ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2018
Adverse Events Following Posterior Lumbar Fusion: A Comparison of Spine Surgeons Perceptions and Reported Data for Rates and Risk Factors.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive factors for satisfaction with surgery following anterior posterior same day spinal fusion.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Association Between Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs Use and Surgical Outcomes Following Posterior Lumbar Fusion: A Medical Claims Database Analysis.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Correlation of Patient Reported Satisfaction With Adverse Events Following Elective Posterior Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Single Institution Analysis.North American Spine Society journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative complications and risks factors for adverse events play an important role in both decision making and patient expectation setting. The present study serves to contrast surgeons' perceived and reported rates of postoperative adverse events following posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) and to assess the accuracy of predicting the impact of patient factors on such outcomes.
methodsA survey investigating perceived rates of adverse events and the impact of patient risk factors on them following PLF for degenerative conditions was distributed to spine surgeons at the Lumbar Spine Research Society (LSRS) 2016 annual meeting. For comparison, the corresponding rates and patient risk factors were assessed in patients undergoing elective PLF from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data years 2011-2014.
resultsFrom the survey, there were 53 responses (response rate of 79%) from attending physicians at LSRS. From NSQIP, there were 16,589 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Adverse event rates estimated by the surgeons at LSRS were close to those determined by NSQIP data (no greater than 2.81% different). The largest differences were for deep vein thrombosis (overestimation of 2.81%,
conclusionsThe current study noted that surgeon estimates were relatively close to national numbers for estimating the adverse events and impact of patient factors on such outcomes after PLF for degenerative conditions. The estimates are roughly appropriate with a bias toward overestimation for planning and expectation setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.