms). Clinicians were also asked about willingness to randomise each patient case. Results. Of 174 responses (73 UK, 101 Australia), 70 were orthopaedic surgeons, 34 neurosurgeons, 65 allied health professionals (AHPs), 5 others. Most worked in public health services only (92% UK, 45% Australia), or a mix of public/private (36% Australia). Most respondents chose BCC as their first-choice management option for all five cases (81–93% UK, 83–91% Australia). For LFS, UK surgeons preferred TLIF (36.4%), whereas Australian surgeons preferred ALIF (54%). Willingness to randomise cases ranged from 37–60% (UK mean 50.7%), and 47–55% (Australian mean 51.9%); orthopaedic and neuro-surgeons were more willing than AHPs. Conclusion. Whilst BCC was preferred for all five patient cases, just over half of survey respondents in both the UK and Australia were willing to randomise cases to either LFS or BCC, indicating clinical equipoise (collective uncertainty) needed for RCT recruitment. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of funding. No specific funding obtained for the surveys. DB, SA, AG and NEF have funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) UK (FORENSIC-UK NIHR134859); NEF, DB and SA have funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC FORENSIC-Australia GA268233). AG has funding from Orthopaedic Research UK (combined with British Association of Spine Surgeons and British Scoliosis Society) and Innovate UK. NEF is funded through an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Investigator Grant (ID: 2018182)

Background and study purpose. Low back pain with no identified underlying cause is categorised as primary musculoskeletal pain by the International Association for the Study of Pain. In April 2021, the National Institute for Care and Excellence (NICE) published updated guidance for the management of primary chronic pain conditions in England. As part of the De-STRESS pain study, we explored the perspectives of GPs on the updated guideline and impact upon clinical practice. Methods and results. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 GPs in England. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and constant comparison techniques. GPs agreed with the recommendations restricting pharmacological options for pain management and reflected that they now had an expert reference to back-up their decision-making and could use the guidance in potentially difficult conversations with patients. Frustration was expressed by GPs about the lack of alternative options to medication, as the non-pharmacological recommendations were difficult to implement, had lengthy waiting lists, or were unavailable in their locality. Conclusion. Although GPs discussed benefits of the updated NICE guideline in potentially reducing prescriptions of ineffective and potentially harmful medications, frustration about the lack of alternative strategies added to the difficulties encountered in managing people with persistent back pain in primary care. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This study was funded by Versus Arthritis – grant number 22454; Carolyn A Chew-Graham is part-funded by NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) West Midlands

Aims. Lumbar disc prolapse is a frequent indication for surgery. The few available long-term follow-up studies focus mainly on repeated surgery for recurrent disease. The aim of this study was to analyze all reasons for additional surgery for patients operated on for a primary lumbar disc prolapse. Methods. We retrieved data from the Swedish spine register about 3,291 patients who underwent primary surgery for a lumbar disc prolapse between January 2007 and December 2008. These patients were followed until December 2020 to record all additional lumbar spine operations and the reason for them. Results. In total, 681 of the 3,291 patients (21%) needed one or more additional operations. More than three additional operations was uncommon (2%; 15/906). Overall, 906 additional operations were identified during the time period, with a mean time to the first of these of 3.7 years (SD 3.6). The most common reason for an additional operation was recurrent disc prolapse (47%; 426/906), followed by spinal stenosis or degenerative spondylolisthesis (19%; 176/906), and segmental pain (16%; 145/906). The most common surgical procedures were revision discectomy (43%; 385/906) and instrumented fusion (22%; 200/906). Degenerative spinal conditions other than disc prolapse became a more common reason for additional surgery with increasing length of follow-up. Most patients achieved the minimally important change (MIC) for the patient-reported outcomes after the index surgery. After the third additional spinal operation, only 20% (5/25) achieved the MIC in terms of leg pain, and 29% (7/24) in terms of the EuroQol five-dimension index questionnaire visual analogue scale. Conclusion. More than one in five patients operated on for a lumbar disc prolapse underwent further surgery during the 13-year follow-up period. Recurrent disc prolapse was the most common reason for additional surgery, followed by spinal stenosis and segmental pain. This study shows that additional operations after primary disc surgery are needed more frequently than previously reported, and that the outcome profoundly deteriorates after the second additional operation. The findings from this study can be used in the shared decision-making process. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):627–632

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. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 584 patients who had undergone lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal disease. The 'simple' group (SG) consisted of patients who had undergone one- or two-level posterior lumbar fusion. The 'complex' group (CG) consisted of patients who had undergone fusion over three or more levels, or combined anterior and posterior surgery. On admission, the mFI-5 was calculated and nutritional parameters collected. Results. Complications occurred in 9.3% (37/396) of patients in the SG, and 10.1% (19/167) of patients in the CG. In the SG, the important predictors of complications were age (odds ratio (OR) 1.036; p = 0.002); mFI-5 (OR 1.026 to 2.411, as score increased to 1 ≥ 2 respectively. ;. p = 0.023); albumin (OR 11.348; p < 0.001); vitamin D (OR 2.185; p = 0.032); and total lymphocyte count (OR 1.433; p = 0.011) . In the CG, the predictors of complications were albumin (OR 9.532; p = 0.002) and vitamin D (OR 3.815; p = 0.022). Conclusion. The mFI-5 and nutritional status were effective predictors of postoperative complications in the SG, but only nutritional status was successful in predicting postoperative complications in the CG. The complexity of the surgery, as well as the preoperative frailty and nutritional status of patients, should be considered when determining if it is safe to proceed with lumbar spinal fusion. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1717–1722

A statement of the purposes of the study and background:. Merely publishing clinical guidelines is insufficient to ensure their implementation in clinical practice. We aimed to clarify the decision-making processes that result in the delivery of particular treatments to patients with low back pain (LBP) in primary care and to examine clinicians' perspectives on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines for managing LBP in primary care. A summary of the methods used and the results:. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 53 purposively-sampled clinicians from south-west England. Participants were: 16 General Practitioners (GPs), 10 chiropractors, 8 acupuncturists, 8 physiotherapists, 7 osteopaths, and 4 nurses. Thematic analysis showed that official guidelines comprised just one of many inputs to clinical decision-making. Clinicians drew on personal experience and inter-professional networks and were constrained by organisational factors when deciding which treatment to prescribe, refer for, or deliver to an individual patient with LBP. Some found the guideline terminology - “non-specific LBP” - unfamiliar and of limited relevance to practice. They were frustrated by disparities between recommendations in the guidelines and the real-world situation of short consultation times, difficult-to-access specialist services and sparse commissioning of guideline-recommended treatments. A conclusion:. The NICE guidelines for managing LBP in primary care are one, relatively peripheral, influence on clinical decision-making among GPs, chiropractors, acupuncturists, physiotherapists, osteopaths, and nurses. When revised, these guidelines could be made more clinically relevant by: ensuring guideline terminology reflects clinical practice terminology; dispelling the image of guidelines as rigid and prohibiting patient-centred care; providing opportunities for clinicians to engage in experiential learning about guideline-recommended therapies; and commissioning guideline-recommended treatments for NHS patients

Introduction. Treatment of spinal metastatic disease has evolved with the advent of advanced interventional, surgical and radiation techniques. Spinal Oligometastatic disease is a low volume disease state where en bloc resection of the tumour, based on oncological principles, can achieve maximum local control (MLC). Hybrid therapy incorporating Separation surgery (>2mm clearance of the thecal sac) and Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) offer an alternative approach to achieving MLC. Hybrid therapy is also a viable option in patients eligible for SBRT who have failed conventional radiation therapy. En-bloc surgery may be a suitable option for those patients who are ineligible for or have failed SBRT. A multidisciplinary approach is particularly important in the decision-making process for these patients. Metal free instrumentation is aiding the optimization of these surgeries. The authors present a supra-regional centre's experience in managing spinal oligometastases. Methods. Retrospective review of oligometastatic spinal disease at a supra-regional centre between 2017 and 2021. Demographics, operative course, complications and Instrument type are examined. Results. Demographics: 24 patients with mean age 53.8y (range 12–77), 44% (40y–59y), 40% (60y–69y); 51% Male. Histology: Breast, Renal and Sarcoma accounted for 16.7% each; Thyroid, Prostate and Chordoma accounted for 8.3% each. Primary disease 7%, Synchronous 15%, Metachronous 78%. Instrumentation: Carbon-fibre (85%), TiAl (11%), Non-Instrumented (3%). Separation Surgery (70%), En-bloc resection/Tomita surgery (30%); SABR/Proton Beam Planned: 70%. Average length of hospital stays 19.1 days; twenty patients required intensive care admission for an average 2.7 days. 30 Day Mortality 8.3% (n=2: COVID-19 during admission and ventriculitis post discharge), 1y Mortality – 16.7%, 3y Mortality – 25%; Synchronous Mortality 75% (n=3) at 3 years. 30 Day infection rate 3%; 1y infection rate 7%. 1 Non-instrumented case developed proximal junctional failure post proton beam therapy and required a vascularised fibular strut graft. 2-year Revision for Local Recurrence 5% (Revision at 23 months). Conclusion. There are very few case series of oligometastatic spinal disease due to the relatively new concept of adjuvant SABR and its limited availability. Solid tumours pre-dominated the histology in our series with metachronous disease being the most commonly operated disease state. 92% of cases were eligible for SABR. The majority (85%) of cases were performed with Carbon-fibre instrumentation and has been shown to be safe with no mechanical failures in this series. Infection rates are in keeping with patients requiring radical radiotherapy with 3% early and 7% late. 30-day mortality was 8.3%, 1y=16.7% and 25% at last follow up. Mortality, as expected, is highest within the synchronous disease group and should be operated on sparingly. With the current management strategy, there was no local recurrence at 1 year and excellent local recurrence rate at 2 years (5%). Although radical en bloc surgery carries significant morbidity, it should be considered in selective cases to achieve MLC. All Oligometastatic cases deserve extra consideration and specialist MDT as not all are suitable for SABR. Multimodal Hybrid therapy, incorporating less invasive surgical techniques and SABR, represents a paradigm shift in achieving MLC in oligometastatic spinal disease

Aims. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) can support clinicians in selecting appropriate treatments for patients. The objective of this study was to examine if triaging patients with LBP to the most optimal treatment can be improved by using a data-driven approach with the help of machine learning as base of such a CDSS. Methods. A clinical database of the Groningen Spine Center containing patient-reported data from 1546 patients with LBP was used. From this dataset, a training dataset with 354 features was labeled on eight different treatments actually received by these patients. With this dataset, models were trained. A test dataset with 50 cases judged on treatments by 4 experts in LBP triage was used to test these models with data not used to train the models. Prediction accuracy and average area under curve (AUC) were used as performance measures for the models. Results. The AUC values indicated small to medium learning effects showing that machine learning on patient-reported data, to model decision-making processes on treatments for LBP, may be possible. One of the best performing models was the Bayesian Network (BN) model; e.g. predicted surgery with accuracy 0.78 (95% C.I. 0.68– 0.87) and AUC 0.70. Conclusion. Benefits to using BNs compared to other supervised machine learning techniques are that it is easy to exploit expert knowledge in BN models, meaning that advices generated by the model can be explained. The next step is to improve the BN accuracy so that it can actually be used in a CDSS. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This work is partly funded by a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw), grant 10-10400-98-009

Background. Improving primary care management of musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is a priority. A pilot cluster RCT tested prognostic stratified care for patients with common MSK pain presentations, including low back pain, in 8 UK general practices (4 stratified care; 4 usual care) with 524 patients. GPs in stratified care practices were asked to use i) the Keele STarT MSK tool for risk-stratification and ii) matched treatment options for patients at low-, medium- and high-risk of persistent pain. A linked qualitative process evaluation explored patients' and GPs' views and experiences of stratified care. Methods. Individual ‘stimulated-recall’ interviews with patients and GPs in the stratified care arm (n=10 patients; 10 GPs), prompted by consultation-recordings. Data were analysed thematically and mapped onto the COM-B behaviour change model; exploring the Opportunity, Capability and Motivation GPs and patients had to engage with stratified care. Results. Patients reported positive views that stratified care enabled a more ‘structured’ consultation. GPs identified difficulties integrating the STarT MSK tool in their consultation timeframe (Opportunity), but found this easier as it became more familiar. Both groups saw the tool as having added-value, but identified ‘cumbersome’ items which made it more difficult to use (Capability). GPs reported the matched treatment options aided their clinical decision-making, identified several that were not available to them (e.g. pain-management clinics) and suggested additional options (e.g. GP-management of psychosocial issues (Motivation). Conclusion. Changes to the STarT MSK tool and matched treatment options, targeting the COM-B model constructs, were identified and have been implemented in the current main trial. Conflicts of interest statement: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research scheme (grant number: RP-PG-1211-20010). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Nadine Foster is a NIHR Senior Investigator and was supported through an NIHR Research Professorship (NIHR-RP-011-015). Trial registration: ISRCTN15366334

Aims

People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians’ views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial).

Aims

Patients with cauda equina syndrome (CES) require emergency imaging and surgical decompression. The severity and type of symptoms may influence the timing of imaging and surgery, and help predict the patient’s prognosis. Categories of CES attempt to group patients for management and prognostication purposes. We aimed in this study to assess the inter-rater reliability of dividing patients with CES into categories to assess whether they can be reliably applied in clinical practice and in research.

Aims

To determine the major risk factors for unplanned reoperations (UROs) following corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) and their interactions, using machine learning-based prediction algorithms and game theory.

Aims

Gram-negative infections are associated with comorbid patients, but outcomes are less well understood. This study reviewed diagnosis, management, and treatment for a cohort treated in a tertiary spinal centre.

Aims

Frailty has been gathering attention as a factor to predict surgical outcomes. However, the association of frailty with postoperative complications remains controversial in spinal metastases surgery. We therefore designed a prospective study to elucidate risk factors for postoperative complications with a focus on frailty.