ArticleBrain & spine2025
Impact of resident versus specialist performed cervical spine surgery.
Article in Brain & spine, 2025. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cervical spine surgeries are complex procedures associated with a significant risk of suboptimal clinical outcomes. In Denmark, residents perform cervical spine surgery under specialist supervision during their training. This study aims to assess whether patient-reported outcomes (PROs) differ between cervical spine surgeries performed by supervised residents and those performed by specialist neurosurgeons. Research question: To compare PROs following cervical spine surgeries performed by residents versus specialist neurosurgeons. Materials and methods: Data from 464 surgical decompressive procedures performed at Aarhus University Hospital between 2018 and 2023 were extracted from the national spine surgery database, DaneSpine. Univariate and multivariate ordinal and binary logistic regression were performed to calculate odds ratios (OR) for lower arm and neck pain (visual analogue scale), lower neck disability index (NDI), and patient satisfaction at 1-year follow-up. Specialist neurosurgeons served as the reference group. Results: Multivariate ordinal and logistic regressions found no statistically significant difference in PROs between the groups. At 1-year follow-up, we find a tendency towards patients with resident-performed surgery having a better chance of improvements for arm pain (OR 1.05, CI = 0.69-1.58), however a lower chance of improvement for neck pain (OR 0.93, CI = 0.63-1.39), NDI (OR = 0.80, CI = 0.49-1.31) and being satisfied (OR = 0.89, CI = 0.55-1.46). Discussion and conclusion: Our results support the practice of graduated surgical responsibility: with proper supervision and case selection, resident surgeons can safely participate in cervical spine surgeries without significantly affecting patient-reported outcomes.
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.