Objectives. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) stimulation was evaluated after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures in a randomized, controlled clinical study performed for United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. PEMF significantly increased fusion rates at six months, but 12-month fusion outcomes for subjects at elevated risk for pseudoarthrosis were not thoroughly reported. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effect of PEMF treatment on subjects at increased risk for pseudoarthrosis after ACDF procedures. Methods. Two evaluations were performed that compared fusion rates between PEMF stimulation and a historical control (160 subjects) from the FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) study: a post hoc (PH) analysis of high-risk subjects from the FDA study (PH PEMF); and a multicentre, open-label (OL) study consisting of 274 subjects treated with PEMF (OL PEMF). Fisher’s exact test and multivariate logistic regression was used to compare fusion rates between PEMF-treated subjects and historical controls. Results. In separate comparisons of PH PEMF and OL PEMF groups to the historical control group, PEMF treatment significantly (p < 0.05, Fisher’s exact test) increased the fusion rate at six and 12 months for certain high-risk subjects who had at least one clinical risk factor of being elderly, a nicotine user, osteoporotic, or diabetic; and for those with at least one clinical risk factor and who received at least a two- or three-level arthrodesis. Conclusion. Adjunctive PEMF treatment can be recommended for patients who are at high risk for pseudoarthrosis. Cite this article: D. Coric, D. E. Bullard, V. V. Patel, J. T. Ryaby, B. L. Atkinson, D. He, R. D. Guyer. Pulsed electromagnetic field stimulation may improve fusion rates in cervical arthrodesis in high-risk populations. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:124–130. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.72.BJR-2017-0221.R1

Children undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for neuromuscular and syndromic scoliosis were admitted to the paediatric intensive care (PIC) until about 6 years ago, at which time we created a new unit, a hospital floor-based spinal high-dependency unit-plus (SHDU-plus), in response to frequent bed-shortage cancellations. This study compares postoperative management on PIC with HDU-plus for these non-hospital floor suitable children with syndromic and neuromuscular scoliosis undergoing PSF.

Retrospective review of 100 consecutive children with syndromic and neuromuscular scoliosis undergoing PSF between June 2016 and January 2022. Inclusion criteria were: 1) diagnosis of syndromic or neuromuscular scoliosis, 2) underwent PSF, 3) not suitable for immediate postoperative hospital floor-based care. Exclusion criteria were children with significant cardio-respiratory co-morbidity requiring PIC postoperatively.

55 patients were managed postoperatively on PIC and 45 on SHDU-plus. No significant difference between groups was found with respect to age, weight, ASA grade, preoperative Cobb angles, operative duration, number of levels fused and estimated blood loss. 4 patients in the PIC group and 1 in the SHDU-plus group were readmitted back to PIC or HDU following step-down to the hospital floor. Average length of stay was 2 days on PIC and 1 day on SHDU-plus. Average total length of hospital stay was 16.5 days in the PIC group and 10.5 days in the HDU-plus group. 19 (35%) patients developed complications in the PIC group, compared to 18 (40%) in SHDU-plus. Mean specialist unit charge per day was less on SHDU-plus compared with PIC. There were no bed-shortage cancellations in the SHDU-plus group, compared to 11 in the PIC group.

For children with neuromuscular or syndromic scoliosis undergoing PSF and deemed not suitable for post-operative care on the hospital floor, creation of a SHDU-plus was associated with fewer readmissions back to PIC or HDU, shorter hospital stays, an equivalent complication rate, significant cost-saving and fewer cancellations. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III.

Purpose of study and background. Spinal surgery is a high-risk surgical speciality, a patient's understanding of surgical interventions, alternative treatment options, and the benefits and risks must be ascertained to gain informed consent. This pilot study aims to evaluate if the provision of a digital recording of a patient's consultation enhances patient satisfaction, improves recall of clinical diagnosis, recall of treatment options and the risks and benefits of Spinal Surgery. Methodology and results. A coalition team was identified. A safe and secure process for recording and storage identified. Both qualitative and quantitative data was collected via questionnaires. 62 patients were invited to participate in the pilot, 12 declined. Data was collected immediately post consultation, and two weeks following the consultation via telephone. Comparison was made of the relative increase or decrease in patient recall of the clinical diagnosis, treatment options, and the benefits and the risks of spinal surgery. Patient satisfaction was measured pre- and post- consultation. 50 patients (81%) participated. 32 participants (52%) responded to follow up questionnaire at 2 weeks. Recall of risk for surgical intervention increased by 37%, and of benefit by 36%. Patient satisfaction was rated excellent or very satisfied in 93% at initial consultation and at 2 week follow up all participant's rated satisfaction as excellent or very satisfied. Conclusion. This pilot study was small. COVID delayed further recruitment. Initial outcomes demonstrated high levels of patient satisfaction and appear to demonstrate improved recall. Significant technological issues were identified. Further collaborative work needs to be undertaken. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding obtained

Aims. Fracture of the odontoid process (OP) in the elderly is associated with mortality rates similar to those of hip fracture. The aim of this study was to identify variables that predict mortality in patients with a fracture of the OP, and to assess whether established hip fracture scoring systems such as the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) or Sernbo Score might also be used as predictors of mortality in these patients. Patients and Methods. We conducted a retrospective review of patients aged 65 and over with an acute fracture of the OP from two hospitals. Data collected included demographics, medical history, residence, mobility status, admission blood tests, abbreviated mental test score, presence of other injuries, and head injury. All patients were treated in a semi-rigid cervical orthosis. Univariate and multivariate analysis were undertaken to identify predictors of mortality at 30 days and one year. A total of 82 patients were identified. There were 32 men and 50 women with a mean age of 83.7 years (67 to 100). Results. Overall mortality was 14.6% at 30 days and 34.1% at one year. Univariate analysis revealed head injury and the NHFS to be significant predictors of mortality at 30 days and one year. Multivariate analysis showed that head injury is an independent predictor of mortality at 30 days and at one year. The NHFS was an independent predictor of mortality at one year. The presence of other spinal injuries was an independent predictor at 30 days. Following survival analysis, an NHFS score greater than 5 stratified patients into a significantly higher risk group at both 30 days and one year. Conclusion. The NHFS may be used to identify high-risk patients with a fracture of the OP. Head injury increases the risk of mortality in patients with a fracture of the OP. This may help to guide multidisciplinary management and to inform patients. This paper provides evidence to suggest that frailty rather than age alone may be important as a predictor of mortality in elderly patients with a fracture of the odontoid process. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:253–259

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

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common skeletal system disease that has been partly attributed to genetic variation. However, the correlation between genetic variation and pathological changes in LSS is insufficient, and it is difficult to provide a reference for the early diagnosis and treatment of the disease.

Aims

The aim of this study was to report the long-term prognosis of patients with multiple Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) involving the spine, and to analyze the risk factors for progression-free survival (PFS).

Purpose & Background. The STarT Back risk-stratification approach uses the STarT Back Tool to categorise patients with low back pain (LBP) at low, medium or high-risk of persistent disabling pain, in order to match treatments. The MATCH trial (NCT02286141) evaluated the effect of implementing an adaptation of this approach in a United States healthcare setting. Methods. This was a pragmatic cluster randomised trial with a pre-intervention baseline period. Six primary care clinics were pair-randomised, three to an intensive stratified care quality improvement intervention and three as controls. LBP patients were invited to provide outcomes two weeks after their primary care visit, and two and six months later. Primary outcomes were physical function (RMDQ) and pain (0–10 NRS), and secondary outcomes including healthcare use and treatments provided received. Analysis was intention-to-treat. Results. Patient outcomes were obtained from intervention (n=690) and control (n=864) clinics. At six months between-group differences in adjusted mean change scores did not significantly favour stratified care for RMDQ; 0.50 (95%CI −0.55, 1.55) or pain NRS 0.13 (95%CI −0.37, 0.63). There were no significant between group differences in any secondary patient outcome. Process data showed that the STarT Back tool was used with 47% of LBP patients in the intervention clinics but there was no differences in the treatments provided. Conclusions. Implementation of a LBP stratified care approach in this United States healthcare setting showed moderate use of the STarT Back tool, but no change in treatments received by patients, and no benefits on patient outcomes. Conflicts of interest: None. Sources of funding: Funding for this trial was provided by the Patient Centered Care Research Institute (“Evaluation of a Patient-Centered Risk Stratification Method for Improving Primary Care for Back Pain”: Contract #398) and by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health/NIH (“Implementing Evidence-Based Treatments for Persistent Back Pain into Primary Care”: Grant #R21AT0007326). Martin Levine, Diane Piekara, and Pam Rock received support to participate in the quality improvement activities from Group Health. Nadine Foster and Jonathan Hill were supported through an NIHR Research Professorship (NIHR-RP-011-015) to Nadine Foster. Nadine Foster is an NIHR Senior Investigator. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Patient Centered Care Research Institute, NIH, NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health

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.

Background:. Low Back Pain and Neck Pain rank 1 and 4 on the causes of years lost to disability (YLDs) in the UK. Treatment options are broad including popular approaches such as chiropractic care but with NHS funding limited to recent initiatives such as Any Qualified Provider (AQP). Method:. Eleven chiropractic practices with AQP contracts took part in the study. As part of routine clinical practice, patients are entered onto a web based patient reported outcome system that sends automated e mails links to questionnaires, prior to the initial visit (includes the Bournemouth Questionnaire (BQ) and STarT Back, and at 14, 30 and 90 days (BQ and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)). Data from subjects consenting for such use were used in the analysis. Results:. Three thousand three hundred thirty nine patients filled out baseline questionnaires, one third of which were NHS. Response rates at 90 days were 33 and 23% in NHS and private groups respectively. NHS referral status was associated with reduced adjusted odds only at 14 days whereas at 30 and 90 days referral groups were equally likely to have improved. Chronicity, lower baseline BQ scores and not improved at previous follow up points were associated with poor recovery. High-risk STarT Back patients were associated with poorer recovery compared to low risk patients but only in the NHS group. Conclusion:. Factors predicting favourable outcomes were similar between NHS and private groups. At most only 35% of the variance was explained with dominance from non-modifiable prognostic factors

Aims

To provide normative data that can assess spinal-related disability and the prevalence of back or leg pain among adults with no spinal conditions in the UK using validated questionnaires.

Background. Stratifying patients with Low Back Pain (LBP) using the STarT Back Tool and delivering targeted treatment has demonstrated efficacy in individual physiotherapy settings. Physiotherapy interventions for LBP patients are often delivered in groups. This study aimed to explore the sustainability and cost effectiveness of a group stratified intervention in primary care. Methods. This non-randomised controlled trial compared a novel group stratified intervention to a historical non-stratified group control. Patients from 30 GP practices in Waterford Primary Care were stratified and offered a matched targeted group intervention. The historical control received a generic group intervention. The primary outcome measure was disability (RMDQ) at 12 weeks. A cost effectiveness analysis was also undertaken. Analysis was by intention to treat. Ethical approval was obtained. Results. 251 patients in the new stratified intervention and 332 in the historical control were included. Overall adjusted mean changes in the RMDQ scores were higher in the stratified intervention than in the control arm [p=0.028]. Exploring the risk groups individually the high-risk (HR) stratified group demonstrated better outcome over the controls (p=0.031)]. The medium risk (MR) stratified intervention demonstrated equally good outcomes (p=0.125), and low risk (LR) stratified patients, despite less intervention did as well as the historical controls [p=0.993]. With respect to cost effectiveness, the high risk intervention delivered a larger reduction in disability per unit time and proved equally cost effective as the medium risk intervention (HR €44.50 v MR €45.43). Conclusion. Group stratified care provides both a clinically effective and cost effective model of care for LBP patients. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Source of Funding: Funded by an unrestricted educational grant from Pfizer Healthcare Ireland

Aims

The outcome following the development of neurological complications after corrective surgery for scoliosis varies from full recovery to a permanent deficit. This study aimed to assess the prognosis and recovery of major neurological deficits in these patients, and to determine the risk factors for non-recovery, at a minimum follow-up of two years.

Aim:. To present the results of multi-modal IOM in 298 patients who underwent spinal deformity correction. Method:. We reviewed the notes, surgical and IOM charts of all patients who underwent spinal surgery with the use of cortical and cervical SSEPs, as well as upper/lower limb transcranial electrical MEPs under the senior author. We recorded IOM events which we categorised as true, transient true and false (+) or (−). We correlated the IOM events with surgical or anaesthetic incidents. Results:. Diagnosis included idiopathic scoliosis in 224, congenital in 12, syndromic in 14, scoliosis with intraspinal anomaly in 5, scoliosis with congenital cardiac disease in 4, spondylolisthesis in 2, spinal tumour in one, and Scheuermann's kyphosis in 36 patients. We identified 3 true (+) monitoring events occurring in 2 patients (1%), 6 transient true (+) (2%), and 11 transient false (+) events (3.7%). True (+) events occurred during deformity correction in one patient with severe AIS and during osteotomies in another with severe Scheuermann's. Transient true (+) events occurred during posterior osteotomies in 2 patients with Scheuermann's, during scoliosis correction (apical correction with sublaminar wires) in one and placement of concave apical pedicle screw in another patient, and 2 IOM changes during positioning (one during reduction of spondylolisthesis-one during positioning on the surgical table). Transient false (+) events were mainly related to low blood pressure (10 patients). There were no false (−) IOM events and none of our patients had postoperative neurological complications. Sensitivity of our IOM technique was 100% [all patients with impending spinal cord injury will have a (+) event] and specificity 96% (patients with normal IOM had 96% chance that the cord was safe). Positive predictive value was 65.3% (65.3% chance that an IOM event reflected a surgical-related cause of cord injury); negative predictive value 100% (100% chance that normal IOM corresponded to no cord injury). We found no difference between patients with AIS and Scheuermann's in terms of risk of true or transient true (+) IOM events (Fisher's exact test, p=0.12). Discussion:. Multimodal IOM is highly sensitive and specific for spinal cord injury. This technique is reliable to assess the condition of the spinal cord during high-risk major spinal deformity surgery. Conflict of interest statement: None

We have treated 101 patients with scoliosis secondary to muscular dystrophy over a 13-year period; 64 had Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy, 33 spinal muscular atrophy and four congenital muscular dystrophy. The patients underwent a modified Luque (87) or Harrington-Luque instrumentation (14) combined with a limited Moe fusion in all except 27 cases. A mean of 13 levels was instrumented. The mean preoperative sitting Cobb angle was 84° (10 to 150) and the mean postoperative angle 40° (52% correction). Most patients (96%) were able to discard their braces and there was a high level of patient satisfaction (89.6%). Less correction was seen for severe curves, and there was a greater recurrence of postoperative pelvic tilt in those patients not instrumented to the sacrum. Although the incidence of minor or temporary complications was high, these occurred chiefly in the early high-risk patients with very severe curves and considerable pre-existing immobility

Aims

Cervical spondylosis is often accompanied by dizziness. It has recently been shown that the ingrowth of Ruffini corpuscles into diseased cervical discs may be related to cervicogenic dizziness. In order to evaluate whether cervicogenic dizziness stems from the diseased cervical disc, we performed a prospective cohort study to assess the effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion on the relief of dizziness.

Objectives

We performed a systematic review of the literature to determine the safety and efficacy of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) compared with bone graft when used specifically for revision spinal fusion surgery secondary to pseudarthrosis.

There is no universally agreed definition of cauda equina syndrome (CES). Clinical signs of CES including direct rectal examination (DRE) do not reliably correlate with cauda equina (CE) compression on MRI. Clinical assessment only becomes reliable if there are symptoms/signs of late, often irreversible, CES. The only reliable way of including or excluding CES is to perform MRI on all patients with suspected CES. If the diagnosis is being considered, MRI should ideally be performed locally in the District General Hospitals within one hour of the question being raised irrespective of the hour or the day. Patients with symptoms and signs of CES and MRI confirmed CE compression should be referred to the local spinal service for emergency surgery.

CES can be subdivided by the degree of neurological deficit (bilateral radiculopathy, incomplete CES or CES with retention of urine) and also by time to surgical treatment (12, 24, 48 or 72 hour). There is increasing understanding that damage to the cauda equina nerve roots occurs in a continuous and progressive fashion which implies that there are no safe time or deficit thresholds. Neurological deterioration can occur rapidly and is often associated with longterm poor outcomes. It is not possible to predict which patients with a large central disc prolapse compressing the CE nerve roots are going to deteriorate neurologically nor how rapidly. Consensus guidelines from the Society of British Neurological Surgeons and British Association of Spinal Surgeons recommend decompressive surgery as soon as practically possible which for many patients will be urgent/emergency surgery at any hour of the day or night.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1390–4

Despite the increasing prevalence of sleep apnoea, little information is available regarding its impact on the peri-operative outcome of patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion. Using a national database, patients who underwent lumbar fusion between 2006 and 2010 were identified, sub-grouped by diagnosis of sleep apnoea and compared. The impact of sleep apnoea on various outcome measures was assessed by regression analysis. The records of 84 655 patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion were identified and 7.28% (n = 6163) also had a diagnostic code for sleep apnoea. Compared with patients without sleep apnoea, these patients were older, more frequently female, had a higher comorbidity burden and higher rates of peri-operative complications, post-operative mechanical ventilation, blood product transfusion and intensive care. Patients with sleep apnoea also had longer and more costly periods of hospitalisation.

In the regression analysis, sleep apnoea emerged as an independent risk factor for the development of peri-operative complications (odds ratio (OR) 1.50, confidence interval (CI) 1.38;1.62), blood product transfusions (OR 1.12, CI 1.03;1.23), mechanical ventilation (OR 6.97, CI 5.90;8.23), critical care services (OR 1.86, CI 1.71;2.03), prolonged hospitalisation and increased cost (OR 1.28, CI 1.19;1.37; OR 1.10, CI 1.03;1.18).

Patients with sleep apnoea who undergo posterior lumbar fusion pose significant challenges to clinicians.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:242–8.