Do we really apply evidence-based-recommendations to spine surgery? Results of an international survey.

OBJECTIVE: This international survey investigated Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) in spine surgery by measuring its acceptance among spine surgeons. It assessed their understanding of EBM and how they apply it in practice by analyzing responses to various clinical scenarios.. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following the CHERRIES guidelines, an e-survey was distributed to multiple social media forums for neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Telegram and circulated further through email via the authors' network. Three hundred participants from Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, and Oceania completed the survey. RESULTS: Our study revealed that 67.7% (n = 203) of respondents used EBM in their practice, and 97.3% (n = 292) believed training in research methodology and EBM was necessary for the practice of spine surgery. Despite this endorsement of using EBM in spine surgery, we observed varied responses to how EBM is applied in practice based on example scenarios. The responders who had additional training tended to obey EBM guidelines more than those who had no additional training. Most surgeons responded as always or sometimes prescribing methylprednisolone to patients with acute spinal cord injury. Other significant differences were identified between geographical regions, training, practice settings, and other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Most respondents used EBM in practice and believed training in research methodology and EBM is necessary for spine surgery; however, there were significant variations on how to use them per case. Thus, the appropriate application of EBM in clinical settings for spinal surgery must be further studied.

Intracortical brain-computer interfaces for improved motor function: a systematic review.

In this systematic review, we address the status of intracortical brain-computer interfaces (iBCIs) applied to the motor cortex to improve function in patients with impaired motor ability. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Guidelines for Systematic Reviews. Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) were used to assess bias and quality. Advances in iBCIs in the last two decades demonstrated the use of iBCI to activate limbs for functional tasks, achieve neural typing for communication, and other applications. However, the inconsistency of performance metrics employed by these studies suggests the need for standardization. Each study was a pilot clinical trial consisting of 1-4, majority male (64.28 %) participants, with most trials featuring participants treated for more than 12 months (55.55 %). The systems treated patients with various conditions: amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, stroke, spinocerebellar degeneration without cerebellar involvement, and spinal cord injury. All participants presented with tetraplegia at implantation and were implanted with microelectrode arrays via pneumatic insertion, with nearly all electrode locations solely at the precentral gyrus of the motor cortex (88.88 %). The development of iBCI devices using neural signals from the motor cortex to improve motor-impaired patients has enhanced the ability of these systems to return ability to their users. However, many milestones remain before these devices can prove their feasibility for recovery. This review summarizes the achievements and shortfalls of these systems and their respective trials.