Cargando…
Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: To review the existing literature of prediction models in degenerative spinal surgery. METHODS: Review of PubMed/Medline and Embase databases was conducted to identify articles between January 1, 2000 and March 1, 2020 that reported prediction model perfo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8076813/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33890803 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568220959037 |
_version_ | 1783684763364622336 |
---|---|
author | Lubelski, Daniel Hersh, Andrew Azad, Tej D. Ehresman, Jeff Pennington, Zachary Lehner, Kurt Sciubba, Daniel M. |
author_facet | Lubelski, Daniel Hersh, Andrew Azad, Tej D. Ehresman, Jeff Pennington, Zachary Lehner, Kurt Sciubba, Daniel M. |
author_sort | Lubelski, Daniel |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: To review the existing literature of prediction models in degenerative spinal surgery. METHODS: Review of PubMed/Medline and Embase databases was conducted to identify articles between January 1, 2000 and March 1, 2020 that reported prediction model performance for outcomes following elective degenerative spine surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles were included. Twenty studies were of thoracolumbar, 5 were of cervical, and 6 included all spine patients. Five studies were externally validated. Prediction models were developed using machine learning (42%) and logistic regression (42%) as well as other techniques. Web-based calculators were included in 45% of published articles. Various outcomes were investigated, including complications, infection, length of stay, discharge disposition, reoperation, readmission, disability score, back pain, leg pain, return to work, and opioid dependence. CONCLUSIONS: Significant heterogeneity exists in methods used to develop prediction models of postoperative outcomes after degenerative spine surgery. Most internally validate their scores, but a few have been externally validated. Areas under the curve for most models range from 0.6 to 0.9. Techniques for development are becoming increasingly sophisticated with different machine learning tools. With further external validation, these models can be deployed online for patient, physician, and administrative use, and have the potential to optimize outcomes and maximize value in spine surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8076813 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80768132021-05-13 Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review Lubelski, Daniel Hersh, Andrew Azad, Tej D. Ehresman, Jeff Pennington, Zachary Lehner, Kurt Sciubba, Daniel M. Global Spine J Special Issue Articles STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: To review the existing literature of prediction models in degenerative spinal surgery. METHODS: Review of PubMed/Medline and Embase databases was conducted to identify articles between January 1, 2000 and March 1, 2020 that reported prediction model performance for outcomes following elective degenerative spine surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-one articles were included. Twenty studies were of thoracolumbar, 5 were of cervical, and 6 included all spine patients. Five studies were externally validated. Prediction models were developed using machine learning (42%) and logistic regression (42%) as well as other techniques. Web-based calculators were included in 45% of published articles. Various outcomes were investigated, including complications, infection, length of stay, discharge disposition, reoperation, readmission, disability score, back pain, leg pain, return to work, and opioid dependence. CONCLUSIONS: Significant heterogeneity exists in methods used to develop prediction models of postoperative outcomes after degenerative spine surgery. Most internally validate their scores, but a few have been externally validated. Areas under the curve for most models range from 0.6 to 0.9. Techniques for development are becoming increasingly sophisticated with different machine learning tools. With further external validation, these models can be deployed online for patient, physician, and administrative use, and have the potential to optimize outcomes and maximize value in spine surgery. SAGE Publications 2021-04-23 2021-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8076813/ /pubmed/33890803 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568220959037 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Special Issue Articles Lubelski, Daniel Hersh, Andrew Azad, Tej D. Ehresman, Jeff Pennington, Zachary Lehner, Kurt Sciubba, Daniel M. Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title | Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_full | Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_short | Prediction Models in Degenerative Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_sort | prediction models in degenerative spine surgery: a systematic review |
topic | Special Issue Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8076813/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33890803 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568220959037 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lubelskidaniel predictionmodelsindegenerativespinesurgeryasystematicreview AT hershandrew predictionmodelsindegenerativespinesurgeryasystematicreview AT azadtejd predictionmodelsindegenerativespinesurgeryasystematicreview AT ehresmanjeff predictionmodelsindegenerativespinesurgeryasystematicreview AT penningtonzachary predictionmodelsindegenerativespinesurgeryasystematicreview AT lehnerkurt predictionmodelsindegenerativespinesurgeryasystematicreview AT sciubbadanielm predictionmodelsindegenerativespinesurgeryasystematicreview |