Evidence and practice in spine registries

Miranda L van Hooff, Wilco C H Jacobs, Paul C Willems, Michel W J M Wouters, Marinus de Kleuver, Wilco C Peul, Raymond W J G Ostelo, Peter Fritzell, Miranda L van Hooff, Wilco C H Jacobs, Paul C Willems, Michel W J M Wouters, Marinus de Kleuver, Wilco C Peul, Raymond W J G Ostelo, Peter Fritzell

Abstract

Background and purpose: We performed a systematic review and a survey in order to (1) evaluate the evidence for the impact of spine registries on the quality of spine care, and with that, on patient-related outcomes, and (2) evaluate the methodology used to organize, analyze, and report the "quality of spine care" from spine registries.

Methods: To study the impact, the literature on all spinal disorders was searched. To study methodology, the search was restricted to degenerative spinal disorders. The risk of bias in the studies included was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Additionally, a survey among registry representatives was performed to acquire information about the methodology and practice of existing registries.

Results: 4,273 unique references up to May 2014 were identified, and 1,210 were eligible for screening and assessment. No studies on impact were identified, but 34 studies were identified to study the methodology. Half of these studies (17 of the 34) were judged to have a high risk of bias. The survey identified 25 spine registries, representing 14 countries. The organization of these registries, methods used, analytical approaches, and dissemination of results are presented.

Interpretation: We found a lack of evidence that registries have had an impact on the quality of spine care, regardless of whether intervention was non-surgical and/or surgical. To improve the quality of evidence published with registry data, we present several recommendations. Application of these recommendations could lead to registries showing trends, monitoring the quality of spine care given, and ultimately improving the value of the care given to patients with degenerative spinal disorders.

Figures

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4564774/bin/ORT-86-534-g001.jpg
Flow chart of studies through the different phases of the systematic review.

References

    1. Adogwa O, Huang M I, Thompson P M, et al. No difference in postoperative complications, pain, and functional outcomes up to 2 years after incidental durotomy in lumbar spinal fusion: a prospective, multi-institutional, propensity-matched analysis of 1,741 patients. Spine J. 2014;14(9):1828–34.
    1. AHRQ. 2014. . 2015 Feb 09; Available. Accessed.
    1. Benson K, Hartz A J. A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(25):1878–86.
    1. Bridwell K H, Berven S, Glassman S, et al. Is the SRS-22 instrument responsive to change in adult scoliosis patients having primary spinal deformity surgery? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32(20):2220–5.
    1. Colditz G A. Overview of the epidemiology methods and applications: strengths and limitations of observational study designs. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2010;50(Suppl 1):10–12.
    1. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz R I. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(25):1887–92.
    1. Concato J, Lawler E V, Lew R A, Gaziano J M, Aslan M, Huang G D. Observational methods in comparative effectiveness research. Am J Med. 2010;123(12 Suppl 1):e16–e23.
    1. Corcoll J, Orfila J, Tobajas P, Alegre L. Implementation of neuroreflexotherapy for subacute and chronic neck and back pain within the Spanish public health system: audit results after one year. Health Policy. 2006;79(2-3):345–57.
    1. Deer T, Chapple I, Classen A, et al. Intrathecal drug delivery for treatment of chronic low back pain: report from the National Outcomes Registry for Low Back Pain. Pain Med. 2004;5(1):6–13.
    1. Desai A, Bekelis K, Ball P A, et al. Variation in outcomes across centers after surgery for lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis in the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38(8):678–91.
    1. Dimick J B, Staiger D O, Birkmeyer J D. Ranking hospitals on surgical mortality: the importance of reliability adjustment. Health Serv Res. 2010;45(6 Pt 1):1614–29.
    1. Donders A R, van der Heijden G J, Stijnen T, Moons K G. Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(10):1087–91.
    1. Drolet B C, Johnson K B. Categorizing the world of registries. J Biomed Inform. 2008;41(6):1009–1020.
    1. Forsth P, Michaelsson K, Sanden B. Does fusion improve the outcome after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis?: A two-year follow-up study involving 5390 patients. Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B(7):960–5.
    1. Forsth P, Carlsson T, Michealsson K, Sanden B. No benefit from fusion in decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Two-year results from the Swedish spinal stenosis study. A multicenter RCT of 229 patients. Abstract EuroSpine conference 2014; Lyon France.
    1. Fritzell P, Stromqvist B, Hagg O. A practical approach to spine registers in Europe: the Swedish experience. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(Suppl 1):S57–S63.
    1. Glassman S D, Schwab F, Bridwell K H, Shaffrey C, Horton W, Hu S. Do 1-year outcomes predict 2-year outcomes for adult deformity surgery? Spine J. 2009;9(5):317–22.
    1. Gliklich R E, Dreyer N A. Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes. A User’s Guide. 2nd. 2010. ed.
    1. Grob D, Mannion A F. The patient’s perspective on complications after spine surgery. Eur Spine J. 2009;18(Suppl 3):380–5.
    1. Hoy D, March L, Brooks P, et al. The global burden of low back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(6):968–974.
    1. ICHOM. (International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurements) Standard Set for Low Back Pain. 2014 Available from. Accessed on: 09 February 2015.
    1. Iezzoni LI. Risk adjustment for medical effectiveness research: an overview of conceptual and methodological considerations. J Investig Med. 1995;43(2):136–150.
    1. Jacobs W, Hooff van ML, Stoefs J, towell C, Fritzell P. ISSLS Focus Group Global Collaboration of Spine Registries. International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine (ISSLS) Seoul Korea. 2014.
    1. Jacobs WC, Kruyt MC, Verbout AJ, Oner FC. Effect of methodological quality measures in spinal surgery research: a metaepidemiological study. Spine J. 2012a;12(5):339–48.
    1. Jacobs WC, Kruyt MC, Verbout AJ, Oner FC. Spine surgery research: on and beyond current strategies. Spine J. 2012b;12(8):706–13.
    1. Karrholm J. The Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2010;81(1):3–4.
    1. Kasliwal MK, Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, et al. Does prior short-segment surgery for adult scoliosis impact perioperative complication rates and clinical outcome among patients undergoing scoliosis correction? J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17(2):128–33.
    1. Knutsson B, Michaelsson K, Sanden B. Obesity is associated with inferior results after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a study of 2633 patients from the Swedish spine register. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38(5):435–41.
    1. Kovacs FM, Seco J, Royuela A, Corcoll RJ, Abraira V. Predicting the evolution of low back pain patients in routine clinical practice: results from a registry within the Spanish National Health Service. Spine J. 2012;12(11):1008–20.
    1. Kuenen JW, Mohr R, Larsson S, Van Leeuwen W. Zorg voor waarde. Meer kwaliteit voor minder geld: wat de Nederlandse gezondheidszorg kan leren van Zweden. . 2011 Available from: Accessed on: 17 April 2015.
    1. Larsson S, Lawyer P, Siverstein MB. Putting Value-Based Healthcare into Practice in Sweden: The Boston Consultancy Group (BCG); 2010. From concept to reality. Available from: Accessed on: 17 April 2015.
    1. Mannion AF, Brox JI, Fairbank JC. Comparison of spinal fusion and nonoperative treatment in patients with chronic low back pain: long-term follow-up of three randomized controlled trials. Spine J. 2013;13(11):1438–48.
    1. McCormick JD, Werner BC, Shimer AL. Patient-reported outcome measures in spine surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013;21(2):99–107.
    1. McGirt MJ, Speroff T, Dittus RS, Harrell FE, Jr, Asher AL. The National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database (N2QOD): general overview and pilot-year project description. Neurosurg Focus. 2013;34(1):E6.
    1. Munce SE, Perrier L, Tricco AC, et al. Impact of quality improvement strategies on the quality of life and well-being of individuals with spinal cord injury: a systematic review protocol. Syst Rev. 2013;2:14.
    1. Murray CJ, Vos T, Lozano R, Naghavi M, Flaxman AD, Michaud C, et al. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380(9859):2197–223.
    1. Nerland US, Jakola AS, Solheim O, et al. Comparative effectiveness of microdecompression and laminectomy for central lumbar spinal stenosis: study protocol for an observational study. BMJ Open. 2014;4(3):e004651.
    1. Oien RF, Forssell HW. Ulcer healing time and antibiotic treatment before and after the introduction of the Registry of Ulcer Treatment: an improvement project in a national quality registry in Sweden. BMJ Open. 2013;3(8):e003091.
    1. Phillips FM, Slosar PJ, Youssef JA, Andersson G, Papatheofanis F. Lumbar spine fusion for chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38(7):E409–E422.
    1. Porter ME. What is value in health care? N Engl J Med. 2010;363(26):2477–2481.
    1. PRISMA statement and checklist. . Available from: Accessed on: 09 February 2015.
    1. Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S, et al. An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(26):2725–32.
    1. Robinson Y, Michaelsson K, Sanden B. Instrumentation in lumbar fusion improves back pain but not quality of life 2 years after surgery. A study of 1,310 patients with degenerative disc disease from the Swedish Spine Register SWESPINE. Acta Orthop. 2013;84(1):7–11.
    1. Royuela A, Kovacs FM, Campillo C, Casamitjana M, Muriel A, Abraira V. Predicting outcomes of neuroreflexotherapy in patients with subacute or chronic neck or low back pain. Spine J. 2014;14(8):1588–600.
    1. Sackett D L, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2000. Chrurchill and Livingstone Edinburgh.
    1. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Sample size slippages in randomised trials: exclusions and the lost and wayward. Lancet. 2002;359:781–5.
    1. Schwab FJ, Lafage V, Farcy JP, Bridwell KH, Glassman S, Shainline MR. Predicting outcome and complications in the surgical treatment of adult scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008;33(20):2243–7.
    1. Seng C, Siddiqui MA, Wong KP, et al. Five-year outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a matched-pair comparison study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38(23):2049–2055.
    1. Shojania KG, Ranji SR, McDonald KM, et al. Effects of quality improvement strategies for type 2 diabetes on glycemic control: a meta-regression analysis. JAMA. 2006;296(5):427–40.
    1. Sigmundsson FG, Kang XP, Jonsson B, Stromqvist B. Prognostic factors in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery. Acta Orthop. 2012;83(5):536–42.
    1. Sigmundsson FG, Jonsson B, Stromqvist B. Impact of pain on function and health related quality of life in lumbar spinal stenosis. A register study of 14,821 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38(15):E937–E945.
    1. Solberg TK, Sorlie A, Sjaavik K, Nygaard OP, Ingebrigtsen T. Would loss to follow-up bias the outcome evaluation of patients operated for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine? Acta Orthop. 2011;82(1):56–63.
    1. Solberg T, Johnsen LG, Nygaard OP, Grotle M. Can we define success criteria for lumbar disc surgery? : estimates for a substantial amount of improvement in core outcome measures. Acta Orthop. 2013;84(2):196–201.
    1. Stromqvist B, Fritzell P, Hagg O, Knutsson B, Sanden B. The Swedish Spine Register. Swedish Society of Spinal Surgeons. 2014 report SweSpine. Available from: Report_2014_Swespine_Engl_ver_141204.pdf. Accessed on: 25 March 2015.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.
    1. Tricco AC, Ivers NM, Grimshaw JM, et al. Effectiveness of quality improvement strategies on the management of diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;379(9833):2252–61.
    1. Twisk J, de Vet W. Attrition in longitudinal studies. How to deal with missing data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55(5):329–37.
    1. van Hooff ML, van Loon J, van Limbeek J, de Kleuver M. The Nijmegen decision tool for chronic low back pain. Development of a clinical decision tool for secondary or tertiary spine care specialists. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e104226.
    1. van Leersum NJ, Kolfschoten NE, Klinkenbijl JH, Tollenaar RA, Wouters MW. [‘Clinical auditing’, a novel tool for quality assessment in surgical oncology] Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2011;155(45):A4136.
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453–7.
    1. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, et al. Surgical compared with nonoperative treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. four-year results in the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) randomized and observational cohorts. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(6):1295–304.
    1. Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Available from: clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed on: 09 February 2015.
    1. Wood AM, White IR, Thompson SG. Are missing outcome data adequately handled? A review of published randomized controlled trials in major medical journals. Clin Trials. 2004;1(5):368–76.
    1. Wouters MW, Wijnhoven BP, Karim-Kos HE, et al. High-volume versus low-volume for esophageal resections for cancer: the essential role of case-mix adjustments based on clinical data. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(1):80–87.
    1. Zweig T, Hemmeler C, Aghayev E, Melloh M, Etter C, Roder C. Influence of preoperative nucleus pulposus status and radiculopathy on outcomes in mono-segmental lumbar total disc replacement: results from a nationwide registry. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:275.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe