Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jan;10(1 Suppl):17S-28S.
doi: 10.1177/2192568219839699. Epub 2020 Jan 6.

Quality and Safety Improvement in Spine Surgery

Affiliations

Quality and Safety Improvement in Spine Surgery

Fan Jiang et al. Global Spine J. 2020 Jan.

Abstract

Study design: Review article.

Objectives: A narrative review of the literature on the current advances and limitations in quality and safety improvement initiatives in spine surgery.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE focusing on 3 preidentified concepts: (1) quality and safety improvement, (2) reporting of outcomes and adverse events, and (3) prediction model and practice guidelines. The search was conducted under appropriate subject headings and using relevant text words. Articles were screened, and manuscripts relevant to this discussion were included in the narrative review.

Results: Quality and safety improvement remains a major research focus attracting investigators from the global spine community. Multiple databases and registries have been developed for the purpose of generating data and monitoring the progress of quality and safety improvement initiatives. The development of various prediction models and clinical practice guidelines has helped shape the care of spine patients in the modern era. With the reported success of exemplary programs initiated by the Northwestern and Seattle Spine Team, other quality and safety improvement initiatives are anticipated to follow. However, despite these advancements, the reporting metrics for outcomes and adverse events remain heterogeneous in the literature.

Conclusion: Constant surveillance and continuous improvement of the quality and safety of spine treatments is imperative in modern health care. Although great advancement has been made, issues with reporting outcomes and adverse events persist, and improvement in this regard is certainly needed.

Keywords: adverse events; clinical practice guidelines; outcome; prediction model; predictors; protocol; quality improvement; safety; spine surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kobayashi K, Ando K, Nishida Y, Ishiguro N, Imagama S. Epidemiological trends in spine surgery over 10 years in a multicenter database. Eur Spine J. 2018;27:1698–1703. - PubMed
    1. Cortesi PA, Assietti R, Cuzzocrea F, et al. Epidemiologic and economic burden attributable to first spinal fusion surgery: analysis from an Italian Administrative Database. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42:1398–1404. - PubMed
    1. Thirukumaran CP, Raudenbush B, Li Y, Molinari R, Rubery P, Mesfin A. National trends in the surgical management of adult lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis: 1998 to 2011. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41:490–501. - PubMed
    1. Witiw CD, Smieliauskas F, Fehlings MG. Health economics and the management of degenerative cervical myelopathy. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2018;29:169–176. - PubMed
    1. Lu Y, Qureshi SA. Cost-effective studies in spine surgeries: a narrative review. Spine J. 2014;14:2748–2762. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources