ArticleSpine deformity2024
Evaluating compliance with the 2013 best practice guidelines for preventing surgical site infection in high-risk pediatric spine surgery.
Article in Spine deformity, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBest Practice Guidelines (BPGs) were published one decade ago to decrease surgical site infection (SSI) in pediatric spinal deformity. Successful implementation has not been established. This study evaluated surgeon compliance with items on the BPG. We hypothesized that BPG authors and surgeons with more experience, higher caseload, and awareness of the BPG would have higher compliance.
methodsWe queried North American and European surgeons, authors and non-authors, and members of various spine study groups on adherence to BPGs using an anonymous survey. Mean compliance scores (MCSs) were developed by correlating Likert responses with MCSs ("None of the time" = no compliance = MCS 0, "Sometimes" = weak to moderate = MCS 1, "Most of the time" = high = MCS 2, "All the time" = perfect = MCS 3).
resultsOf the 142 respondents, 73.7% reported high or perfect compliance. Average compliance scores for all guidelines was 2.2 ± 0.4. There were significantly different compliance scores between North American and European surgeons (2.3 vs 1.8, p < 0.001), authors and non-authors (2.5 vs. 2.2, p = 0.023), and surgeons with and without knowledge of the BPGs (2.3 vs. 1.8, p < 0.001). There was a weak correlation between BPG awareness and compliance (r = 0.34, p < 0.001) and no correlation between years in practice (r = 0.0, p = 0.37) or yearly caseload (r = 0.2, p = 0.78) with compliance.
conclusionsCompliance among our cohort of surgeons surveyed was high. North American surgeons, authors of the BPGs and those aware of the guidelines had increased compliance. Participation in a spine study group, years in practice, and yearly caseload were not associated with compliance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V-expert opinion.
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.