Clinical and financial burden of spinal infections in people who inject drugs.

BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs (PWID) are known to be at increased risk of infectious diseases including bacterial and blood-borne viral infections. However, there is limited literature surrounding the burden of spinal infections as a complication of injecting drug use (IDU). AIMS: To quantify the clinical and financial burden of IDU-related spinal infections. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of adult PWID with spinal infections requiring hospital admission to a tertiary health service in Melbourne, Australia between 2011 and 2019. RESULTS: Fifty-seven PWID with 63 episodes of spinal infections were identified with a median hospital stay of 47 days (interquartile range (IQR) 16; range 4-243 days). One-third of episodes required neurosurgical intervention and 11 (17%) episodes required intensive care unit admission (range 2-17 days). Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative pathogen, present in three-quarters of all episodes (n = 47). The median duration of antibiotic regime was 59 days (IQR 42) and longer courses were associated with known bacteraemia (P = 0.048), polymicrobial infections (P = 0.001) and active IDU (P = 0.066). Predictors of surgery include neurological symptoms at presentation (relative risk (RR) 2.6; P = 0.010), inactive IDU status (RR 3.0; P = 0.002), a diagnosis of epidural abscess (RR 4.1; P = 0.001) and spinal abscess (RR ∞; P < 0.001). Completion of planned antimicrobial therapy was reported in 51 (82%) episodes. Average expenditure per episode was  A$61 577. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal infections in PWID are an underreported serious medical complication of IDU. Although mortality is low, there is significant morbidity with prolonged admissions, large antimicrobial requirements and surgical interventions generating a substantial cost to the health system.

Interobserver Reliability of Spinal Adverse Events Severity System - Neuro (SAVES-N): A Prospective Adverse Event Reporting System for Neurosurgical Cases.

BACKGROUND: The reporting of adverse events (AEs) in neurosurgery uses inconsistent definitions and subjective grading systems. A standardized system for recording and describing AEs would allow valid comparisons to be drawn between different institutions, using different technologies, at different times. The Spinal Adverse Events Severity System - Neuro (SAVES-N) system is a modification of the well-validated SAVES-V2 system that encompasses complications from both cranial and spinal surgery. The objective of this study was to assess the interobserver reliability of SAVES-N in spinal and cranial neurosurgery. METHODS: Ten vignettes, including cranial and spinal neurosurgical cases, were assessed by groups of consultant neurosurgeons (n = 5) and neurosurgical registrars (n = 5) using the SAVES-N system. Interobserver reliability for the presence of AEs, the type of AE, and the SAVES severity grade of the AE were calculated using Gwet's AC2 and Fleiss' kappa and were interpreted using the thresholds described by Landis and Koch. RESULTS: Neurosurgeons had almost-perfect agreement (Gwet AC2 = 0.93), whereas registrars had substantial agreement (Gwet's AC2 = 0.74) in determining the presence or absence of AEs. Both neurosurgeons (Fleiss' kappa = 0.78) and registrars (Fleiss' kappa = 0.70) demonstrated substantial agreement within their groups as to the type of AE. Similarly, neurosurgeons (Gwet's AC2 = 0.94) and registrars (Gwet's AC2 = 0.81) both graded the severity of the AE with almost perfect agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that the scope of the well-validated SAVES-V2 system may be broadened to cranial neurosurgical cases by SAVES-N with substantial to almost-perfect interobserver reliability.