Selcen Yüksel

The Global Spine Care Initiative: model of care and implementation

PurposeSpine-related disorders are a leading cause of global disability and are a burden on society and to public health. Currently, there is no comprehensive, evidence-based model of care for spine-related disorders, which includes back and neck pain, deformity, spine injury, neurological conditions, spinal diseases, and pathology, that could be applied in global health care settings. The purposes of this paper are to propose: (1) principles to transform the delivery of spine care; (2) an evidence-based model that could be applied globally; and (3) implementation suggestions.MethodsThe Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) meetings and literature reviews were synthesized into a seed document and distributed to spine care experts. After three rounds of a modified Delphi process, all participants reached consensus on the final model of care and implementation steps.ResultsSixty-six experts representing 24 countries participated. The GSCI model of care has eight core principles: person-centered, people-centered, biopsychosocial, proactive, evidence-based, integrative, collaborative, and self-sustaining. The model of care includes a classification system and care pathway, levels of care, and a focus on the patient’s journey. The six steps for implementation are initiation and preparation; assessment of the current situation; planning and designing solutions; implementation; assessment and evaluation of program; and sustain program and scale up.ConclusionThe GSCI proposes an evidence-based, practical, sustainable, and scalable model of care representing eight core principles with a six-step implementation plan. The aim of this model is to help transform spine care globally, especially in low- and middle-income countries and underserved communities.Graphical abstractThese slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: a consensus process to develop and validate a stratification scheme for surgical care of spinal disorders as a guide for improved resource utilization in low- and middle-income communities

AbstractPurposeThe purpose of this study was to develop a stratification scheme for surgical spinal care to serve as a framework for referrals and distribution of patients with spinal disorders.MethodsWe used a modified Delphi process. A literature search identified experts for the consensus panel and the panel was expanded by inviting spine surgeons known to be global opinion leaders. After creating a seed document of five hierarchical levels of surgical care, a four-step modified Delphi process (question validation, collection of factors, evaluation of factors, re-evaluation of factors) was performed.ResultsOf 78 invited experts, 19 participated in round 1, and of the 19, 14 participated in 2, and 12 in 3 and 4. Consensus was fairly heterogeneous for levels of care 2–4 (moderate resources). Only simple assessment methods based on the clinical skills of the medical personnel were considered feasible and safe in low-resource settings. Diagnosis, staging, and treatment were deemed feasible and safe in a specialized spine center. Accurate diagnostic workup was deemed feasible and safe for lower levels of care complexity (from level 3 upwards) compared to non-invasive procedures (level 4) and the full range of invasive procedures (level 5).ConclusionThis study introduces a five-level stratification scheme for the surgical care of spinal disorders. This stratification may provide input into the Global Spine Care Initiative care pathway that will be applied in medically underserved areas and low- and middle-income countries.Graphical Abstract These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: methodology, contributors, and disclosures

AbstractPurposeThe purpose of this report is to describe the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) contributors, disclosures, and methods for reporting transparency on the development of the recommendations. MethodsWorld Spine Care convened the GSCI to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable healthcare model for spinal care. The initiative aims to improve the management, prevention, and public health for spine-related disorders worldwide; thus, global representation was essential. A series of meetings established the initiative’s mission and goals. Electronic surveys collected contributorship and demographic information, and experiences with spinal conditions to better understand perceptions and potential biases that were contributing to the model of care. ResultsSixty-eight clinicians and scientists participated in the deliberations and are authors of one or more of the GSCI articles. Of these experts, 57 reported providing spine care in 34 countries, (i.e., low-, middle-, and high-income countries, as well as underserved communities in high-income countries.) The majority reported personally experiencing or having a close family member with one or more spinal concerns including: spine-related trauma or injury, spinal problems that required emergency or surgical intervention, spinal pain referred from non-spine sources, spinal deformity, spinal pathology or disease, neurological problems, and/or mild, moderate, or severe back or neck pain. There were no substantial reported conflicts of interest.ConclusionThe GSCI participants have broad professional experience and wide international distribution with no discipline dominating the deliberations. The GSCI believes this set of papers has the potential to inform and improve spine care globally.Graphical abstractThese slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: World Spine Care executive summary on reducing spine-related disability in low- and middle-income communities

PurposeSpinal disorders, including back and neck pain, are major causes of disability, economic hardship, and morbidity, especially in underserved communities and low- and middle-income countries. Currently, there is no model of care to address this issue. This paper provides an overview of the papers from the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI), which was convened to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable, spinal healthcare model for communities around the world with various levels of resources.MethodsLeading spine clinicians and scientists around the world were invited to participate. The interprofessional, international team consisted of 68 members from 24 countries, representing most disciplines that study or care for patients with spinal symptoms, including family physicians, spine surgeons, rheumatologists, chiropractors, physical therapists, epidemiologists, research methodologists, and other stakeholders.ResultsLiterature reviews on the burden of spinal disorders and six categories of evidence-based interventions for spinal disorders (assessment, public health, psychosocial, noninvasive, invasive, and the management of osteoporosis) were completed. In addition, participants developed a stratification system for surgical intervention, a classification system for spinal disorders, an evidence-based care pathway, and lists of resources and recommendations to implement the GSCI model of care.ConclusionThe GSCI proposes an evidence-based model that is consistent with recent calls for action to reduce the global burden of spinal disorders. The model requires testing to determine feasibility. If it proves to be implementable, this model holds great promise to reduce the tremendous global burden of spinal disorders.Graphical abstractThese slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Comparison of micro-computerized tomography and cone-beam computerized tomography in the detection of accessory canals in primary molars

Purpose This study was performed to compare the accuracy of micro-computed tomography (CT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting accessory canals in primary molars. Materials and Methods Forty-one extracted human primary first and second molars were embedded in wax blocks and scanned using micro-CT and CBCT. After the images were taken, the samples were processed using a clearing technique and examined under a stereomicroscope in order to establish the gold standard for this study. The specimens were classified into three groups: maxillary molars, mandibular molars with three canals, and mandibular molars with four canals. Differences between the gold standard and the observations made using the imaging methods were calculated using Spearmans rho correlation coefficient test. Results The presence of accessory canals in micro-CT images of maxillary and mandibular root canals showed a statistically significant correlation with the stereomicroscopic images used as a gold standard. No statistically significant correlation was found between the CBCT findings and the stereomicroscopic images. Conclusion Although micro-CT is not suitable for clinical use, it provides more detailed information about minor anatomical structures. However, CBCT is convenient for clinical use but may not be capable of adequately analyzing the internal anatomy of primary teeth.

Decision analysis to identify the ideal treatment for adult spinal deformity: What is the impact of complications on treatment outcomes?

Objective The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of treatment complications on outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD) using a decision analysis (DA) model. Methods The study included 535 ASD patients (371 with non-surgical (NS) and 164 with surgical (S) treatment) from an international multicentre database of ASD patients. DA was structured in two main steps; 1) Baseline analysis (Assessing the probabilities of outcomes, Assessing the values of preference -utilities-, Combining information on probability and utility and assigning the quality adjusted life expectancy (QALE) for each treatment) and 2) Sensitivity analysis. Complications were analyzed as life threatening (LT) and nonlife threatening (NLT) and their probabilities were calculated from the database as well as a thorough literature review. Outcomes were analyzed as improvement, no change and deterioration. Death/complete paralysis was considered as a separate category. Results All 535 patients were analyzed in regard to complications. Overall, there were 78 NLT and 12 LT complications and 3 death/paralysis. Surgical treatment offered significantly higher chances of clinical improvement but also was significantly more prone to complications (31.7% vs. 11.1%, p < 0.001). Conclusion Surgical treatment of ASD is more likely to cause complications compared to NS treatment. On the other hand, surgery has been shown to provide a higher likelihood of improvement in HRQoL scores. So, the decision on the type of treatment in ASD needs to take both chances of improvement and burden associated with S or NS treatments and better be arrived by the active participation of patients and physicians equipped with the present information. Level of evidence Level II, Decision analysis.

Establishing the Turkish version of the SIGAM mobility scale, and determining its validity and reliability in lower extremity amputees

Abstract Purpose: The aim of this study is to adapt the Special Interest Group in Amputee Medicine (SIGAM) mobility scale to Turkish, and to test its validity and reliability in lower extremity amputees. Material and methods: Adaptation of the scale into Turkish was performed by following the steps in American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) guideline. Turkish version of the scale was tested twice on 109 patients who had lower extremity amputations, at hours 0 and 72. The reliability of the Turkish version was tested for internal consistency and test–retest reliability. Structural validity was tested using the “scale validity” method. For this purpose, the scores of the Short Form-36 (SF-36), Functional Ambulation Scale (FAS), Get Up and Go Test, and Satisfaction with the Prosthesis Questionnaire (SATPRO) were calculated, and analyzed using Spearman’s correlation test. Results: Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.67 for the Turkish version of the SIGAM mobility scale. Cohens kappa coefficients were between 0.224 and 0.999. Repeatability according to the results of the SIGAM mobility scale (grades A–F) was 0.822. We found significant and strong positive correlations of the SIGAM mobility scale results with the FAS, Get Up and Go Test, SATPRO, and all of the SF-36 subscales. Conclusion: In our study, the Turkish version of the SIGAM mobility scale was found as a reliable, valid, and easy to use scale in everyday practice for measuring mobility in lower extremity amputees. Implications for Rehabilitation Amputation is the surgical removal of a severely injured and nonfunctional extremity, at a level of one or more bones proximal to the body. Loss of a lower extremity is one of the most important conditions that cause functional disability. The Special Interest Group in Amputee Medicine (SIGAM) mobility scale contains 21 questions that evaluate the mobility of lower extremity amputees. Lack of a specific Turkish scale that evaluates rehabilitation results and mobility of lower extremity amputees, and determines their needs, directed us to perform a study on this topic when we took the number of amputations performed in our country into consideration. SIGAM mobility scale is directed at rehabilitation specialists who are working in amputee medicine. Turkish version of this scale was found both reliable and valid in our study and hence it can be used in clinical practice and studies.

Minimum clinically important difference of the health-related quality of life scales in adult spinal deformity calculated by latent class analysis: is it appropriate to use the same values for surgical and nonsurgical patients?

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) parameters have been shown to be reliable and valid in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has become increasingly important to clinicians in evaluating patients with a threshold of improvement that is clinically relevant. PURPOSE To calculate MCID and minimum detectable change (MDC) values of total scores of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Physical Component Summary (PCS), Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the Short Form 36 (SF-36), and Scoliosis Research Society 22R (SRS-22R) in surgically and nonsurgically treated ASD patients who have completed an anchor question at pretreatment and 1-year follow-up. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING Prospective cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE Surgical and nonsurgical patients from a multicenter ASD database. OUTCOME MEASURES Self-reported HRQOL measures (COMI, ODI, SF-36, SRS-22R, and anchor question). METHODS A total of 185 surgical and 86 nonsurgical patients from a multicenter ASD database who completed pretreatment and 1-year follow-up HRQOL scales and the anchor question at the first year follow-up were included. The anchor question was used to determine MCID for each HRQOL measure. MCIDs were calculated by an anchor-based method using latent class analysis (LCA) and MDCs by a distribution-based method. RESULTS All differences between means of baseline and first year postoperative total score measures for all scales demonstrated statistically significant improvements in the overall population as well as the surgically treated patients but not in the nonsurgical group. The calculated MDC and MCID values of HRQOL parameters in the entire study population were 1.34 and 2.62 for COMI, 10.65 and 14.31 for ODI, 6.09 and 7.33 for SF-36 PCS, 6.14 and 4.37 for SF-36 MCS, and 0.42 and 0.71 for SRS-22R. The calculated MCID values for surgical and non-surgical treatment groups were 2.76 versus 1.20 for COMI, 14.96 versus 2.45 for ODI, 7.83 versus 2.15 for SF-36 PCS, 5.14 versus 2.03 for SF-36 MCS, and 0.94 versus 0.11 for SRS-22R; the MDC values for surgical and nonsurgical treatment groups were 1.22 versus 1.51 for COMI, 10.27 versus 9.45 for ODI, 5.16 versus 6.77 for SF-36 PCS, 6.05 versus 5.67 for SF-36 MCS, and 0.38 versus 0.43 for SRS-22R. CONCLUSIONS This study has demonstrated that MCID calculations for the HRQOL scales in ASD using LCA yield values comparable to other studies that had used different methodologies. The most important finding was the significantly different MCIDs for COMI, ODI, SF-36 PCS and SRS-22 in the surgically and nonsurgically treated cohorts. This finding suggests that a universal MCID value, inherent to a specific HRQOL for an entire cohort of ASD may not exist. Use of different MCIDs for surgical and nonsurgical patients may be warranted.

Psoriasis management in actual clinical practice: a 6-year retrospective study of 845 patients

Abstract Background: Over the past years, with the availability of relatively well tolerated, very effective but expensive drugs, biologics, treatment of psoriasis has dramatically shifted from inpatient modalities to outpatient ones. Relatively little is known about true life practices regarding psoriasis treatment in our country. Aims: To assess the impact of introduction of conventional drugs and biological drugs on medical resource use of psoriasis patients. Study design: A retrospective chart review was performed. Methods: Patients with the diagnosis of psoriasis who were seen in the period between 2010 and 2015 were included in the study. Data including hospital resource use (inpatient, outpatient, day ward) and treatment modalities were collected. Results: The study population comprised 845 patients with 1053 different treatment modalities. There was not any significant difference between number of in-hospital days and frequency of hospitalization between biological drugs and cyclosporine. There was significant (p < .05) decline in the length of hospitalization after the year 2012 in biological treatment group. Conclusions: Treatment of MSP with classical drugs requires fairly similar medical resource expenditures as biologics.

The Influence of Diagnosis, Age, and Gender on Surgical Outcomes in Patients With Adult Spinal Deformity

Study Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a multicentric database. Objectives: To determine the clinical impact of diagnosis, age, and gender on treatment outcomes in surgically treated adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients. Methods: A total of 199 surgical patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included and analyzed for baseline characteristics. Patients were separated into 2 groups based on improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) parameters by minimum clinically important difference. Statistics were used to analyze the effect of diagnosis, age, and gender on outcome measurements followed by a multivariate binary logistic regression model for these results with statistical significance. Results: Age was found to affect SF-36 PCS (Short From-36 Physical Component Summary) score significantly, with an odds ratio of 1.017 (unit by unit) of improving SF-36 PCS score on multivariate analysis (P < .05). The breaking point in age for this effect was 37.5 years (AUC = 58.0, P = .05). A diagnosis of idiopathic deformity would increase the probability of improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) by a factor of 0.219 and in SF-36 PCS by 0.581 times (P < .05). Gender was found not to have a significant effect on any of the HRQOL scores. Conclusions: Age, along with a diagnosis of degenerative deformity, may have positive effects on the likelihood of improvement in SF-36 PCS (for age) and ODI (for diagnosis) in surgically treated patients with ASD and the breaking point of this effect may be earlier than generally anticipated. Gender does not seem to affect results. These may be important in patient counseling for the anticipated outcomes of surgery.