Cargando…

Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review

BACKGROUND: As a growing number of patients seek consultations for increasingly complex and costly spinal surgery, it is of both clinical and economic value to investigate the role for second opinions (SOs). Here, we summarized and focused on the shortcomings of 14 studies regarding the role and val...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gattas, Sandra, Fote, Gianna M., Brown, Nolan J., Lien, Brian V., Choi, Elliot H., Chan, Alvin Y., Rosen, Charles D., Oh, Michael Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Scientific Scholar 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8422531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34513199
http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/SNI_399_2021
_version_ 1783749301955985408
author Gattas, Sandra
Fote, Gianna M.
Brown, Nolan J.
Lien, Brian V.
Choi, Elliot H.
Chan, Alvin Y.
Rosen, Charles D.
Oh, Michael Y.
author_facet Gattas, Sandra
Fote, Gianna M.
Brown, Nolan J.
Lien, Brian V.
Choi, Elliot H.
Chan, Alvin Y.
Rosen, Charles D.
Oh, Michael Y.
author_sort Gattas, Sandra
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: As a growing number of patients seek consultations for increasingly complex and costly spinal surgery, it is of both clinical and economic value to investigate the role for second opinions (SOs). Here, we summarized and focused on the shortcomings of 14 studies regarding the role and value of SOs before proceeding with spine surgery. METHODS: Utilizing PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus, we identified 14 studies that met the inclusion criteria that included: English, primary articles, and studies published in the past 20 years. RESULTS: We identified the following findings regarding SO for spine surgery: (1) about 40.6% of spine consultations are SO cases; (2) 61.3% of those received a discordant SO; (3) 75% of discordant SOs recommended conservative management; and (4) SO discordance applied to a variety of procedures. CONCLUSION: The 14 studies reviewed regarding SOs in spine surgery showed that half of the SOs differed from those given in the initial consultation and that SOs in spine surgery can have a substantial impact on patient care. Absent are prospective studies investigating the impact of following a first versus second opinion. These studies are needed to inform the potential benefit of universal implementation of SOs before major spine operations to potentially reduce the frequency and type/extent of surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8422531
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Scientific Scholar
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84225312021-09-09 Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review Gattas, Sandra Fote, Gianna M. Brown, Nolan J. Lien, Brian V. Choi, Elliot H. Chan, Alvin Y. Rosen, Charles D. Oh, Michael Y. Surg Neurol Int Review Article BACKGROUND: As a growing number of patients seek consultations for increasingly complex and costly spinal surgery, it is of both clinical and economic value to investigate the role for second opinions (SOs). Here, we summarized and focused on the shortcomings of 14 studies regarding the role and value of SOs before proceeding with spine surgery. METHODS: Utilizing PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus, we identified 14 studies that met the inclusion criteria that included: English, primary articles, and studies published in the past 20 years. RESULTS: We identified the following findings regarding SO for spine surgery: (1) about 40.6% of spine consultations are SO cases; (2) 61.3% of those received a discordant SO; (3) 75% of discordant SOs recommended conservative management; and (4) SO discordance applied to a variety of procedures. CONCLUSION: The 14 studies reviewed regarding SOs in spine surgery showed that half of the SOs differed from those given in the initial consultation and that SOs in spine surgery can have a substantial impact on patient care. Absent are prospective studies investigating the impact of following a first versus second opinion. These studies are needed to inform the potential benefit of universal implementation of SOs before major spine operations to potentially reduce the frequency and type/extent of surgery. Scientific Scholar 2021-08-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8422531/ /pubmed/34513199 http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/SNI_399_2021 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Surgical Neurology International https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Review Article
Gattas, Sandra
Fote, Gianna M.
Brown, Nolan J.
Lien, Brian V.
Choi, Elliot H.
Chan, Alvin Y.
Rosen, Charles D.
Oh, Michael Y.
Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review
title Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review
title_full Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review
title_fullStr Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review
title_short Second opinion in spine surgery: A scoping review
title_sort second opinion in spine surgery: a scoping review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8422531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34513199
http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/SNI_399_2021
work_keys_str_mv AT gattassandra secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview
AT fotegiannam secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview
AT brownnolanj secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview
AT lienbrianv secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview
AT choiellioth secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview
AT chanalviny secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview
AT rosencharlesd secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview
AT ohmichaely secondopinioninspinesurgeryascopingreview