Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23397190›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2013

Time spent per patient in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery.

Ludovic Kaminski, Xavier Banse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ludovic KaminskiDepartment of orthopaedicsurgery, Cliniques Universitaires St. Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Avenue Hippocrate, 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. kaminski.ludovic@gmail.com
Xavier Banse

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine the time needed from a surgeon's viewpoint to treat a patient operated for lumbar spinal stenosis. We firstly aimed to give evidence of the wide ranging duration of standardized procedure. Secondly, we investigated factors affecting the time allocated to each patient.

methods438 medical records of patients operated on for lumbar decompression without fusion (2005-2011) were retrospectively examined. Primary data were operative time (OT, min), length of stay (LoS, days) and number of postoperative visits. A fourth parameter was calculated, the time spent per patient (TSPP, min) by summing the time spent in surgery, during inpatient and outpatient follow-up visits. Factors that influenced these medical resources were examined.

resultsMedian (5th-95th percentile) LoS was 5 days (2-15), OT 106 min (60-194), number of medical visits 5 (2-11) and TSPP 329 min (206-533). In descending order, factors predicting LoS were age, no. of levels, sex, operative technique, cardiovascular risk index, dural tear and haematoma. Factors predicting OT were number of levels, dural tear, foraminotomy, synovial cyst and body mass index. The statistical model could predict 36% of the TSPP variance. We recommend that surgeons add 35 min for each level, 29 min for patients over 65 years, 30 min for women, 132 min for dural tear and 108 min for epidural haematoma.

conclusionTSPP treated for lumbar spinal stenosis is highly variable, yet partially predictable. These data may help individual surgeons or heads of departments to plan their activities.

Indexed as

Operative TimeOrthopedic ProceduresAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsBody Mass IndexFemaleHumansLength of StayLumbar VertebraeMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative CareRetrospective StudiesSex FactorsSpinal Stenosis

Identifiers

PMID23397190
PMCPMC3731491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.