METHODS: The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) meetings and literature reviews were synthesized into a seed document and distributed to spine care experts. After three rounds of a modified Delphi process, all participants reached consensus on the final model of care and implementation steps.
RESULTS: Sixty-six experts representing 24 countries participated. The GSCI model of care has eight core principles: person-centered, people-centered, biopsychosocial, proactive, evidence-based, integrative, collaborative, and self-sustaining. The model of care includes a classification system and care pathway, levels of care, and a focus on the patient's journey. The six steps for implementation are initiation and preparation; assessment of the current situation; planning and designing solutions; implementation; assessment and evaluation of program; and sustain program and scale up.
CONCLUSION: The GSCI proposes an evidence-based, practical, sustainable, and scalable model of care representing eight core principles with a six-step implementation plan. The aim of this model is to help transform spine care globally, especially in low- and middle-income countries and underserved communities. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
METHODS: World Spine Care convened the GSCI to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable healthcare model for spinal care. The initiative aims to improve the management, prevention, and public health for spine-related disorders worldwide; thus, global representation was essential. A series of meetings established the initiative's mission and goals. Electronic surveys collected contributorship and demographic information, and experiences with spinal conditions to better understand perceptions and potential biases that were contributing to the model of care.
RESULTS: Sixty-eight clinicians and scientists participated in the deliberations and are authors of one or more of the GSCI articles. Of these experts, 57 reported providing spine care in 34 countries, (i.e., low-, middle-, and high-income countries, as well as underserved communities in high-income countries.) The majority reported personally experiencing or having a close family member with one or more spinal concerns including: spine-related trauma or injury, spinal problems that required emergency or surgical intervention, spinal pain referred from non-spine sources, spinal deformity, spinal pathology or disease, neurological problems, and/or mild, moderate, or severe back or neck pain. There were no substantial reported conflicts of interest.
CONCLUSION: The GSCI participants have broad professional experience and wide international distribution with no discipline dominating the deliberations. The GSCI believes this set of papers has the potential to inform and improve spine care globally. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
METHODS: The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) care pathway development team extracted interventions recommended for the management of spinal disorders from six GSCI articles that synthesized the available evidence from guidelines and relevant literature. Sixty-eight international and interprofessional clinicians and scientists with expertise in spine-related conditions were invited to participate. An iterative consensus process was used.
RESULTS: After three rounds of review, 46 experts from 16 countries reached consensus for the care pathway that includes five decision steps: awareness, initial triage, provider assessment, interventions (e.g., non-invasive treatment; invasive treatment; psychological and social intervention; prevention and public health; specialty care and interprofessional management), and outcomes. The care pathway can be used to guide the management of patients with any spine-related concern (e.g., back and neck pain, deformity, spinal injury, neurological conditions, pathology, spinal diseases). The pathway is simple and can be incorporated into educational tools, decision-making trees, and electronic medical records.
CONCLUSION: A care pathway for the management of individuals presenting with spine-related concerns includes evidence-based recommendations to guide health care providers in the management of common spinal disorders. The proposed pathway is person-centered and evidence-based. The acceptability and utility of this care pathway will need to be evaluated in various communities, especially in low- and middle-income countries, with different cultural background and resources. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
METHODS: Leading spine clinicians and scientists around the world were invited to participate. The interprofessional, international team consisted of 68 members from 24 countries, representing most disciplines that study or care for patients with spinal symptoms, including family physicians, spine surgeons, rheumatologists, chiropractors, physical therapists, epidemiologists, research methodologists, and other stakeholders.
RESULTS: Literature reviews on the burden of spinal disorders and six categories of evidence-based interventions for spinal disorders (assessment, public health, psychosocial, noninvasive, invasive, and the management of osteoporosis) were completed. In addition, participants developed a stratification system for surgical intervention, a classification system for spinal disorders, an evidence-based care pathway, and lists of resources and recommendations to implement the GSCI model of care.
CONCLUSION: The GSCI proposes an evidence-based model that is consistent with recent calls for action to reduce the global burden of spinal disorders. The model requires testing to determine feasibility. If it proves to be implementable, this model holds great promise to reduce the tremendous global burden of spinal disorders. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight patients with level IV inferior vena cava thrombi not extending into the atrium underwent transabdominal-transdiaphragmatic robot-assisted inferior vena cava thrombectomy obviating cardiopulmonary bypass/deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (cardiopulmonary bypass-free group) by an expert team comprising urological, hepatobiliary, and cardiovascular surgeons. The central diaphragm tendon and pericardium were transabdominally dissected until the intrapericardial inferior vena cava were exposed and looped proximal to the cranial end of the thrombi under intraoperative ultrasound guidance. As controls, 14 patients who underwent robot-assisted inferior vena cava thrombectomy with cardiopulmonary bypass (cardiopulmonary bypass group) and 25 patients who underwent open thrombectomy with cardiopulmonary bypass/deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (cardiopulmonary bypass/deep hypothermic circulatory arrest group) were included. Clinicopathological, operative, and survival outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.
RESULTS: Eight robot-assisted inferior vena cava thrombectomies were successfully performed without cardiopulmonary bypass, with 1 open conversion. The median operation time and first porta hepatis occlusion time were shorter, and estimated blood loss was lower in the cardiopulmonary bypass-free group as compared to the cardiopulmonary bypass group (540 vs 586.5 minutes, 16.5 vs 38.5. minutes, and 2,050 vs 3,500 mL, respectively). Severe complications (level IV-V) were also lower in the cardiopulmonary bypass-free group than in cardiopulmonary bypass and cardiopulmonary bypass/deep hypothermic circulatory arrest groups (25% vs 50% vs 40%). Oncologic outcomes were comparable among the 3 groups in short-term follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Pure transabdominal-transdiaphragmatic robot-assisted inferior vena cava thrombectomy without cardiopulmonary bypass/deep hypothermic circulatory arrest represents as an alternative minimally invasive approach for selected level IV inferior vena cava thrombi.
PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We conducted an online survey to gather data, examining participants' binge-watching habits and preferred platforms. We also utilized regression analysis to assess the impact of binge-watching addiction on mental health, exploring the associations between binge-watching addiction and feelings of loneliness, anxiety, and depression.
RESULTS: Our findings revealed that the Chinese college students in our study typically defined binge-watching sessions as lasting approximately 7.22 hours, with an average of 10.83 episodes. Regarding the self-assessment of binge-watching, the average duration of participants was 5.76 hours, and the average number of episodes was 7.42. Tencent Video, iQIYI, and Bilibili emerged as the dominant platforms for binge-watching among the respondents. Regression analysis demonstrated a significant link between binge-watching addiction and mental health, with positive associations observed between binge-watching addiction and increased feelings of loneliness, anxiety, and depression.
CONCLUSION: The results of this study reinforce previous findings regarding the detrimental effects of excessive media consumption on mental well-being. Moreover, they provide valuable insights into the global prevalence of binge-watching and its impact on the psychological health of young adults in the digital age, emphasizing the need for proactive measures to address this issue.