The problems and limitations of applying evidence-based medicine to primary surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity

Spine

Volumn 32, Issue 19 SUPPL., 2007, Pages

  Bridwell, Keith H ^a   Berven, Sigurd ^a   Edwards II, Charles ^a   Glassman, Steven ^a   Hamill, Christopher ^a   Schwab, Frank ^a  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Adult scoliosis; Outcomes analysis; SRS 22

Indexed keywords

ADULTHOOD; ARTICLE; CONSENSUS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; FUNDING; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCOLIOSIS; SPINE MALFORMATION; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; SPINE SURGERY; THORACOLUMBAR SPINE; TREATMENT INDICATION;

ADULT; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; PEER REVIEW; SPINAL DISEASES; SPINE;

EID: 34548357013     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181453e22     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Bridwell KH, Berven S, Glassman S, et al. Is the SRS-22 instrument responsive to change (surgical treatment) in adult scoliosis patients having primary spinal deformity surgery. Spine In press.
2. Weinstein SL, Ponseti IV. Curve progression in idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983;65:447-55.
3. Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Pseudarthrosis in adult spinal deformity following multisegmental instrumentation and arthrodesis. J Bone J Surg Am 2006;88:721-8.
4. Bradford DS, Tay BK, Hu SS. Adult scoliosis: surgical indications, operative management, complications, and outcomes. Spine 1999;24:2617-29.
5. Scoliosis Research Society Focus Issue on Adult Spinal Deformity. Spine 2006;31(suppl).
6. Dickson JH, Mirkovic S, Noble PC, et al. Results of operative treatment of idiopathic scoliosis in adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995;77:513-23.
7. Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, et al. Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine 2005;30:682-8.
8. Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, et al. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine 2005;30:2024-9.
9. Glassman S, Berven S, Kostuik J, et al. Nonsurgical resource utilization in adult spinal deformity. Spine 2006;31:941-7.
10. Schwab F, Dubey A, Gamez L, et al. Adult scoliosis: prevalence, SF-36, and nutritional parameters in an elderly volunteer population. Spine 2005;30:1082-5.
11. Schwab F, Farcy J-P, Bridwell K, et al. A clinical impact classification of scoliosis in the adult. Spine 2006;31:2109-14.
12. Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, et al. Scoliosis Research Society-22 patient questionnaire: responsiveness to change associated with surgical treatment. Spine 2003;28:70-3.
13. Bridwell KH, Cats-Baril W, Harrast J, et al. The validity of the SRS-22 instrument in an adult spinal deformity population compared with the ODI and SF-12: a study of response distribution, concurrent validity, internal consistency and reliability. Spine 2005;30:455-61.
14. Berven S, Deviren V, Demir-Deviren S, et al. Studies in the modified Scoliosis Research Society outcomes instrument in adults: validation, reliability, and discriminatory capacity. Spine 2003;28:2164-9.
15. Haher TR, Gorup JM, Shin TM, et al. Results of the Scoliosis Research Society instrument for evaluation of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a multi-center study of 244 patients. Spine 1999;24:1435-40.
16. Berven SH, Deviren V, Polly D Jr, et al. Minimal clinically important difference in spinal deformity: defining a threshold of change that matters [Poster 4]. SRS 40th Annual Meeting, Miami, FL, October 27-30, 2005.
17. Benson K, Hartz AJ. A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1878-86.