Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37383465›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2023

Evaluating the potential impact of spinal anesthesia use in lumbar surgery on global healthcare cost and climate change.

Michelle Olmos, Jainith Patel, Matthew Kanter, Helen Karimi, James Kryzanski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

5 authors.

Michelle OlmosDepartment of Neurosurgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Jainith PatelDepartment of Neurosurgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Matthew KanterDepartment of Neurosurgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Helen KarimiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
James KryzanskiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Despite recent evidence demonstrating its safety and efficacy, spinal anesthesia remains a seldom-utilized anesthetic modality in lumbar surgical procedures. In addition, numerous clinical advantages, such as reduced cost, blood loss, operative time, and inpatient length of stay have been consistently demonstrated with spinal anesthesia over general anesthesia. Research question: In this report we aim to examine the differences between spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia with regard to accessibility and climate impact and determine whether wider adoption of spinal anesthesia would have a meaningful impact on the global population. Results: In the U.S., use of spinal anesthesia for lumbar fusions would have resulted in savings of 343 million dollars in 2015. A similar reduction in cost was seen with each country studied. Additionally, spinal anesthesia was associated with 12,352 ​kg carbon dioxide equivalents (CO Discussion and conclusion: Spinal anesthesia is safe and effective for both simple and complex spine surgeries, it reduces carbon emissions, permits lower operative times, and decreases cost.

Indexed as

Global neurosurgeryGlobal surgeryHealth equityNeurosurgical careSpinal anesthesiaSpinal fusion

Identifiers

PMID37383465
PMCPMC10293309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.