Best practice rehabilitation pathway for the management of single and double-level lumbar fusion surgery: a modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to guide the rehabilitation of patients following single or double-level lumbar fusion surgery (LFS). This is reflected in extensive variability in current rehabilitation regimes and subsequent low clinical success rates, which urges a call for a consensus rehabilitation pathway. AIM: To establish consensus on the optimal pre-, peri- and postoperative rehabilitation of LFS. DESIGN: A modified Delphi Study. SETTING: Belgium and the Netherlands. POPULATION: A multidisciplinary panel of 31 experts in the field of LFS and rehabilitation participated. Nine patients validated the consensus pathway. METHODS: A three-round online Delphi questionnaire was followed by an in-person consensus meeting. In each round, experts could suggest new statements, and received group summary statistics and feedback for reconsidered statements. Consensus threshold was set at ≥75% agreement. The resulting rehabilitation pathway was validated by patients through an online questionnaire and subsequent in-person focus group. RESULTS: A total of 31 experts participated in the first online round, with 27 (87%) completing all online rounds, and 17 (55%) attending the in-person consensus meeting. Consensus was reached on 122 statements relating to pre-, peri- and postoperative rehabilitation of LFS, and validated by patients. Key components of the rehabilitation pathway included prehabilitation, education, physiotherapy in every phase, early postoperative mobilization, and little movement restrictions. Patients emphasized the need for support during the return-to-work process. CONCLUSIONS: This process resulted in 122 expert-consensus statements on best practice rehabilitation for managing LFS, validated by patients. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The proposed rehabilitation pathway can serve as guidance to support clinicians, reduce practice variability, and subsequently improve clinical outcomes after LFS.

Rehabilitation to improve outcomes of lumbar fusion surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation strategies on disability, pain, pain-related fear, and return-to-work in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative conditions or adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. METHODS: Six electronic databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of rehabilitation (unimodal or multimodal). The estimated effect size was calculated for interventions with homogeneous content using a random-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed by GRADE. RESULTS: In total, 18 RCTs, including 1402 unique patients, compared specific rehabilitation to other rehabilitation strategies or usual care. Most described indications were degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis. All rehabilitation interventions were delivered in the postoperative period, and six of them also included a preoperative component. Intervention dose and intensity varied between studies (ranging from one session to daily sessions for one month). Usual care consisted mostly of information and postoperative mobilization. At short term, low quality of evidence shows that exercise therapy was more effective for reducing disability and pain than usual care (standardized mean difference [95% CI]: -0.41 [-0.71; -0.10] and -0.36 [-0.65; -0.08], four and five studies, respectively). Multimodal rehabilitation consisted mostly of exercise therapy combined with cognitive behavioral training, and was more effective in reducing disability and pain-related fear than exercise therapy alone (-0.31 [-0.49; -0.13] and -0.64 [-1.11; -0.17], six and four studies, respectively). Effects disappeared beyond one year. Rehabilitation showed a positive tendency towards a higher return-to-work rate (pooled relative risk [95% CI]: 1.30 [0.99; 1.69], four studies). CONCLUSION: There is low-quality evidence showing that both exercise therapy and multimodal rehabilitation are effective for improving outcomes up to six months after lumbar fusion, with multimodal rehabilitation providing additional benefits over exercise alone in reducing disability and pain-related fear. Additional high-quality studies are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of rehabilitation strategies in the long term and for work-related outcomes.

Variability drivers of treatment costs in hospitals: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Studies on variability drivers of treatment costs in hospitals can provide the necessary information for policymakers and healthcare providers seeking to redesign reimbursement schemes and improve the outcomes-over-cost ratio, respectively. This systematic literature review, focusing on the hospital perspective, provides an overview of studies focusing on variability in treatment cost, an outline of their study characteristics and cost drivers, and suggestions on future research methodology. METHODS: We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We searched PubMED/MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Science direct, OvidSP and Cochrane library. Two investigators extracted and appraised data for citation until October 2020. RESULTS: 90 eligible articles were included. Patient, treatment and disease characteristics and, to a lesser extent, outcome and institutional characteristics were identified as significant variables explaining cost variability. In one-third of the studies, the costing method was classified as unclear due to the limited explanation provided by the authors. CONCLUSION: Various patient, treatment and disease characteristics were identified to explain hospital cost variability. The limited transparency on how hospital costs are defined is a remarkable observation for studies wherein cost variability is the main focus. Recommendations relating to variables, costs, and statistical methods to consider when designing and conducting cost variability studies were provided.

Applying a knowledge translation framework for triaging low back pain and radicular pain at an emergency department: an iterative process within an uncontrolled before-and-after design.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic imaging for low back pain (LBP) without any indication of a serious underlying cause does not improve patient outcomes. However, there is still overuse of imaging, especially at emergency departments (EDs). Although evidence-based guidelines for LBP and radicular pain management exist, a protocol for use at the ED in the Belgian University Hospitals Leuven was not available, resulting in high practice variation. The present paper aims to describe the process from protocol development to the iterative implementation approach and explore how it has influenced practice. METHODS: In accordance with a modified 'knowledge-to-action' framework, five steps took place within the iterative bottom-up implementation process: (1) identification of the situation that requires the implementation of evidence based recommendations, (2) context analysis, (3) development of an implementation plan, (4) evaluation and (5) sustainability of the implemented practice recommendations. Two potential barriers were identified: the high turnover of attending specialists at the ED and patients' and general practicioners' expectations that might overrule the protocol. These were tackled by educational sessions for staff, patient brochures, an information campaign and symposium for general practitioners. RESULTS: The rate of imaging of the lumbar spine decreased from over 25% of patients to 15.0%-16.4% for CT scans and 19.0%-21.8% for X-rays after implementation, but started to fluctuate again after 3 years. After introducing a compulsory e-learning before rotation and catchy posters in the ED staff rooms, rates decreased to 14.0%-14.6% for CT scan use and 12.7-13.5% for X-ray use. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a new protocol in a tertiary hospital ED with high turn over of rotating trainees is a challenge and requires ongoing efforts to ensure sustainability. Rates of imaging represent an indirect though useful indicator. We have demonstrated that it is possible to implement a protocol that includes demedicalisation in an ED environment and to observe changes in indicator results.

Variability in Hospital Costs of Adult Spinal Deformity Care.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, single-center analysis. OBJECTIVE: To calculate the total clinical hospital cost of the Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD) care trajectory, to explain cost variability by patient and surgery characteristics, and to identify areas of process improvement opportunities. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: ASD is associated with a high financial and clinical burden on society. ASD care thus requires improved insights in costs and its drivers as a critical step toward the improvement of value, i.e., the ratio between delivered health outcome and associated costs. METHODS: Patient characteristics and surgical variables were collected following ethical approval in a cohort of 139 ASD patients, treated between December, 2014 and January, 2018. Clinical hospital costs were calculated, including all care activities, from initial consultation to 1 year after initial surgery (excl. overhead) in a university hospital setting. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to analyze the impact of patient and surgical characteristics on clinical costs. RESULTS: 75.5% of the total clinical hospital cost (&OV0556;27,865) was incurred during initial surgery with costs related to the operating theatre (80.3%), nursing units (11.9%), and intensive care (2.9%) being the largest contributors. 57.5% of the variation in total cost could be explained in order of importance by surgical invasiveness, age, coronary disease, single or multiple-staged surgery, and mobility status. Revision surgery, unplanned surgery due to complications, was found to increase average costs by 87.6% compared with elective surgeries (&OV0556; 44,907 (± &OV0556; 23,429) vs. &OV0556; 23,944 (± &OV0556; 7302)). CONCLUSION: This study identified opportunities for process improvement by calculating the total clinical hospital costs. In addition, it identified patient and treatment characteristics that predict 57.5% of cost variation, which could be taken into account when developing a payment system. Future research should include outcome data to assess variation in value. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Efficacy and safety of a Belgian tertiary care outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) program.

PURPOSE: Evidence supports the implementation of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) as standard of care. Until 2015 the overall experience with OPAT in Belgium remained limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a Belgian 'OPAT at home' program, which was implemented in University Hospitals Leuven starting from January 2017. METHODS: A mono-centric, prospective, observational study was carried out. All OPAT cases discharged between 10 January 2017 and 10 January 2019 were included in the study. Relevant demographic and clinical patient data were collected. The outcomes were clinical cure rate, OPAT related readmission rate, adverse event rate and patients' satisfaction. RESULTS: Over the two-year study period, 152 OPAT episodes were started in 130 patients, resulting in 3153 avoided hospitalization days which corresponds to 5.4 freed hospital beds. Urinary tract infections accounted for 40.8% of OPAT courses and temocillin was the most frequently used antibiotic (24.3%). Cure was achieved in 97.9% of the OPAT episodes. During 22 (14.5%) OPAT episodes, patients experienced adverse events, including line related adverse events (7.9%) and adverse drug events (6.6%). An OPAT related readmission rate of 9.2% was observed, mostly related to line-associated adverse events. All patients who completed the satisfaction survey (n = 23) were very satisfied with their OPAT course. CONCLUSION: The University Hospitals Leuven OPAT program is associated with a high level of clinical cure and low all-cause readmission and adverse event rates. Improvement actions are described to further reduce the readmission rate to less than 5.0%.