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

Aim. To develop a clinical core set of outcome measures that is accepted for relevance, feasibility and validity by stakeholders and useful for a) interaction between patient and professional, b) internal quality improvement, and c) external transparency in patients with NSLBP in primary care physical therapy. Method. We used a consensus-driven modified RAND-UCLA Delphi technique. We conducted seven separate steps with panellists (physical therapists, patient representatives, health insurers) to select accepted outcomes. These seven steps consisted of a literature search, two online surveys, patient interviews, an experts meeting, a consensus meeting and final approval of an advisory board. Results of previous steps were discussed during the consensus meeting, and then panellists voted for inclusion per measure. The final core set was rated on relevance and feasibility on a 9-point Likert scale, when the median was ≥7 the core set was accepted. Results. 34 panellists in two online surveys, five panellists in an expert committee, ten patients for semi-structured interviews and 26 panellists in a consensus meeting participated in the study. 12 outcome measures were rated and discussed and finally six outcome measures were accepted. The final core set was accepted with a median of 7. Conclusion. This study present an outcome set that is accepted by stakeholders as having added value for a) interaction between patient and professional, b) internal quality improvement, and c) external transparency in patients with NSLBP in primary care physical therapy. In a next project this outcome set will be tested on his reliability and feasibility in a large pilot. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: Health insurance company CZ, the Netherlands

Aims. Patients seeking cervical spine surgery are thought to be increasing in age, comorbidities and functional debilitation. The changing demographics of this population may significantly impact the outcomes of their care, specifically with regards to complications. In this study, our goals were to determine the rates of functionally dependent patients undergoing elective cervical spine procedures and to assess the effect of functional dependence on 30-day morbidity and mortality using a large, validated national cohort. Patients and Methods. A retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data files from 2006 to 2013 was conducted to identify patients undergoing common cervical spine procedures. Multivariate logistic regression models were generated to analyse the independent association of functional dependence with 30-day outcomes of interest. Results. Patients with lower functional status had significantly higher rates of medical comorbidities. Even after accounting for these comorbidities, type of procedure and pre-operative diagnosis, analyses demonstrated that functional dependence was independently associated with significantly increased odds of sepsis (odds ratio (OR) 5.04), pulmonary (OR 4.61), renal (OR 3.33) and cardiac complications (OR 4.35) as well as mortality (OR 11.08). Conclusions. Spine surgeons should be aware of the inherent risks of these procedures with the functionally dependent patient population when deciding on whether to perform cervical spine surgery, delivering pre-operative patient counselling, and providing peri-operative management and surveillance. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:824–8

Aims

The number of patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy has increased. In many countries, public hospitals have limited capacity. This has resulted in long waiting times for elective treatment and a need for supplementary private healthcare. It is uncertain whether the management of patients and the outcome of treatment are equivalent in public and private hospitals. The aim of this study was to compare the management and patient-reported outcomes among patients who underwent surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy in public and private hospitals in Norway, and to assess whether the effectiveness of the treatment was equivalent.

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.

Aims

To evaluate the perioperative complications associated with total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) in patients with spinal tumours, based on the extent and level of tumour resection.

Aims

The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for adverse events following the surgical correction of cervical spinal deformities in adults.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and analyze the trends of surgeon-reported complications following surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) over a 13-year period from the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) Morbidity and Mortality database.

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate improvements in the quality and safety of paediatric spinal surgery following the implementation of a specialist Paediatric Spinal Surgical Team (PSST) in the operating theatre.