A Mixed-Methods Assessment of the Feasibility of Conducting Neurosurgical Clinical Research in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Clinical research is necessary to evaluate neurosurgical interventions, yet clinical trials are conducted less frequently in low- and middle-income countries. Because specific barriers, facilitating factors, and strategies for neurosurgical clinical research in Uganda have not been previously identified, this study evaluated neurosurgical providers' perspectives on clinical research and documentation patterns of neurosurgical variables at Mulago National Referral Hospital. METHODS: Retrospective review of 166 neurosurgical patient charts assessed the frequency of documentation of key variables. Twenty-two providers working in neurosurgery participated in 6 focus group discussions with qualitative analysis utilizing the framework method. RESULTS: Chart review showed that primary diagnosis (99.4%), pupil light response (97.6%), and computed tomography scan results (93.3%) were documented for most patients. Cranial nerve exam (61.5%), pupil size (69.9%), and time to neurosurgical intervention (45%) were documented less frequently. On average, Glasgow Coma Scale was documented for 86.6% of days hospitalized, while vital signs were documented for 12.3%. In most focus group discussions, participants identified follow-up, financing, recruitment, time, approval, and sociocultural factors as research barriers. Participants described how the current health workforce facilitates successful research. To improve research capacity, suggested strategies focused on research networks, data collection, leadership, participant recruitment, infrastructure, and implementation. CONCLUSIONS: At Mulago National Referral Hospital, there was variability in the frequency of documentation of neurosurgical variables, which may impact data collection for future studies. While multiple barriers were identified, sociocultural, financing, and time barriers greatly impacted neurosurgical clinical research. Despite that, identified facilitating factors and strategies could be utilized to support neurosurgical research capacity growth.

An asynchronous web-based intervention for neurosurgery residents to improve education on cost-effective care.

OBJECTIVE: To gauge resident knowledge in the socioeconomic aspects of neurosurgery and assess the efficacy of an asynchronous, longitudinal, web-based, socioeconomics educational program tailored for neurosurgery residents. METHODS: Trainees completed a 20-question pre- and post-intervention knowledge examination including four educational categories: billing/coding, procedure-specific concepts, material costs, and operating room protocols. Structured data from 12 index cranial neurosurgical operations were organized into 5 online, case-based modules sent to residents within a single training program via weekly e-mail. Content from each educational category was integrated into the weekly modules for resident review. RESULTS: Twenty-seven neurosurgical residents completed the survey. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference between pre- vs post-intervention resident knowledge of billing/coding (79.2 % vs 88.2 %, p = 0.33), procedure-specific concepts (34.3 % vs 39.2 %, p = 0.11), material costs (31.7 % vs 21.6 %, p = 0.75), or operating room protocols (51.7 % vs 35.3 %, p = 0.61). However, respondents' accuracy increased significantly by 40.8 % on questions containing content presented more than 3 times during the 5-week study period, compared to an increased accuracy of only 2.2 % on questions containing content presented less often during the same time period (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline resident knowledge in socioeconomic aspects of neurosurgery is relatively lacking outside of billing/coding. Our socioeconomic educational intervention demonstrates some promise in improving socioeconomic knowledge among neurosurgery trainees, particularly when content is presented frequently. This decentralized, web-based approach to resident education may serve as a future model for self-driven learning initiatives among neurosurgical residents with minimal disruption to existing workflows.

Assessing the Success and Sustainability of Global Neurosurgery Collaborations: Systematic Review and Adaptation of the Framework for Assessment of InteRNational Surgical Success Criteria.

BACKGROUND: The high unmet neurosurgical burden in low- and middle-income countries has necessitated multiple global neurosurgical collaborations. We identified these collaborations and their peer-reviewed journal publications and evaluated them using a modified version of the Framework for Assessment of InteRNational Surgical Success (FAIRNeSS). METHODS: A systematic literature review yielded 265 articles describing neurosurgery-focused collaborations. A subset of 101 papers from 17 collaborations were evaluated with the modified FAIRNeSS criteria. Analysis of trends was performed for both individual articles and collaborations. RESULTS: Most of the articles were general reviews (64), and most focused on clinical research (115). The leading collaboration focus was workforce and infrastructure development (45%). Composite FAIRNeSS scores ranged from 7/34 to 30/34. Average FAIRNeSS scores for individual articles ranged from 0.25 to 26.75, while collaboration-wide FAIRNeSS score averages ranged from 5.25 to 20.04. There was significant variability within each subset of FAIRNeSS indicators (P value <0.001). Short-term goals had higher scores than medium- and long-term goals (P value <0.001). Collaboration composite scores correlated with the number of papers published (R2 = 0.400, P = 0.007) but not with the number of years active (R2 = 0.072, P = 0.3). Finally, the overall agreement between reviewers was 53.5%, and the overall correlation was 38.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Global neurosurgery has no established metrics for evaluating collaborations; therefore, we adapted the FAIRNeSS criteria to do so. The criteria may not be well suited for measuring the success and sustainability of global neurosurgery collaborations, creating a need to develop a more applicable alternate set of metrics.

Predictors of Academic Career Trajectory Among Fellowship-Trained Neurosurgical Oncologists.

Much research has been conducted to investigate predictors of an academic career trajectory among neurosurgeons in general. This study seeks to examine a cohort of fellowship-trained neurosurgical oncologists to determine which factors are associated with a career in academia. Publicly available data on fellowship-trained neurosurgical oncologists was aggregated from ACGME-accredited residency websites, from program websites listed on the AANS Neurosurgical Fellowship Training Program Directory, and from professional websites including Doximity. Bivariate analyses were conducted to determine covariates for a logistic regression model, and a multivariate analysis was conducted to determine which variables were independently associated with an academic career trajectory. A total of 87 neurosurgical oncologists were identified (1991-2018). A total of 73 (83.9%) had > 1 year of protected research time in residency, 33 (37.9%) had an h-index of ≥2 prior to residency, and 63 (72.4%) had an h-index of ≥2 during residency. In multivariate analysis, the only factor independently associated with academic career trajectory among neurosurgical oncologists was achieving an h-index of ≥2 during residency (odds ratio [OR] = 2.93, p = .041). Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center graduated the most neurosurgical oncologists in our cohort (n = 23). Our study establishes a novel factor that is predictive of academic career trajectory among fellowship-trained neurosurgical oncologists, specifically having an h-index of ≥2 during residency. Our results may be useful for those mentoring students and trainees with an interest in pursuing academia.

Impact of international research fellows in neurosurgery: results from a single academic center.

OBJECTIVE: International research fellows have been historically involved in academic neurosurgery in the United States (US). To date, the contribution of international research fellows has been underreported. Herein, the authors aimed to quantify the academic output of international research fellows in the Department of Neurosurgery at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. METHODS: Research fellows with Doctor of Medicine (MD), Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), or MD/PhD degrees from a non-US institution who worked in the Hopkins Department of Neurosurgery for at least 6 months over the past decade (2010-2020) were included in this study. Publications produced during fellowship, number of citations, and journal impact factors (IFs) were analyzed using ANOVA. A survey was sent to collect information on personal background, demographics, and academic activities. RESULTS: Sixty-four international research fellows were included, with 42 (65.6%) having MD degrees, 17 (26.6%) having PhD degrees, and 5 (7.8%) having MD/PhD degrees. During an average 27.9 months of fellowship, 460 publications were produced in 136 unique journals, with 8628 citations and a cumulative journal IF of 1665.73. There was no significant difference in total number of publications, first-author publications, and total citations per person among the different degree holders. Persons holding MD/PhDs had a higher number of citations per publication per person (p = 0.027), whereas those with MDs had higher total IFs per person (p = 0.048). Among the 43 (67.2%) survey responders, 34 (79.1%) had nonimmigrant visas at the start of the fellowship, 16 (37.2%) were self-paid or funded by their country of origin, and 35 (81.4%) had mentored at least one US medical student, nonmedical graduate student, or undergraduate student. CONCLUSIONS: International research fellows at the authors' institution have contributed significantly to academic neurosurgery. Although they have faced major challenges like maintaining nonimmigrant visas, negotiating cultural/language differences, and managing self-sustainability, their scientific productivity has been substantial. Additionally, the majority of fellows have provided reciprocal mentorship to US students.

Predictors of Academic Neurosurgical Career Trajectory among International Medical Graduates Training Within the United States.

BACKGROUND: Within the literature, there has been limited research tracking the career trajectories of international medical graduates (IMGs) following residency training. OBJECTIVE: To compare the characteristics of IMG and US medical school graduate (USMG) neurosurgeons holding academic positions in the United States and also analyze factors that influence IMG career trajectories following US-based residency training. METHODS: We collected data on 243 IMGs and 2506 USMGs who graduated from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited neurosurgery residency programs. We assessed for significant differences between cohorts, and a logistic regression model was used for the outcome of academic career trajectory. RESULTS: Among the 2749 neurosurgeons in our study, IMGs were more likely to pursue academic neurosurgery careers relative to USMGs (59.7% vs 51.1%; P = .011) and were also more likely to complete a research fellowship before beginning residency (odds ratio [OR] = 9.19; P < .0001). Among current US academic neurosurgeons, USMGs had significantly higher pre-residency h-indices relative to IMGs (1.23 vs 1.01; P < .0001) with no significant differences between cohorts when comparing h-indices during (USMG = 5.02, IMG = 4.80; P = .67) or after (USMG = 14.05, IMG = 13.90; P = .72) residency. Completion of a post-residency clinical fellowship was the only factor independently associated with an academic career trajectory among IMGs (OR = 1.73, P = .046). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that while IMGs begin their US residency training with different research backgrounds and achievements relative to USMG counterparts, they attain similar levels of academic productivity following residency. Furthermore, IMGs are more likely to pursue academic careers relative to USMGs. Our work may be useful for better understanding IMG career trajectories following US-based neurosurgery residency training.

Predictive Model and Online Calculator for Discharge Disposition in Brain Tumor Patients.

BACKGROUND: In the era of value-based payment models, it is imperative for neurosurgeons to eliminate inefficiencies and provide high-quality care. Discharge disposition is a relevant consideration with clinical and economic ramifications in brain tumor patients. We developed a predictive model and online calculator for postoperative non-home discharge disposition in brain tumor patients that can be incorporated into preoperative workflows. METHODS: We reviewed all brain tumor patients at our institution from 2017 to 2019. A predictive model of discharge disposition containing preoperatively available variables was developed using stepwise multivariable logistic regression. Model performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and calibration curves. Internal validation was performed using bootstrapping with 2000 samples. RESULTS: Our cohort included 2335 patients who underwent 2586 surgeries with a 16% non-home discharge rate. Significant predictors of non-home discharge were age >60 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.02), African American (OR, 1.73) or Asian (OR, 2.05) race, unmarried status (OR, 1.48), Medicaid insurance (OR, 1.90), admission from another health care facility (OR, 2.30), higher 5-factor modified frailty index (OR, 1.61 for 5-factor modified frailty index ≥2), and lower Karnofsky Performance Status (increasing OR with each 10-point decrease in Karnofsky Performance Status). The model was well calibrated and had excellent discrimination (optimism-corrected C-statistic, 0.82). An open-access calculator was deployed (https://neurooncsurgery.shinyapps.io/discharge_calc/). CONCLUSIONS: A strongly performing predictive model and online calculator for non-home discharge disposition in brain tumor patients was developed. With further validation, this tool may facilitate more efficient discharge planning, with consequent improvements in quality and value of care for brain tumor patients.