Objectives: Primary objective was to assess database variables, processes involved and web platform for their suitability with a view to provide guidance for a large scale global project. Secondary objective was to capture demographic and selected injury/safety data on patients with T-SCI with a view to formulate prevention strategies.
Setting: Nine centers from Asia.
Methods: All patients with T-SCI admitted for first time were included. International SCI Core Data Set and especially compiled Minimal Safety Data Set were used as data elements. Questionnaire was used for feedback from centers.
Results: Results showed relevance and appropriateness of processes, data variables and web platform of the study. Ease of entering and retrieval of data from web platform was confirmed. Cost of one year IDAPP study was USD 7780. 975 patients were enrolled. 790 (81%) were males. High falls (n = 513, 52%) as a cause and complete injuries (n = 547, 56%) were more common. There was a higher percentage of thoracic and lumbar injuries (n = 516, 53%).
Conclusions: The study confirms that establishing the SCI database is possible using the variables, processes and web platform of the pilot study. It also provides a low cost solution. Expansion to other centers/regions and including non-traumatic SCI would be the next step forward.
METHODS: This multicentric multinational retrospective study, includes 24 countries from five different regions (Asia Pacific, South Eastern Africa, Western Africa, Latin America, and Middle East). Patients who developed orthopedic surgical site infection between January 2021 and December 2022 were included. Demographic details, bacterial profile of surgical site infection, and antibiotic sensitivity pattern were documented.
RESULTS: 2038 patients from 24 countries were included. Among them 69.7 % were male patients and 64.1 % were between 20 and 60 years. 70.3 % patients underwent trauma surgery and instrumentation was used in 93.5 %. Ceftriaxone was the most common preferred in 53.4 %. Early SSI was seen in 55.2 % and deep SSI in 59.7 %. Western Africa (76 %) and Asia-Pacific (52.8 %) reported a higher number of gram-negative infections whereas gram-positive organisms were predominant in other regions. Most common gram positive organism was Staphylococcus aureus (35 %) and gram-negative was Klebsiella (17.2 %). Majority of the organisms showed variable sensitivity to broad-spectrum antibiotics.
CONCLUSION: Our study strongly proves that every institution has to analyse their surgical site infection microbiological profile and antibiotic sensitivity of the organisms and plan their surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis accordingly. This will help to decrease the rate of surgical site infection, prevent the emergence of multidrug resistance and reduce the economic burden of treatment.
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) 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: 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.