ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2026
Distance Patients Will Travel for Specialty Endoscopic Spine Surgery Care.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2026. 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.
- Travel Distance and Its Impact on Wait Time for Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography in Patients with Cancers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTravel distance can serve as an objective, behavioral measure of patient preference in health care. Endoscopic spine surgery is the least invasive surgical option for treating spinal pathology, yet access is limited due to the relatively small number of trained surgeons. This study evaluates travel patterns of patients seeking care at the Endoscopic Spine Institute of New York, a specialized center staffed by 3 fellowship-trained endoscopic spine surgeons.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of the first 100 consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic spine surgery at Endoscopic Spine Institute of New York. The primary objective was to quantify patient travel distance as a behavioral proxy for preference for specialized, minimally invasive care. Secondary objectives were to characterize spinal pathology, determine revision surgery frequency, and compare travel distances by pathology type and revision status. Travel distances were calculated as straight-line distances from the patient's city of residence to the institute. Descriptive and comparative statistics were performed.
resultsThe mean travel distance was 308.4 miles (SD: 494.1), with patients traveling from multiple states and internationally. Surgical interventions included cervical (20%), thoracic (18%), and lumbar (62%) pathologies. Revision surgeries accounted for 29% of cases. Travel distance was significantly greater for revision cases compared with primary cases (
conclusionsPatients are willing to travel substantial distances to access specialized, minimally invasive spine surgery. Travel distance serves as a behavioral measure of patient preference, distinct from conventional quality metrics, providing insight into patient priorities in health care utilization and informing the centralization of specialized surgical services. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding how far patients will travel for endoscopic spine surgery provides insight into the growing demand for minimally invasive approaches and the regionalization of specialized spine care. This information can help guide resource allocation, referral patterns, and the develpment of centers of excellence. LEVEL OF EVIDIENCE: 4.
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.