ArticleJBJS reviews2025
Institution-Based Quality and Safety Improvement Initiatives in Spine Surgery: A Scoping Review.
Article in JBJS reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImproving patient safety and healthcare quality is necessary to advance value-based health care. Spine surgery is complex, entailing joint efforts between different disciplines. This scoping review aimed to map the research on establishing and implementing institution-based quality improvement (QI) initiatives in spine surgery.
methodsStudies were identified in electronic searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Qualitative or quantitative studies that report the implementation of QI programs that occurred in or covered spine surgery were included; studies that did not describe the establishment, implementations, impacts, barriers, and facilitators of QI initiatives were excluded. Three reviewers independently screened the retrieved studies, and 2 reviewers extracted data and conducted a quality assessment of full-text articles. Studies were categorized according to dimensions of quality (timely, effective, patient-centered, efficient, equitable, and safe), and quality appraisal was conducted using the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence reporting guidelines.
resultsThe search from the 3 databases yielded 2,876 returns; after removing duplicates, there were 1,274 in total. After screening, 228 records were entered into a full-text review, resulting in 133 records included in the review. Specifically, 88 addressed aspects of efficiency, 74 on safety, 32 on improving effectiveness, 23 on patient-centeredness, 7 on timeliness, and 1 on equity. Of the studies included, 71 rely on retrospective audits, 19 are prospective, and only 8 are interventional trials. Only 67 QI initiatives leveraged the advantages of multidisciplinary teams or the rigor of evidence-based protocols. Study gaps include limited follow-up, small sample sizes, and lack of comprehensive assessment using both objective measures and patient-reported outcomes.
conclusionsThis scoping review maps the current research on developing and implementing institution-based QI initiatives in spine surgery. Although most of the initiatives reported show improvement in the quality of health care and patient safety from multiple aspects, the sustainability of these initiatives remains unknown, and further studies are needed to trace the long-term effects and generalizability of these initiatives.
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.