RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Primary spinal epidural abscess (SEA) is a rare but serious pathology that may result in severe neurologic injury. While certain literature has identified medical risk factors for failure of conservative therapy, no current evidence has been published regarding socioeconomic risk factors associated with failure of medical therapy. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients presenting with SEA from primary spinal infections. Patients presenting with magnetic resonance imaging evidence of SEA treated conservatively in the absence of neurologic deficits were included. Baseline clinical and socioeconomic characteristics were collected. Failure of medical management was defined as requiring surgical intervention despite maximal medical therapy due to the development of neurologic deficits or clinically significant deformity. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were identified as presenting with magnetic resonance imaging evidence of SEAs without evidence of neurologic deficit. Of these patients, 42 required surgical intervention compared with 108 whose infection was successfully treated with medical therapy alone. Estimated average annual income was $64,746 vs $62,615 in those who successfully cleared their infection with medical management without requiring surgery, which was not statistically significant (P = 0.5). Insured patients were 5 times more likely to be successfully treated with antibiotics alone compared with uninsured patients (OR = 5.83, P = 0.008). Payer type, employment status, and incarceration status were not associated with failure of conservative therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of primary SEA, absence of medical insurance is associated with failure of medical management. Payer status, employment status, average salary, and incarceration are not significant risk factors for failure of conservative management.
RESUMO
Background: Health literacy profoundly impacts patient outcomes as patients with decreased health literacy are less likely to understand their illness and adhere to treatment regimens. Patient education materials supplement in-person patient education, especially in cerebrovascular diseases that may require a multidisciplinary care team. This study aims to assess the readability of online patient education materials related to cerebrovascular diseases and to contrast the readability of those materials produced by academic institutions with those of non-academic sources. Methods: The readability of online patient education materials was analyzed using Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) assessments. Readability of academic-based online patient education materials was compared to nonacademic online patient education materials. Online patient education materials from 20 academic institutions and five sources from the web were included in the analysis. Results: Overall median FKGL for neurovascular-related patient online education documents was 11.9 (95% CI: 10.8-13.1), reflecting that they are written at a 12th grade level, while the median FRE was 40.6 (95% CI: 34.1-47.1), indicating a rating as "difficult" to read. When comparing academic-based online patient education materials to other internet sources, there was no significant difference in FRE and FKGL scores (P = 0.63 and P = 0.26 for FKGL and FRE, respectively). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that online patient education materials pertaining to cerebrovascular diseases from major academic centers and other nonacademic internet sites are difficult to understand and written at levels significantly higher than that recommended by national agencies. Both academic and nonacademic sources reflect this finding equally. Further study and implementation are warranted to investigate how improvements can be made.
