ArticleGlobal spine journal2026
A Global Survey on Intra-operative Neuromonitoring (IONM) Practices, Attitudes Towards Its Use, and Barriers Among Spine Surgeons.
Article in Global spine journal, 2026. 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
Study DesignCross-sectional survey study.ObjectivesTo provide a contemporary global overview of intra-operative neuromonitoring (IONM) practices, attitudes, and perceived barriers among spine surgeons.MethodsA web-based questionnaire was distributed to AO Spine surgeon members worldwide between April and May 2025 to collect data on surgeon demographics, access to and utilization of IONM, models of service delivery, intra-operative responses to neuromonitoring alerts, attitudes toward IONM, and perceived limitations. Attitudes were assessed using 13 Likert-scale statements. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with a positive attitude toward IONM. Significance was set at p<0.05.ResultsA total of 529 spine surgeons responded to the survey. Consistent access to IONM was reported by 55.5% of respondents, occasional access by 35.7%, and no access by 8.8%. External service providers were the most used IONM model (59.5%). Neuromonitoring technicians most frequently interpret intraoperative data (63.6%). In response to unexpected signal loss, most surgeons reported using a standardized checklist (76.3%). Overall attitudes toward IONM were predominantly positive, with most respondents agreeing that IONM improves patient outcomes, provides medicolegal protection, and offers surgeon reassurance. Economic constraints (38.2%), logistical challenges (27.4%), and lack of training (25.6%) were the most reported barriers. Multivariate analysis identified geographic region, specialty, and access to IONM as independent predictors of a positive attitude.ConclusionsThis global survey demonstrates widespread acceptance of IONM among spine surgeons, particularly for high-risk procedures. However, disparities in access and persistent economic and logistical barriers remain, highlighting the need for strategies to improve equitable implementation worldwide.
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.