Cargando…

Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Hooff, Miranda L, Jacobs, Wilco C H, Willems, Paul C, Wouters, Michel W J M, de Kleuver, Marinus, Peul, Wilco C, Ostelo, Raymond W J G, Fritzell, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4564774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25909475
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1043174
_version_ 1782389497539854336
author van Hooff, Miranda L
Jacobs, Wilco C H
Willems, Paul C
Wouters, Michel W J M
de Kleuver, Marinus
Peul, Wilco C
Ostelo, Raymond W J G
Fritzell, Peter
author_facet van Hooff, Miranda L
Jacobs, Wilco C H
Willems, Paul C
Wouters, Michel W J M
de Kleuver, Marinus
Peul, Wilco C
Ostelo, Raymond W J G
Fritzell, Peter
author_sort van Hooff, Miranda L
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4564774
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Informa Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45647742015-10-01 Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries van Hooff, Miranda L Jacobs, Wilco C H Willems, Paul C Wouters, Michel W J M de Kleuver, Marinus Peul, Wilco C Ostelo, Raymond W J G Fritzell, Peter Acta Orthop Spine 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. Informa Healthcare 2015-10 2015-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4564774/ /pubmed/25909475 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1043174 Text en Copyright: © Nordic Orthopaedic Federation http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 License which permits users to download and share the article for non-commercial purposes, so long as the article is reproduced in the whole without changes, and provided the original source is credited.
spellingShingle Spine
van Hooff, Miranda L
Jacobs, Wilco C H
Willems, Paul C
Wouters, Michel W J M
de Kleuver, Marinus
Peul, Wilco C
Ostelo, Raymond W J G
Fritzell, Peter
Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries
title Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries
title_full Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries
title_fullStr Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries
title_full_unstemmed Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries
title_short Evidence and practice in spine registries: A systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries
title_sort evidence and practice in spine registries: a systematic review, and recommendations for future design of registries
topic Spine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4564774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25909475
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1043174
work_keys_str_mv AT vanhooffmirandal evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries
AT jacobswilcoch evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries
AT willemspaulc evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries
AT woutersmichelwjm evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries
AT dekleuvermarinus evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries
AT peulwilcoc evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries
AT osteloraymondwjg evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries
AT fritzellpeter evidenceandpracticeinspineregistriesasystematicreviewandrecommendationsforfuturedesignofregistries