Fusion versus Non-fusion Surgery for Pediatric Idiopathic Scoliosis: Preferences of Patients, Caregivers, and Patient-Caregiver Dyads.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Vincent J Devlin, Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda, David Gebben, A Noelle Larson, Michelle Claire Marks, Peter Newton, Raquel Peat, Michelle Tarver, Olufemi Babalola, Patrick Cahill, Suken Shah, Amer Samdani, Keith Bachmann, Baron Lonner
{"title":"Fusion versus Non-fusion Surgery for Pediatric Idiopathic Scoliosis: Preferences of Patients, Caregivers, and Patient-Caregiver Dyads.","authors":"Vincent J Devlin, Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda, David Gebben, A Noelle Larson, Michelle Claire Marks, Peter Newton, Raquel Peat, Michelle Tarver, Olufemi Babalola, Patrick Cahill, Suken Shah, Amer Samdani, Keith Bachmann, Baron Lonner","doi":"10.1177/21925682251330217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Study DesignOriginal research, cross-sectional study.ObjectivesEvaluate preferences of patients, caregivers, and patient-caregiver dyads for non-fusion vs fusion surgery.MethodsA survey-based discrete choice experiment included patients 12-15 years of age with idiopathic scoliosis and their caregivers. Preference weights were estimated for 2 types of attributes that differed between fusion and non-fusion surgery: treatment outcomes (ie, appearance, confidence in planned correction, spinal motion, device failure, reoperation, and recovery period) and procedure-type requirements associated with each surgery type. Correlations between preference weights for patients, caregivers, and dyads were calculated to assess preference concordance between cohorts.ResultsA total of 344 respondents (124 patients, 92 caregivers, and 128 patient/caregiver dyads) completed the survey. Appearance was the most important treatment outcome for the average respondent in all cohorts. For patients, the least important treatment outcome was recovery time, whereas reoperation rate was the least important treatment outcome for caregivers and dyads. After controlling for treatment outcomes, patients and patient-caregiver dyads preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with fusion surgery, while caregivers preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with non-fusion surgery. Preferences of respondents who completed the survey prior to surgery were similar to those who completed the survey after surgery. Patient and caregiver preferences were more similar to the preferences of dyads than to each other.ConclusionsPatients and patient-caregiver dyads preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with fusion surgery, while caregivers preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with non-fusion surgery. Appearance was the most important treatment outcome for patients, caregivers, and patient-caregiver dyads.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"21925682251330217"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11962925/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682251330217","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study DesignOriginal research, cross-sectional study.ObjectivesEvaluate preferences of patients, caregivers, and patient-caregiver dyads for non-fusion vs fusion surgery.MethodsA survey-based discrete choice experiment included patients 12-15 years of age with idiopathic scoliosis and their caregivers. Preference weights were estimated for 2 types of attributes that differed between fusion and non-fusion surgery: treatment outcomes (ie, appearance, confidence in planned correction, spinal motion, device failure, reoperation, and recovery period) and procedure-type requirements associated with each surgery type. Correlations between preference weights for patients, caregivers, and dyads were calculated to assess preference concordance between cohorts.ResultsA total of 344 respondents (124 patients, 92 caregivers, and 128 patient/caregiver dyads) completed the survey. Appearance was the most important treatment outcome for the average respondent in all cohorts. For patients, the least important treatment outcome was recovery time, whereas reoperation rate was the least important treatment outcome for caregivers and dyads. After controlling for treatment outcomes, patients and patient-caregiver dyads preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with fusion surgery, while caregivers preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with non-fusion surgery. Preferences of respondents who completed the survey prior to surgery were similar to those who completed the survey after surgery. Patient and caregiver preferences were more similar to the preferences of dyads than to each other.ConclusionsPatients and patient-caregiver dyads preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with fusion surgery, while caregivers preferred the procedure-type requirements associated with non-fusion surgery. Appearance was the most important treatment outcome for patients, caregivers, and patient-caregiver dyads.

儿童特发性脊柱侧凸的融合与非融合手术:患者、护理者和患者-护理者二元组合的偏好。
研究设计原创性研究,横断面研究。目的评估患者、护理人员和患者-护理人员对非融合手术和融合手术的偏好。方法采用离散选择调查法,选取12 ~ 15岁特发性脊柱侧凸患者及其照顾者。评估融合手术和非融合手术之间的2种不同属性的偏好权重:治疗结果(即外观、对计划矫正的信心、脊柱运动、器械失效、再手术和恢复期)和与每种手术类型相关的手术类型要求。计算患者、护理者和配偶的偏好权重之间的相关性,以评估队列之间的偏好一致性。结果共有344名受访者(124名患者,92名护理人员,128名患者/护理人员对)完成了调查。在所有队列中,外观是平均应答者最重要的治疗结果。对于患者来说,最不重要的治疗结果是恢复时间,而再手术率是最不重要的治疗结果。在控制治疗结果后,患者和患者-护理者双组倾向于与融合手术相关的手术类型要求,而护理者倾向于与非融合手术相关的手术类型要求。术前完成调查的受访者的偏好与术后完成调查的受访者相似。病人和照顾者的偏好与二人组的偏好更相似,而不是彼此之间的偏好。结论患者和患者-护理人员更倾向于融合手术相关的手术类型要求,而护理人员更倾向于非融合手术相关的手术类型要求。外观是患者、护理者和患者-护理者二人组最重要的治疗结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信