ArticleSpine deformity2024
Impact of a quality improvement initiative and monthly multidisciplinary meetings on outcomes after posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
Article in Spine deformity, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-derived versus surgeon-performed instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a biomechanical simulation analysis.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Long-Term Management of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis in Adulthood: Clinical Challenges and Progress During the Critical Period of Pregnancy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Accuracy of Diagnosis and Anticipation of Future Treatment in Pediatric Peripelvic Infections: The Role of Multisurgeon Review and Implications for Future Machine Learning Algorithms.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026Article
- Institution-Based Quality and Safety Improvement Initiatives in Spine Surgery: A Scoping Review.JBJS reviews · 2025Article
- Enhanced recovery after surgery in children with congenital scoliosis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSeveral studies have demonstrated the benefits of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) undergoing posterior spinal instrumented fusion (PSIF). However, there are relatively few studies investigating the effect of regular multidisciplinary team meetings on level selection, surgical performance parameters, and patient outcomes after PSIF for AIS. The aim of this study was to assess changes in intra- and postoperative outcomes following multidisciplinary team meeting implementation for patients undergoing PSIF for AIS.
methodsThe medical records of 96 adolescents (10 to 18 years old) diagnosed with AIS and undergoing PSIF at a major academic institution from 2017 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. A quality improvement (QI) initiative was implemented in February 2020, including institution of monthly multidisciplinary conferences focusing on preoperative indications, level selection, postoperative review of surgical performance parameters for previous cases, and discussion and optimization of postoperative ambulation and pain control protocols. Patients were placed into "Pre-QI" (treated pre-February 2020) and "Post-QI" (treated post-February 2020) cohorts. Patient demographics, comorbidities, deformity characteristics, intraoperative variables, ambulation status, postoperative complications, length of stay (LOS), and unplanned readmission rates were assessed.
resultsOf the 96 study patients, 44 (45.8%) were in the Pre-QI cohort, and 52 (54.2%) were in the Post-QI cohort. Mean major curve was not significantly different between the two cohorts (Pre-QI: 58.0 ± 7.3° vs Post-QI: 57.9 ± 14.5°, p = 0.169). The Pre-QI cohort had a greater mean minor curve degree (Pre-QI: 42.7 ± 11.8° vs Post-QI: 36.8 ± 12.4, p = 0.008). The Pre-QI cohort had significantly greater mean spinal levels fused (Pre-QI: 11.7 ± 1.7 vs Post-QI: 10.4 ± 2.6, p = 0.009), significantly greater mean estimated blood loss (Pre-QI: 1063.6 ± 631.5 ml vs. Post-QI: 415.8 ± 189.9 ml, p < 0.001), significantly greater mean operative time normalized to levels fused (Pre-QI: 0.6 ± 0.1 h/level fused vs Post-QI: 0.4 ± 0.1 h/level fused, p < 0.001), and a significantly greater proportion of patients with intraoperative drain placement (Pre-QI: 93.2% vs Post-QI: 5.8%, p < 0.001). The Post-QI cohort had significantly shorter time to postoperative ambulation (Pre-QI: 2.1 ± 0.9 days vs Post-QI: 1.3 ± 0.5 days, p < 0.001). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the Pre-QI cohort developed any postoperative complication (Pre-QI: 72.7% vs Post-QI: 34.6%, p < 0.001), and mean LOS was significantly greater among Pre-QI patients (Pre-QI: 4.5 ± 1.1 days vs Post-QI: 3.2 ± 0.8 days, p < 0.001). Discharge disposition (p = 0.758) and 30-day unplanned readmissions (p = 0.207) were similar between the cohorts.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that monthly multidisciplinary pediatric spine team meetings may improve patient care. Further studies exploring the incorporation of QI implementation with frequent multidisciplinary team meetings into existing ERAS protocols are merited.
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.