Cargando…

Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery

Study Design Bibliometric analysis. Objective To determine trends, frequency, and distribution of patient-reported outcome instruments (PROIs) in degenerative cervical spine surgery literature over the past decade. Methods A search was conducted via PubMed from 2004 to 2013 on five journals (The Jou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ueda, Haruki, Cutler, Holt S., Guzman, Javier Z., Cho, Samuel K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4836929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27099815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1559584
_version_ 1782427787651448832
author Ueda, Haruki
Cutler, Holt S.
Guzman, Javier Z.
Cho, Samuel K.
author_facet Ueda, Haruki
Cutler, Holt S.
Guzman, Javier Z.
Cho, Samuel K.
author_sort Ueda, Haruki
collection PubMed
description Study Design Bibliometric analysis. Objective To determine trends, frequency, and distribution of patient-reported outcome instruments (PROIs) in degenerative cervical spine surgery literature over the past decade. Methods A search was conducted via PubMed from 2004 to 2013 on five journals (The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Spine Journal, European Spine Journal, and Spine), which were chosen based on their impact factors and authors' consensus. All abstracts were screened and articles addressing degenerative cervical spine surgery using PROIs were included. Articles were then analyzed for publication date, study design, journal, level of evidence, and PROI trends. Prevalence of PROIs and level of evidence of included articles were analyzed. Results From 19,736 articles published, 241 articles fulfilled our study criteria. Overall, 53 distinct PROIs appeared. The top seven most frequently used PROIs were: Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (104 studies), visual analog scale for pain (100), Neck Disability Index (72), Short Form-36 (38), Nurick score (25), Odom criteria (21), and Oswestry Disability Index (15). Only 11 PROIs were used in 5 or more articles. Thirty-three of the PROIs were appeared in only 1 article. Among the included articles, 16% were of level 1 evidence and 32% were of level 4 evidence. Conclusion Numerous PROIs are currently used in degenerative cervical spine surgery. A consensus on which instruments to use for a given diagnosis or procedure is lacking and may be necessary for better communication and comparison, as well as for the accumulation and analysis of vast clinical data across multiple studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4836929
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48369292016-05-01 Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery Ueda, Haruki Cutler, Holt S. Guzman, Javier Z. Cho, Samuel K. Global Spine J Article Study Design Bibliometric analysis. Objective To determine trends, frequency, and distribution of patient-reported outcome instruments (PROIs) in degenerative cervical spine surgery literature over the past decade. Methods A search was conducted via PubMed from 2004 to 2013 on five journals (The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Spine Journal, European Spine Journal, and Spine), which were chosen based on their impact factors and authors' consensus. All abstracts were screened and articles addressing degenerative cervical spine surgery using PROIs were included. Articles were then analyzed for publication date, study design, journal, level of evidence, and PROI trends. Prevalence of PROIs and level of evidence of included articles were analyzed. Results From 19,736 articles published, 241 articles fulfilled our study criteria. Overall, 53 distinct PROIs appeared. The top seven most frequently used PROIs were: Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (104 studies), visual analog scale for pain (100), Neck Disability Index (72), Short Form-36 (38), Nurick score (25), Odom criteria (21), and Oswestry Disability Index (15). Only 11 PROIs were used in 5 or more articles. Thirty-three of the PROIs were appeared in only 1 article. Among the included articles, 16% were of level 1 evidence and 32% were of level 4 evidence. Conclusion Numerous PROIs are currently used in degenerative cervical spine surgery. A consensus on which instruments to use for a given diagnosis or procedure is lacking and may be necessary for better communication and comparison, as well as for the accumulation and analysis of vast clinical data across multiple studies. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2015-07-28 2016-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4836929/ /pubmed/27099815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1559584 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Article
Ueda, Haruki
Cutler, Holt S.
Guzman, Javier Z.
Cho, Samuel K.
Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery
title Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery
title_full Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery
title_fullStr Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery
title_full_unstemmed Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery
title_short Current Trends in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Degenerative Cervical Spine Surgery
title_sort current trends in the use of patient-reported outcome instruments in degenerative cervical spine surgery
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4836929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27099815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1559584
work_keys_str_mv AT uedaharuki currenttrendsintheuseofpatientreportedoutcomeinstrumentsindegenerativecervicalspinesurgery
AT cutlerholts currenttrendsintheuseofpatientreportedoutcomeinstrumentsindegenerativecervicalspinesurgery
AT guzmanjavierz currenttrendsintheuseofpatientreportedoutcomeinstrumentsindegenerativecervicalspinesurgery
AT chosamuelk currenttrendsintheuseofpatientreportedoutcomeinstrumentsindegenerativecervicalspinesurgery