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). An online cross-sectional survey was piloted by the multidisciplinary research team, then shared with clinical professional groups in the UK who are involved in the management of adults with severe, persistent LBP. The survey had seven sections that covered the demographic details of the clinician, five hypothetical case vignettes of patients with varying presentations, a series of questions regarding the preferred management, and whether or not each clinician would be willing to recruit the example patients into future clinical trials.Aims
Methods
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
has issued guidelines that state fusion for non-specific low back
pain should only be performed as part of a randomised controlled
trial, and that lumbar disc replacement should not be performed.
Thus, spinal fusion and disc replacement will no longer be routine
forms of treatment for patients with low back pain. This annotation
considers the evidence upon which these guidelines are based. Cite this article:
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. 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.Aims
Patients and Methods
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. A single-centre, interventional, two arm, parallel group randomised
controlled trial was undertaken, involving 407 patients who underwent
elective spinal surgery. For 203 patients, the skin was disinfected before surgery using
PVI (10% [w/w (1% w/w available iodine)] in 95% industrial denatured
alcohol, povidone iodine; Videne Alcoholic Tincture) twice, and
for 204 patients using PVI once followed by CHG (2% [w/v] chlorhexidine
gluconate in 70% [v/v] isopropyl alcohol; Chloraprep with tint).
The primary outcome measure was contamination of the wound determined
by aerobic and anaerobic bacterial growth from samples taken after
disinfection.Aims
Patients and Methods
