Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36777909›Full record

ReviewJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine

Patient-reported outcome measures in spine surgery: A systematic review.

Adam Beighley, Allen Zhang, Brendan Huang, Christopher Carr, Mansour Mathkour, Cassidy Werner, Tyler Scullen, Mitchell D Kilgore, Christopher M Maulucci, Robert F Dallapiazza and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07023393 (Effectiveness of an Intraoperative Spine Measurement Tool and Outcomes Assessment From Its Use in Spinal Fusion Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing 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.

NCT07023393 nawithdrawnnot on this map

Effectiveness of an Intraoperative Spine Measurement Tool and Outcomes Assessment From Its Use in Spinal Fusion Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorDuke UniversityRan2026 to 2029Enrolled0ConditionsIntervertebral Disc Degeneration, Intervertebral Disc Displacement, Spinal Curvatures, Spinal OsteochondrosisArmsIntraoperative spinal measurement system
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Preoperative disability is independently associated with postoperative care intensity following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Preoperative health-related quality of life across four degenerative lumbar conditions in a multi-ethnic Southeast Asian surgical cohort: a cross-sectional SF-36 analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Crossing the cervicothoracic junction in multilevel posterior fixations for degenerative cervical disease: a Swedish registry-based study.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 · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Patient-reported outcomes and their associated factors at 1- and 2-year follow-up after lumbar spine surgery: a surgery registry study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) comes of age: 18 years of efficient and effective patient-reported outcome measurement in the field of spinal disorders. Part 1. Development of the COMI, interpretation of scores, and use in research.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 · 2025
    Review
  20. 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

11 authors.

Adam BeighleyTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Allen ZhangTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Brendan HuangTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Christopher CarrTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Mansour MathkourTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Cassidy WernerTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Tyler ScullenTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Mitchell D KilgoreTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Christopher M MaulucciTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Robert F DallapiazzaTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.
James KalyvasTulane University-Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Department of Neurosurgery, New Orleans, LA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Steadily increasing expenditure in the United States health-care system has led to a shift toward a value-based model that focuses on quality of care and cost-effectiveness. Operations involving the spine rank among some of the most common and expensive procedures performed in operating rooms nationwide. Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) are a useful tool for reporting levels of outcome and analyzing patient recovery but are both under-utilized and nonstandardized in spine surgery. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature using the PubMed database, focusing on the most commonly utilized PROMs for spine disease as well as spinal deformity. The benefits and drawbacks of these PROMs were then summarized and compared. Results: Spine-specific PROMs were based on the class of disease. The most frequently utilized PROMs were the Neck Disability Index and the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale; the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; and the Scoliosis Research Society 22-item questionnaire (SRS-22) for cervicothoracic spine disease, lumbar spine disease, and spinal deformity, respectively. Conclusion: We found limited, though effective, use of PROMs targeting specific classes of disease within spine surgery. Therefore, we advocate for increased use of PROMs in spine surgery, in both the research and clinical settings. PROM usage can help physicians assess subjective outcomes in standard ways that can be compared across patients and institutions, more uniquely tailor treatment to individual patients, and engage patients in their own medical care.

Indexed as

Health-care surveyspatient-reported outcome measuresquality of lifespinal deformityspine pathologyspine surgery

Identifiers

PMID36777909
PMCPMC9910127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

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.