Background. Involving research users in setting priorities for research is essential to ensure research outcomes are patient-centred and to maximise research value and impact. The Musculoskeletal (MSK) Disorders Research Advisory Group Versus Arthritis led a research priority setting exercise across MSK disorders. Methods. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHRNI) method of setting research priorities with a range of stakeholders were utilised. The MSKD RAG identified, through consensus, four research Domains: Mechanisms of Disease; Diagnosis and Impact; Living Well with MSK disorders and Successful Translation. Following ethical approval, the research priority exercise involved four stages and two surveys, to: 1) gather research uncertainties; 2) consolidate these; 3) score uncertainties using agreed criteria of importance and impact on a score of 1–10; and 4) analyse scoring, for prioritisation. Results. The first survey had 209 respondents, who described 1290 research uncertainties, which were refined into 68 research questions. 285 people responded to the second survey. The largest group of respondents represented patients and carers, followed by researchers and healthcare professionals. A ranked list was produced, with scores ranging between 12 and 18. Key priorities included developing and testing new treatments, better targeting of treatments, early diagnosis, prevention and better understanding and management of pain, with an emphasis on understanding underpinning mechanisms. Conclusions. For the first time, we have summarised priorities for research across MSKD, from discovery science to applied clinical and health research, including translation. We present a call to action to researchers and funders to target these priorities. Conflict of Interest: None. Sources of funding: We thank the funder, Versus Arthritis for their support of the research advisory groups and this activity

Purposes of the study and background. The care and cure of patients with low back disorders is of a multidisciplinary nature. Cooperation and communication between the disciplines would improve standardized care delivery to the patient. We engaged to establish a national group of multidisciplinary spine specialists to promote research and education in the field of spinal disorders. Summary of the methods used and results. A multidisciplinary group of spine professionals, opinion leaders and research leaders in spinal disorders in the Netherlands were invited to participate in a national network (“Netwerk Wervelkolomaandoeningen”). The group consists of physiotherapists, family physicians, neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, anesthesiologists, as well as clinical researchers and epidemiologists. Group meetings were organized in various locations in the country. Priorities were set and divided in research and education. Communication lines were established with a resource website and a linked-in page. The first educational series of symposia for primary care professionals on multidisciplinary approaches for disc herniation and spinal stenosis is being organized in different regions in the Netherlands. The first meetings on research initiatives are being held on an idea-driven basis. Conclusion. The Dutch Network for Spinal Disorders is a promising initiative that has the potential to align care and cure for spinal disorders across disciplines

Purpose and background

Nearly 70% of UK physiotherapists experience work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs) during their career, with a significant proportion occurring in the back and being attributed to patient handling tasks. Evidence suggests that manual handling training alone is ineffective and interventions among nurses indicate that a tailored approach, including targeted exercise (TE), can reduce WRMSD rates. This study aimed to explore physiotherapists’ perspectives of WRMSDs, patient handling, and the role of TE in reducing WRMSDs among physiotherapists.

Purpose and background

Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) is frequently and increasingly used in lumbar degenerative disorders despite conflicting results and recommendations. Further understanding of patient outcomes after LSF is required to inform decisions regarding surgery and to improve post-surgery management. The objective was to evaluate the course of pain and disability in patients with degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine (spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, disc herniation, discogenic low back pain) after first-time LSF.

Background

Patient-rated measures are the gold standard for assessing spine surgery outcomes, but there is no consensus on the appropriate timing of follow-up. Journals often demand a minimum 2-year follow-up, but the indiscriminate application of this principle may not be warranted. We examined the course of change in patient outcomes up to 5 years postoperatively.

We analysed the complications encountered in 102 consecutive patients who had posterolateral lumbosacral fusion performed with transpedicular screw and rod fixation for non-traumatic disorders after a minimum of two years. Of these, 40 had spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis, 42 a degenerative disorder, 14 instability after previous laminectomy and decompression, and six pain after nonunion of previous attempts at spinal fusion without internal fixation. There were 75 multilevel and 27 single-level fusions.

There were 76 individual complications in 48 patients, and none in the other 54. The complications seen were screw misplacement, coupling failure of the device, wound infection, nonunion, permanent neural injury, and loosening, bending and breakage of screws. Screw breakage or loosening was more common in patients with multilevel fusions (p < 0.001). Screws of 5 mm diameter should not be used for sacral fixation.

Forty-six patients had at least one further operation for one or several complications, including 20 fusion procedures for nonunion. The high incidence of complications is a disadvantage of this technically-demanding method.

Background

Previous surgery is known to increase the risk of complications during spine surgery, but few studies have quantified the dose-response effect using multivariate models to account for confounders. We quantified the effect of the number of prior spine surgeries on perioperative complications in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disorders.

Aim:

Our aim was to report the rate and risk factors for post-operative complications in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) patients undergoing spinal arthrodesis for scoliosis, with a comparison to neuromuscular scoliosis of other aetiology.

The aim of this study was to determine whether obesity affects pain, surgical and functional outcomes following lumbar spinal fusion for low back pain (LBP).

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was made of those studies that compared the outcome of lumbar spinal fusion for LBP in obese and non-obese patients. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference in the pain and functional outcomes. Lumbar spinal fusion in the obese patient resulted in a statistically significantly greater intra-operative blood loss (weighted mean difference: 54.04 ml; 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.08 to 93.00; n = 112; p = 0.007) more complications (odds ratio: 1.91; 95% CI 1.68 to 2.18; n = 43858; p < 0.001) and longer duration of surgery (25.75 mins; 95% CI 15.61 to 35.90; n = 258; p < 0.001). Obese patients have greater intra-operative blood loss, more complications and longer duration of surgery but pain and functional outcome are similar to non-obese patients. Based on these results, obesity is not a contraindication to lumbar spinal fusion.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1395–1404.