ArticleBrain & spine2025
Factors influencing the adoption of innovation in spine surgery: An international survey of AO spine network.
Article in Brain & spine, 2025. 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.
- Understanding the Research Needs and Educational Methods of Surgeons to Help Guide Future Spine Deformity Research: A Survey of AO Spine Members.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Section on innovative spine research and novel technologies: fusion cage design, materials, and coatings: Science versus hype.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- The transformative power of telemedicine in delivering effective neurosurgical care in low and middle-income countries: A review.Brain & spine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Knowledge translation from research to clinical practice can often be challenging, and practice modification patterns among surgeons may stem from a variety of sources, including personal experience, peer influence, ongoing education, and evolving research findings. Research question: This study aimed to investigate the adoption patterns amongst surgeons for newer innovations and to analyse the factors affecting the implementation of the same in clinical practice. We used the adoption of osteobiologics as a case example. Methods: An international expert survey was conducted among AO Spine users and members. The survey, comprising 30 items, explored surgeons' demographics, risk aversion, and factors influencing practice change. We categorized the innovation-adoptive nature of the surgeons and scored their risk-adoptive behaviour. Results: A total of 458 responses were received from surgeons across 81 countries including 433 male (95%), orthopaedic surgeons (n = 263; 57%) from university-affiliated hospitals (n = 185; 40%). Most were in the early majority phase of the innovation-adoption cycle (n = 174; 38%) with a majority in the 'high-moderate' risk-adoption category (n = 396; 86%). This risk adoption behaviour had a significant correlation with their appetite for innovation (r = 0.182,p=<0.001). About 67.9% of respondents preferred scientific literature and conference presentations showcasing solid clinical evidence to be the most influential factor in driving change in their clinical practice. Material logistics (55%) is considered an important barrier to practice modification followed by familiarity (50%) and financial reimbursements (25%). Discussion & conclusion: A complex interplay exists between risk-adoptive behaviour amongst surgeons and the factors influencing a change in their clinical practice. Although most surgeons were in the early adoptive phase in accepting the innovations into their clinical practice, they were also equally noted to be risk tolerant. Hence, a successful adoption of practice-changing innovation hinges on addressing not only logistical and financial challenges but also on providing robust scientific evidence to drive the necessary change in clinical practice.
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.