关于内窥镜脊柱手术当前和新兴技术的 ISASS 网络研讨会系列的见解 | 第一部分:外科医生对内窥镜椎间盘切除术/对椎板切除术、椎间融合术的认可程度以及手术过程中患者反馈的重要性的多变量 Rasch 分析。

IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY
Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski, Paulo Sergio Terxeira de Carvalho, Alvaro Dowling, Zhen-Zhou Li, Martin Knight, Morgan P Lorio
{"title":"关于内窥镜脊柱手术当前和新兴技术的 ISASS 网络研讨会系列的见解 | 第一部分:外科医生对内窥镜椎间盘切除术/对椎板切除术、椎间融合术的认可程度以及手术过程中患者反馈的重要性的多变量 Rasch 分析。","authors":"Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski, Paulo Sergio Terxeira de Carvalho, Alvaro Dowling, Zhen-Zhou Li, Martin Knight, Morgan P Lorio","doi":"10.14444/8672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery hosted the first of a series of 4 webinars on endoscopic spine surgery techniques, focusing on end§oscopic discectomy, foraminotomy, instrumented endoscopic fusion, standalone lumbar interbody fusion with innovative materials, and the role of patient feedback in awake procedures. This series aims to share knowledge and discuss the complexities and clinical evidence of modern endoscopic spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze the level of surgeon endorsement for the presented endoscopic spine surgery techniques before and after the webinar, utilizing polytomous Rasch analysis, and to evaluate the potential for these insights to inform clinical guideline recommendations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was available to 1311 potential respondents during the Zoom webinar, collecting data on surgeon endorsements using a Likert scale. The polytomous Rasch model was employed to analyze responses, considering the complexity of decisions against surgeon expertise, developing a logarithmic measurement scale, allowing objective statistical analysis of categorical variables, highlighting incongruent or out-of-order items vs congruent and in-order items, and driving improvement in clinical guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 4 topics received higher confidence ratings demonstrated by descriptive statistics, highlighting the webinar's effective role in surgeon education and in identifying ongoing trends in spine surgery. The logarithmic transformation of these data during Rasch analysis showed noticeable shifts in surgeon confidence levels postwebinar, with increased endorsement for transforaminal full-endoscopic thoracolumbar interbody fusion for hard disc herniation and standalone endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion. The Wright plot and person-item map analyses demonstrated that the webinar effectively targeted areas of initial low confidence, significantly impacting surgeons' perceptions. Disordered endorsement thresholds remained in the topics of uniportal transforaminal discectomy/foraminotomy and patient feedback during endoscopic spine surgery, indicating issues in response category discrimination or confounding factors not captured by the survey. Ongoing controversies were highlighted by the influence of confounding factors, stemming from preconceived notions and limited familiarity with high-grade evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The first in the 4-part webinar series effectively shifted professional confidence and acceptance of innovative surgical approaches among spine surgeons. Observations indicated a high level of interest in applying the endoscopic surgery platform with other advanced technologies. The polytomous Rasch analysis provided nuanced insights into ongoing trends and areas in need of further clarification.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Assessing surgeon confidence and acceptance of endoscopic spinal surgeries using polytomous Rasch analysis.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 2 (inferential) and 3 (observational) evidence because Rasch analysis provides statistical validation of instruments rather than direct clinical outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"S10-S22"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insights From the ISASS Webinar Series on Current and Emerging Techniques in Endoscopic Spine Surgery | Part 1: Polytomous Rasch Analysis of Surgeon Endorsement of Endoscopic Discectomy/Foraminotomy, Interbody Fusion, and Importance of Patient Feedback During Surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski, Paulo Sergio Terxeira de Carvalho, Alvaro Dowling, Zhen-Zhou Li, Martin Knight, Morgan P Lorio\",\"doi\":\"10.14444/8672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery hosted the first of a series of 4 webinars on endoscopic spine surgery techniques, focusing on end§oscopic discectomy, foraminotomy, instrumented endoscopic fusion, standalone lumbar interbody fusion with innovative materials, and the role of patient feedback in awake procedures. This series aims to share knowledge and discuss the complexities and clinical evidence of modern endoscopic spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze the level of surgeon endorsement for the presented endoscopic spine surgery techniques before and after the webinar, utilizing polytomous Rasch analysis, and to evaluate the potential for these insights to inform clinical guideline recommendations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was available to 1311 potential respondents during the Zoom webinar, collecting data on surgeon endorsements using a Likert scale. The polytomous Rasch model was employed to analyze responses, considering the complexity of decisions against surgeon expertise, developing a logarithmic measurement scale, allowing objective statistical analysis of categorical variables, highlighting incongruent or out-of-order items vs congruent and in-order items, and driving improvement in clinical guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 4 topics received higher confidence ratings demonstrated by descriptive statistics, highlighting the webinar's effective role in surgeon education and in identifying ongoing trends in spine surgery. The logarithmic transformation of these data during Rasch analysis showed noticeable shifts in surgeon confidence levels postwebinar, with increased endorsement for transforaminal full-endoscopic thoracolumbar interbody fusion for hard disc herniation and standalone endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion. The Wright plot and person-item map analyses demonstrated that the webinar effectively targeted areas of initial low confidence, significantly impacting surgeons' perceptions. Disordered endorsement thresholds remained in the topics of uniportal transforaminal discectomy/foraminotomy and patient feedback during endoscopic spine surgery, indicating issues in response category discrimination or confounding factors not captured by the survey. Ongoing controversies were highlighted by the influence of confounding factors, stemming from preconceived notions and limited familiarity with high-grade evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The first in the 4-part webinar series effectively shifted professional confidence and acceptance of innovative surgical approaches among spine surgeons. Observations indicated a high level of interest in applying the endoscopic surgery platform with other advanced technologies. The polytomous Rasch analysis provided nuanced insights into ongoing trends and areas in need of further clarification.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Assessing surgeon confidence and acceptance of endoscopic spinal surgeries using polytomous Rasch analysis.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 2 (inferential) and 3 (observational) evidence because Rasch analysis provides statistical validation of instruments rather than direct clinical outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38486,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"S10-S22\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14444/8672\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:国际脊柱外科促进会举办了4场关于内窥镜脊柱手术技术的系列网络研讨会中的第一场,重点关注内窥镜椎间盘切除术、椎板切除术、器械内窥镜融合术、使用创新材料的独立腰椎椎间融合术以及患者反馈在清醒手术中的作用。本系列旨在分享知识,讨论现代内窥镜脊柱手术的复杂性和临床证据:目的:利用多定量拉施分析法分析网络研讨会前后外科医生对所介绍的内窥镜脊柱手术技术的认可程度,并评估这些见解为临床指南建议提供信息的潜力:在 Zoom 网络研讨会期间向 1311 名潜在受访者进行了调查,使用李克特量表收集外科医生认可度的数据。考虑到决定的复杂性与外科医生的专业知识,采用了多项式 Rasch 模型来分析回答,制定了一个对数测量量表,允许对分类变量进行客观的统计分析,突出不一致或失序项目与一致和有序项目的对比,并推动临床指南的改进:结果:描述性统计显示,所有 4 个主题都获得了较高的置信度评分,凸显了网络研讨会在外科医生教育和确定脊柱外科发展趋势方面的有效作用。在 Rasch 分析过程中对这些数据进行对数变换,显示出外科医生在网络研讨会后的信心水平发生了明显变化,对经椎间孔全内镜胸腰椎椎体间融合术治疗硬椎间盘突出症和独立内镜腰椎椎体间融合术的认可度有所提高。赖特图和人项图分析表明,网络研讨会有效地针对了最初信心不足的领域,极大地影响了外科医生的看法。在单孔经椎间孔椎间盘切除术/椎板孔切除术和内窥镜脊柱手术中的患者反馈这两个主题上,仍然存在认可阈值失调的问题,这表明存在响应类别区分问题或调查未捕捉到的混杂因素。由于先入为主的观念和对高级证据的了解有限,混杂因素的影响凸显了持续存在的争议:四部分网络研讨会系列中的第一部分有效地转变了脊柱外科医生的专业信心和对创新手术方法的接受程度。观察结果表明,脊柱外科医生对将内窥镜手术平台与其他先进技术结合应用的兴趣很高。多变量 Rasch 分析为当前趋势和需要进一步澄清的领域提供了细致入微的见解:临床相关性:利用多矩拉施分析评估外科医生对内窥镜脊柱手术的信心和接受程度:证据等级:2级(推论性)和3级(观察性)证据,因为Rasch分析提供的是工具的统计验证,而不是直接的临床结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Insights From the ISASS Webinar Series on Current and Emerging Techniques in Endoscopic Spine Surgery | Part 1: Polytomous Rasch Analysis of Surgeon Endorsement of Endoscopic Discectomy/Foraminotomy, Interbody Fusion, and Importance of Patient Feedback During Surgery.

Background: The International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery hosted the first of a series of 4 webinars on endoscopic spine surgery techniques, focusing on end§oscopic discectomy, foraminotomy, instrumented endoscopic fusion, standalone lumbar interbody fusion with innovative materials, and the role of patient feedback in awake procedures. This series aims to share knowledge and discuss the complexities and clinical evidence of modern endoscopic spine surgery.

Objective: To analyze the level of surgeon endorsement for the presented endoscopic spine surgery techniques before and after the webinar, utilizing polytomous Rasch analysis, and to evaluate the potential for these insights to inform clinical guideline recommendations.

Methods: A survey was available to 1311 potential respondents during the Zoom webinar, collecting data on surgeon endorsements using a Likert scale. The polytomous Rasch model was employed to analyze responses, considering the complexity of decisions against surgeon expertise, developing a logarithmic measurement scale, allowing objective statistical analysis of categorical variables, highlighting incongruent or out-of-order items vs congruent and in-order items, and driving improvement in clinical guidelines.

Results: All 4 topics received higher confidence ratings demonstrated by descriptive statistics, highlighting the webinar's effective role in surgeon education and in identifying ongoing trends in spine surgery. The logarithmic transformation of these data during Rasch analysis showed noticeable shifts in surgeon confidence levels postwebinar, with increased endorsement for transforaminal full-endoscopic thoracolumbar interbody fusion for hard disc herniation and standalone endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion. The Wright plot and person-item map analyses demonstrated that the webinar effectively targeted areas of initial low confidence, significantly impacting surgeons' perceptions. Disordered endorsement thresholds remained in the topics of uniportal transforaminal discectomy/foraminotomy and patient feedback during endoscopic spine surgery, indicating issues in response category discrimination or confounding factors not captured by the survey. Ongoing controversies were highlighted by the influence of confounding factors, stemming from preconceived notions and limited familiarity with high-grade evidence.

Conclusion: The first in the 4-part webinar series effectively shifted professional confidence and acceptance of innovative surgical approaches among spine surgeons. Observations indicated a high level of interest in applying the endoscopic surgery platform with other advanced technologies. The polytomous Rasch analysis provided nuanced insights into ongoing trends and areas in need of further clarification.

Clinical relevance: Assessing surgeon confidence and acceptance of endoscopic spinal surgeries using polytomous Rasch analysis.

Level of evidence: Level 2 (inferential) and 3 (observational) evidence because Rasch analysis provides statistical validation of instruments rather than direct clinical outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
162
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Spine Surgery is the official scientific journal of ISASS, the International Intradiscal Therapy Society, the Pittsburgh Spine Summit, and the Büttner-Janz Spinefoundation, and is an official partner of the Southern Neurosurgical Society. The goal of the International Journal of Spine Surgery is to promote and disseminate online the most up-to-date scientific and clinical research into innovations in motion preservation and new spinal surgery technology, including basic science, biologics, and tissue engineering. The Journal is dedicated to educating spine surgeons worldwide by reporting on the scientific basis, indications, surgical techniques, complications, outcomes, and follow-up data for promising spinal procedures.
×
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