The impact of minimum unit pricing on traumatic brain injury in Scotland: a retrospective cohort study of routine national data.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common cause of disability and mortality and is associated with alcohol consumption. On 1st May 2018, the Scottish Government introduced Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) legislation which set the floor price at which alcohol can be sold to 50 pence per unit. While MUP has led to a 7.6% decrease in off trade alcohol purchases, there are limited studies investigating the clinical impact of this legislation. This study aims to explore the impact of MUP on traumatic brain injury in Scotland. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using routinely collected national data collated by the Scottish Trauma Audit Group. Data were requested for all TBI incidents from 1st May to 31st December for both 2017 and 2018. Primary outcome was alcohol-related TBI. Secondary outcomes were injury mechanism, injury severity, clinical course, and short-term mortality. Analysis was conducted using multiple regression models adjusted for age, sex, season, and deprivation. RESULTS: A total of 1166 patients (66% male, and 46% in the 60-79-year bracket) were identified. Alcohol-related TBI was evident in 184 of 509 (36%) patients before MUP and in 239 of 657 (36%) patients injured after its implementation (p = 0.638). Further, there was no change in injury mechanism, injury severity, hospital course and short-term mortality of TBI after MUP. CONCLUSIONS: MUP has not resulted in a change in alcohol-related TBI nor in the mechanism and severity of TBI. Limitations in two-point analysis mean that findings should be interpreted with caution and further studies investigating the clinical outcomes of MUP must be conducted.

CSF rhinorrhoea after endonasal intervention to the anterior skull base (CRANIAL): proposal for a prospective multicentre observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The endonasal transsphenoidal approach (TSA) has emerged as the preferred approach in order to treat pituitary adenoma and related sellar pathologies. The recently adopted expanded endonasal approach (EEA) has improved access to the ventral skull base whilst retaining the principles of minimally invasive surgery. Despite the advantages these approaches offer, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhoea remains a common complication. There is currently a lack of comparative evidence to guide the best choice of skull base reconstruction, resulting in considerable heterogeneity of current practice. This study aims to determine: (1) the scope of the methods of skull base repair; and (2) the corresponding rates of postoperative CSF rhinorrhoea in contemporary neurosurgical practice in the UK and Ireland. METHODS: We will adopt a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort design. All neurosurgical units in the UK and Ireland performing the relevant surgeries (TSA and EEA) will be eligible to participate. Eligible cases will be prospectively recruited over 6 months with 6 months of postoperative follow-up. Data points collected will include: demographics, tumour characteristics, operative data), and postoperative outcomes. Primary outcomes include skull base repair technique and CSF rhinorrhoea (biochemically confirmed and/or requiring intervention) rates. Pooled data will be analysed using descriptive statistics. All skull base repair methods used and CSF leak rates for TSA and EEA will be compared against rates listed in the literature. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal institutional ethical board review was not required owing to the nature of the study - this was confirmed with the Health Research Authority, UK. CONCLUSIONS: The need for this multicentre, prospective, observational study is highlighted by the relative paucity of literature and the resultant lack of consensus on the topic. It is hoped that the results will give insight into contemporary practice in the UK and Ireland and will inform future studies.

The introduction of a Neurosurgical Postoperative Checklist improved quality of care and patient safety.

Purpose: Neurosurgical patients are often complex and require high quality, attentive care in the immediate postoperative period. We identified a number of issues in our department pertaining to patient safety and the assessment and management of patients following handover of care to the neurosurgical ward, and intervened with an aim to provide safe, timely, patient-centred, and procedure-specific care in the postoperative period. Method: We reviewed the records of 50 patients between (Aug-Oct 2015) and analysed quality of postoperative assessment, prescriptions, and adherence to national standards of postoperative care. We identified barriers to effective practice and intervened by introducing a bespoke Neurosurgical Postoperative Checklist which provided a framework for the assessment and management of patients in the immediate postoperative period. We reviewed the records of 50 patients (Oct-Nov 2016) to assess adherence to the new protocol and its effect on the quality of postoperative care, and reaudited a further 50 patients after one year (Sep-Nov 2016). Results: Prior to intervention 37/50 (74.0%) patients were reviewed postoperatively and quality was poor. This improved to 49/50 (98.0%) post-Checklist and was associated with a dramatic improvement in quality of care compared to pre-Checklist: appropriate analgesia and anti-emetics prescribed in 98.0% and 98.0% versus 26.0% and 18.0%; appropriate antibiotic and corticosteroid prescription in 100.0% and 100.0% versus 26.0% and 18.0%; and timely prescription of an appropriate VTE prophylaxis plan in 98.0% versus 2.0% pre-Checklist. Improvements were sustained after one year. Conclusions: The introduction of our Neurosurgery Postoperative Checklist yielded dramatic improvements in patient safety and quality of postoperative care, as indicated by improved adherence to national standards of postoperative clinical assessment, and the quality and safety of medication prescriptions which are so vital in complex neurosurgical patients. We recommend the use of a neurosurgical Postoperative Checklist as a simple, cheap, reproducible tool to improve patient care.

Pre-operative obesity does not predict poorer symptom control and quality of life after lumbar disc surgery.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine whether there was a difference in post-operative symptomatic control and quality of life (QoL) between patients who were obese (BMI >30) and non-obese (BMI <30) pre-operatively. This information may inform the decision making of Physicians and patients whether to proceed to surgery for management of symptomatic lumbar disc prolapse. METHODS: We conducted a prospective questionnaire-based study of QoL and symptom control in 120 patients with postal follow-up at 3 and 12 months after lumbar disc surgery. This study was conducted in two United Kingdom regional neurosurgical units, with ethical approval from the North of Scotland Research Ethics Service (09/S0801/7). RESULTS: 120 patients were recruited; 37 (34.5%) were obese. Follow up was 71% at 3 months and 57% at 12 months. At recruitment, both obese and non-obese patient groups had similar functional status and pain scores. At 3 and 12 months, non-obese and obese patients reported similar and significant benefits from surgery (e.g. 12 month SF-36 80.5 vs. 68.8, respectively). In non-obese and obese patients, time to return to work was 47.5 days and 53.8 days, respectively, (p = .345). After 12 months all QoL scores were significantly improved from pre-operative levels in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Obese patients derive significant benefit from lumbar discectomy that it is similar to the benefit experienced by non-obese patients. Obese individuals may achieve excellent results from discectomy and these patients should not be refused surgery on the basis of BMI alone.

Perceptions, misconceptions and review of a neurosurgery on-call service in a university teaching hospital.

BACKGROUND: No published guidelines exist for how receiving unit doctors should manage referrals. Feedback regarding the quality of neurosurgical referral handling in our hospital has, in the past, been poor. We designed a novel means to appraise specialist referral handling, such that service delivery could be improved. We also aimed to identify differences, if any, between doctor perceptions versus actual satisfaction with the on-call neurosurgery service in our centre. METHODS: We first distributed questionnaires to gauge doctors' perceptions of our neurosurgery on-call service ('Perceptions of Neurosurgery Service' or 'PONS' questionnaire). Next we distributed a novel quality-of-service questionnaire ('Neurosurgery Service Assessment Questionnaire' or 'NSAQ') to all referring doctors over the three-month period between 01 March 2014 and 01 June 2014. RESULTS: Of the 57 respondents to the PONS questionnaire, 47.3% perceived the neurosurgical referral service to be 'poor' (36.8%, n = 21) or 'very poor' (10.5%, n = 6). Next the NSAQ was sent via email to the referring doctor of each of the 502 referrals received in the study period. A total of 52 responses were received by referring doctors (response rate = 10.36%). Actual referral handling ratings were overwhelmingly positive; 82.7% rated the handling of their referral as 'good' (21.2%, n = 11), 'very good' (32.7%, n = 17) or 'excellent' (28.9%, n = 15). CONCLUSIONS: We describe a novel method for receiving units to appraise their referral services and demonstrate its usefulness in our tertiary neurosurgical unit. We also demonstrate that most referring doctors are satisfied with the handling of their neurosurgical referrals, despite perceptions to the contrary.

Feasibility of comparing medical management and surgery (with neurosurgery or stereotactic radiosurgery) with medical management alone in people with symptomatic brain cavernoma - protocol for the Cavernomas: A Randomised Effectiveness (CARE) pilot trial.

INTRODUCTION: The top research priority for cavernoma, identified by a James Lind Alliance Priority setting partnership was 'Does treatment (with neurosurgery or stereotactic radiosurgery) or no treatment improve outcome for people diagnosed with a cavernoma?' This pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to determine the feasibility of answering this question in a main phase RCT. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a pilot phase, parallel group, pragmatic RCT involving approximately 60 children or adults with mental capacity, resident in the UK or Ireland, with an unresected symptomatic brain cavernoma. Participants will be randomised by web-based randomisation 1:1 to treatment with medical management and with surgery (neurosurgery or stereotactic radiosurgery) versus medical management alone, stratified by prerandomisation preference for type of surgery. In addition to 13 feasibility outcomes, the primary clinical outcome is symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage or new persistent/progressive focal neurological deficit measured at 6 monthly intervals. An integrated QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) evaluates screening logs, audio recordings of recruitment discussions, and interviews with recruiters and patients/parents/carers to identify and address barriers to participation. A Patient Advisory Group has codesigned the study and will oversee its progress. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Yorkshire and The Humber-Leeds East Research Ethics Committee (21/YH/0046). We will submit manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals, describing the findings of the QRI and the Cavernomas: A Randomised Evaluation (CARE) pilot trial. We will present at national specialty meetings. We will disseminate a plain English summary of the findings of the CARE pilot trial to participants and public audiences with input from, and acknowledgement of, the Patient Advisory Group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN41647111.

Ensuring adequate epidural decompression during the anterior approach to cervical spine for multi-level spondylotic myelopathy.

We report a simple observation to ensure that adequate decompression has been achieved intra-operatively during multi-level anterior cervical spinal decompression for degenerative spondylotic myelopathy.

Vagus nerve stimulation paired with rehabilitation for stroke: Implantation experience from the VNS-REHAB trial.

OBJECTIVE: Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) paired with rehabilitation delivered by the Vivistim® Paired VNS™ System was approved by the FDA in 2021 to improve motor deficits in chronic ischemic stroke survivors with moderate to severe arm and hand impairment. Vagus nerve stimulators have previously been implanted in over 125,000 patients for treatment-resistant epilepsy and the surgical procedure is generally well-tolerated and safe. In this report, we describe the Vivistim implantation procedure, perioperative management, and complications for chronic stroke survivors enrolled in the pivotal trial. METHODS: The pivotal, multisite, randomized, triple-blind, sham-controlled trial (VNS-REHAB) enrolled 108 participants. All participants were implanted with the VNS device in an outpatient procedure. Thrombolytic agents were temporarily discontinued during the perioperative period. Participants were discharged within 48 hrs and started rehabilitation therapy approximately 10 days after the Procedure. RESULTS: The rate of surgery-related adverse events was lower than previously reported for VNS implantation for epilepsy and depression. One participant had vocal cord paresis that eventually resolved. There were no serious adverse events related to device stimulation. Over 90% of participants were taking antiplatelet drugs (APD) or anticoagulants and no adverse events or serious adverse events were reported as a result of withholding these medications during the perioperative period. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the largest, randomized, controlled trial in which a VNS device was implanted in chronic stroke survivors. Results support the use of the Vivistim System in chronic stroke survivors, with a safety profile similar to VNS implantations for epilepsy and depression.

Harvey Cushing's Influence on Norman Dott's Work on Acromegaly: Pituitary Research, Treatment Modalities, and Research Dissemination c.1900-c.1960.

OBJECTIVE: To review Dr. Harvey Cushing's influence on Mr. Norman Dott's work on acromegaly and other subjects surrounding the pituitary gland such as pituitary research, treatment modalities, and research dissemination. Dott was the first Professor of Neurosurgery in Scotland during 1947 and was considered a pioneer of the understanding and treatment modalities for pituitary disorders such as acromegaly. During 1923, he published an article regarding pituitary physiology that won him the award for the Rockefeller Fellowship Trust, to travel to Boston Massachusetts, giving him the opportunity to train under Cushing's supervision for the years of 1923-1924. However, similarities can be seen between Dott's physiology project that was completed before he ever met Cushing, as well as his treatment suggestions for acromegaly, after he had finished his training under Cushing's supervision. METHODS: This was a historical perspective based on literature review. We reviewed Norman Dott's archives held by University of Edinburgh Library or online sources and we compared these with the work Cushing had previously performed in a chronological fashion. Cushing's work on the pituitary gland and acromegaly can be largely found online, in biographical books, and in other secondary sources. The search included words such as "transsphenoidal surgery," "x-ray," "Harvey Cushing," "Norman Dott," "Acromegaly," "Annual Meetings," and "Pituitary physiology." We excluded any primary sources that were not published between 1900 and 1960 regarding either pituitary physiology or the treatments for acromegaly. CONCLUSIONS: Sir Norman Dott was the first Professor of Neurosurgery in Scotland during 1947 and is well known for his pioneering work on intracranial aneurysms. Although less well known for his contribution to pituitary pathologies, we would like to share his contribution in this regard and correlate it with Cushing's influence.

Intrathecal baclofen trial using a temporary indwelling intrathecal catheter - A single institution experience.

Intrathecal baclofen infusion trial is a sophisticated tool for selecting patients for permanent intra thecal baclofen infusion therapy We report our clinical experience of fifteen patients with refractory spasticity who underwent a continuous ITB trial using a temporary intraspinal indwelling catheter prior to permanent pump implantation. Patients underwent placement of a temporary intrathecal catheter that was connected to an external pump. Multisource feedback was obtained from the various healthcare professionals involved (Staff Nurse, Specialist nurse, physiotherapist, Doctor, family members, patient) regarding progress of test over 48-72 h. Average Modified Ashworth score after the trial was less than 2. Some degree of dose related minor adverse events (AEs) occurred in 8 patients, with the most common being nausea, constipation, urinary retention and hypotension. 10 patients received pump implant. 5 patients did not receive a pump because of AEs or because the goals were not met. 1 patient had pump removed after 4 years because of infection.

Patient-reported outcome following nonsurgical management of type II odontoid process fractures in adults.

BACKGROUND: Transverse (type II) odontoid process fracture is among the most commonly encountered cervical spine fractures. Nonsurgical management through external immobilization is occasionally preferred to surgical management but is criticized for its higher rates of failure and lower patient satisfaction. Our aim is to analyze patient-reported outcomes in patients who underwent nonsurgical treatment for type II odontoid fractures. METHODS: We identified patients >18-year-old who underwent external immobilization as a treatment for isolated type II odontoid fracture between 2007 and 2012. We collected demographic parameters, clinical presentation, mode of injury, imaging studies and modality and duration of treatment (soft collar, halo-vest, or both). Patients were contacted by telephone to participate in a 15-min survey addressing their recovery including their subjective rate of return to preinjury level of functioning. RESULTS: Fifteen patients met the inclusion/exclusion criteria and participated in our survey. Patients were followed up for an average of 19 months after injury. Overall mean age was 61 years. Injury followed a mechanical fall or a road traffic accident in 11 and 4 cases, respectively. External immobilization was achieved by halo vest only in nine patients, soft collar only in two patients (13%), and through a sequential combination in the remaining 4 (27%). This was deployed for a mean of 7.8 months. Radiological studies at the last follow-up showed bony healing (27%), fibrous nonunion (60%), and persistent instability (13%). Patients reported gradual recovery of function throughout the 1st year after injury with levels above 70% of preinjury functioning achieved by 13% of patients at 6 months, 33% at 9 months, and 47% at 12 months. Overall satisfaction with nonsurgical management was 68%. CONCLUSION: In selected patients with type II odontoid fractures, external immobilization represents a good option with acceptable course of recovery.