Spine patient care with wearable medical technology: state-of-the-art, opportunities, and challenges: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Healthcare reforms that demand quantitative outcomes and technical innovations have emphasized the use of Disability and Functional Outcome Measurements (DFOMs) to spinal conditions and interventions. Virtual healthcare has become increasingly important following the COVID-19 pandemic and wearable medical devices have proven to be a useful adjunct. Thus, given the advancement of wearable technology, broad adoption of commercial devices (ie, smartwatches, phone applications, and wearable monitors) by the general public, and the growing demand from consumers to take control of their health, the medical industry is now primed to formally incorporate evidence-based wearable device-mediated telehealth into standards of care. PURPOSE: To (1) identify all wearable devices in the peer-reviewed literature that were used to assess DFOMs in Spine, (2) analyze clinical studies implementing such devices in spine care, and (3) provide clinical commentary on how such devices might be integrated into standards of care. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A systematic review. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review was conducted in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Guidelines (PRISMA) across the following databases: PubMed; MEDLINE; EMBASE (Elsevier); and Scopus. Articles related to wearables systems in spine healthcare were selected. Extracted data was collected as per a predetermined checklist including wearable device type, study design, and clinical indices studied. RESULTS: Of the 2,646 publications that were initially screened, 55 were extensively analyzed and selected for retrieval. Ultimately 39 publications were identified as being suitable for inclusion based on the relevance of their content to the core objectives of this systematic review. The most relevant studies were included, with a focus on wearables technologies that can be used in patients' home environments. CONCLUSIONS: Wearable technologies mentioned in this paper have the potential to revolutionize spine healthcare through their ability to collect data continuously and in any environment. In this paper, the vast majority of wearable spine devices rely exclusively on accelerometers. Thus, these metrics provide information about general health rather than specific impairments caused by spinal conditions. As wearable technology becomes more prevalent in orthopedics, healthcare costs may be reduced and patient outcomes will improve. A combination of DFOMs gathered using a wearable device in conjunction with patient-reported outcomes and radiographic measurements will provide a comprehensive evaluation of a spine patient's health and assist the physician with patient-specific treatment decision-making. Establishing these ubiquitous diagnostic capabilities will allow improvement in patient monitoring and help us learn about postoperative recovery and the impact of our interventions.

SPINE20 recommendations 2021: spine care for people's health and prosperity.

PURPOSE: The focus of SPINE20 is to develop evidence-based policy recommendations for the G20 countries to work with governments to reduce the burden of spine disease, and disability. METHODS: On September 17-18, 2021, SPINE20 held its annual meeting in Rome, Italy. Prior to the meeting, the SPINE20 created six proposed recommendations. These recommendations were uploaded to the SPINE20 website 10 days before the meeting and opened to the public for comments. The recommendations were discussed at the meeting allowing the participants to object and provide comments. RESULTS: In total, 27 societies endorsed the following recommendations. SPINE20 calls upon the G20 countries: (1) to expand telehealth for the access to spine care, especially in light of the current situation with COVID-19. (2) To adopt value-based interprofessional spine care as an approach to improve patient outcomes and reduce disability. (3) To facilitate access and invest in the development of a competent rehabilitation workforce to reduce the burden of disability related to spine disorders. (4) To adopt a strategy to promote daily physical activity and exercises among the elderly population to maintain an active and independent life with a healthy spine, particularly after COVID-19 pandemic. (5) To engage in capacity building with emerging countries and underserved communities for the benefit of spine patients. (6) To promote strategies to transfer evidence-based advances into patient benefit through effective implementation processes. CONCLUSIONS: SPINE20's initiatives will make governments and decision makers aware of efforts to reduce needless suffering from disabling spine pain through education that can be instituted across the globe.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Spine Surgery in Central Europe: A Questionnaire-Based Study.

OBJECTIVE: The severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) crisis led to many restrictions in daily life and protective health care actions in all hospitals to ensure basic medical supply. This questionnaire-based study among spinal surgeons in central Europe was generated to investigate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and consecutively the differences in restrictions in spinal surgery units. METHODS: An online survey consisting of 32 questions on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the related restrictions on spinal surgery units was created. Surgical fellows and consultants from neurosurgical, orthopedic, and trauma departments were included in our questionnaire-based study with the help of Austrian, German, and Swiss scientific societies. RESULTS: In a total of 406 completed questionnaires, most participants reported increased preventive measurements at daily clinical work (split-team work schedule [44%], cancellation of elective and/or semielective surgeries [91%]), reduced occurrence of emergencies (91%), decreased outpatient work (45%) with increased telemedical care (73%) and a reduced availability of medical equipment (75%) as well as medical staff (30%). Although most physicians considered the political restrictive decisions to be not suitable, most considered the medical measures to be appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in comparable restrictive measures for spinal surgical departments in central Europe. Elective surgical interventions were reduced, providing additional resources reserved for severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2-positive patients. Although similar restrictions were introduced in most participants' departments, the supply of personal protective equipment and the outpatient care remained insufficient and should be re-evaluated intensively for future global health care crises.

A Multicenter Evaluation of the Feasibility, Patient/Provider Satisfaction, and Value of Virtual Spine Consultation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility, patient/provider satisfaction, and perceived value of telehealth spine consultation after rapid conversion from traditional in-office visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data were obtained for patients undergoing telehealth visits with spine surgeons in the first 3 weeks after government restriction of elective surgical care at 4 sites (March 23, 2020, to April 17, 2020). Demographic factors, technique-specific elements of the telehealth experience, provider confidence in diagnostic and therapeutic assessment, patient/surgeon satisfaction, and perceived value were collected. RESULTS: A total of 128 unique visits were analyzed. New (74 [58%]), preoperative (26 [20%]), and postoperative (28 [22%]) patients were assessed. A total of 116 (91%) visits had successful connection on the first attempt. Surgeons felt very confident 101 times (79%) when assessing diagnosis and 107 times (84%) when assessing treatment plan. The mean and median patient satisfaction was 89% and 94%, respectively. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher for video over audio-only visits (P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction was not significantly different with patient age, location of chief complaint (cervical or thoracolumbar), or visit type (new, preoperative, or postoperative). Providers reported that 76% of the time they would choose to perform the visit again in telehealth format. Sixty percent of patients valued the visit cost as the same or slightly less than an in-office consultation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate the feasibility and high patient/provider satisfaction of virtual spine surgical consultation, and appropriate reimbursement and balanced regulation for spine telehealth care is essential to continue this existing work.

The Telehealth Spine Physical Examination: A Practical Approach Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a surge in the use of telehealth visits across the country to minimize in-person visits and to limit the spread of COVID-19. To date, no standards or outlines for telehealth spine examinations have been detailed and many surgeons simply defer the physical examination when performing telehealth visits. Nevertheless, just as physical examination of the spine is an integral part of live clinical encounters, appropriately modified physical examinations should also be part of virtual visits. METHODS: In this study we provide our methodology for guiding providers and patients in efficiently performing telehealth spine examinations. RESULTS: The study details steps for efficiently performing a physical examination in the telehealth setting. Our written suggestions are supplemented with photographs and video recordings to help streamline the virtual examination. CONCLUSIONS: An effective and efficient spine physical examination can be performed during telehealth visits. Future directions include verifying the findings from our virtual physical examination with in-person examinations.

Using administrative data to determine rates of surgical site infections following spinal fusion and laminectomy procedures.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a serious and costly post-op complication. Generating SSI rates often requires labor-intensive methods, but increasing numbers of publications reported SSI rates using administrative data. METHODS: Index laminectomy and spinal fusion procedures were identified using Canadian Classification of Health Interventions (CCI) procedure codes for inpatients and outpatients in the province of Alberta, Canada between 2008 and 2015. SSIs occurring in the year postsurgery were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Canada (ICD-10-CA) diagnosis and CCI procedure codes indicative of post-op infection. Rates of SSIs and case characteristics were reported. RESULTS: Over the 8-year study period, 21,222 index spinal procedures were identified of which 12,027 (56.7%) were laminectomy procedures, with 322 SSIs identified, an SSI rate of 2.7 per 100 procedures. Of the 9,195 (43.3%) fusion procedures, 298 were identified as an SSI, an SSI rate of 3.2 per 100 procedures. This study found SSI rates increased from 2008 and 2015, and rates were the highest in the 0-18 year age group. CONCLUSIONS: The rates reported in this study were similar to published SSI rates using traditional surveillance methods, suggesting administrative data may be a viable method for reporting SSI rates following spinal procedures. Further work is needed to validate SSIs identified using administrative data by comparing to traditional surveillance.

MRI-based early diagnosis: a diabetic Charcot spine case report.

BACKGROUND: Spinal neuroarthropathy (SNA), also known as Charcot spine, is an uncommon aggressive arthropathy, secondary to loss of proprioceptive and nociceptive feedback from the spine. A diagnosis of SNA is frequently delayed due to the scarcity of symptoms in its early stages, leading to significant neurological deterioration. Therefore, prompt suspicion of the disease is critical to providing better outcomes. This case assembles two rare characteristics of SNA: diabetic aetiology and a precocious time of diagnosis, and aims to highlight the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings that allowed for the diagnosis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 44-year-old woman, with long-term type 1 diabetes, presented with a two-month history of progressive lumbar pain, difficulty in maintaining an upright position, and discrete trunk forward-leaning. Diabetes-related vasculopathy and nephropathy were already known, and laboratory test results did not show any new abnormalities. A lumbar MRI revealed extensive signal intensity changes of the L2 and L3 vertebral bodies associated with marginal areas of enhancement and the involvement of regions adjacent to interapophyseal articulations and spinous processes from L2-L3 to L5-S1, in association with degenerative changes of the thoracolumbar spine. These findings were identified by the radiologist as suggestive of SNA. To rule out neoplastic and infectious disease, a bone biopsy at the L2-L3 level was executed. The pathology report revealed intervertebral disc material and fragments of fibrous tissue, with a complete absence of inflammatory cells. It was decided to perform a six-month MRI follow-up, which showed stability of the findings, confirming the hypothesis of Charcot spine. The patient was under clinical and radiological follow-up and did not require surgical fixation at the moment of diagnosis. After 2.5 years from the initial diagnosis, a new MRI revealed progression of the lesions with oedema and enlarged paravertebral soft tissues; these findings are compatible with the patient's latest complaints of lumbar pain recurrence. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report of an MRI-based early diagnosis of diabetic SNA, a rare disease with nonspecific symptoms in its initial stages and a wide spectrum of differential diagnoses. The MRI findings, distinctly the involvement of both anterior and posterior spinal elements, were the key to allowing for the proper diagnosis. A precocious diagnosis, although challenging, is fundamental to providing early intervention and to preventing further neurological impairment.

Interventional procedure plans generated by telemedicine visits in spine patients are rarely changed after in-person evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The role of telemedicine in the evaluation and treatment of patients with spinal disorders is rapidly expanding, brought on largely by the COVID-19 pandemic. Within this context, the ability of pain specialists to accurately diagnose and plan appropriate interventional spine procedures based entirely on telemedicine visits, without an in-person evaluation, remains to be established. In this study, our primary objective was to assess the relevance of telemedicine to interventional spine procedure planning by determining whether procedure plans established solely from virtual visits changed following in-person evaluation. METHODS: We reviewed virtual and in-person clinical encounters from our academic health system's 10 interventional spine specialists. We included patients who were seen exclusively via telemedicine encounters and indicated for an interventional procedure with documented procedural plans. Virtual plans were then compared with the actual procedures performed following in-person evaluation. Demographic data as well as the type and extent of physical examination performed by the interventional spine specialist were also recorded. RESULTS: Of the 87 new patients included, the mean age was 60 years (SE 1.4 years) and the preprocedural plan established by telemedicine, primarily videoconferencing, did not change for 76 individuals (87%; 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94) following in-person evaluation. Based on the size of our sample, interventional procedures indicated solely during telemedicine encounters may be accurate in 79%-94% of cases in the broader population. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that telemedicine evaluations are a generally accurate means of preprocedural assessment and development of interventional spine procedure plans. These findings clearly demonstrate the capabilities of telemedicine for evaluating spine patients and planning interventional spine procedures.

Distance Management of Spinal Disorders During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Evidence-Based Patient and Clinician Guides From the Global Spine Care Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly limited patients' access to care for spine-related symptoms and disorders. However, physical distancing between clinicians and patients with spine-related symptoms is not solely limited to restrictions imposed by pandemic-related lockdowns. In most low- and middle-income countries, as well as many underserved marginalized communities in high-income countries, there is little to no access to clinicians trained in evidence-based care for people experiencing spinal pain. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the development and present the components of evidence-based patient and clinician guides for the management of spinal disorders where in-person care is not available. METHODS: Ultimately, two sets of guides were developed (one for patients and one for clinicians) by extracting information from the published Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) papers. An international, interprofessional team of 29 participants from 10 countries on 4 continents participated. The team included practitioners in family medicine, neurology, physiatry, rheumatology, psychology, chiropractic, physical therapy, and yoga, as well as epidemiologists, research methodologists, and laypeople. The participants were invited to review, edit, and comment on the guides in an open iterative consensus process. RESULTS: The Patient Guide is a simple 2-step process. The first step describes the nature of the symptoms or concerns. The second step provides information that a patient can use when considering self-care, determining whether to contact a clinician, or considering seeking emergency care. The Clinician Guide is a 5-step process: (1) Obtain and document patient demographics, location of primary clinical symptoms, and psychosocial information. (2) Review the symptoms noted in the patient guide. (3) Determine the GSCI classification of the patient's spine-related complaints. (4) Ask additional questions to determine the GSCI subclassification of the symptom pattern. (5) Consider appropriate treatment interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The Patient and Clinician Guides are designed to be sufficiently clear to be useful to all patients and clinicians, irrespective of their location, education, professional qualifications, and experience. However, they are comprehensive enough to provide guidance on the management of all spine-related symptoms or disorders, including triage for serious and specific diseases. They are consistent with widely accepted evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. They also allow for adequate documentation and medical record keeping. These guides should be of value during periods of government-mandated physical or social distancing due to infectious diseases, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic. They should also be of value in underserved communities in high-, middle-, and low-income countries where there is a dearth of accessible trained spine care clinicians. These guides have the potential to reduce the overutilization of unnecessary and expensive interventions while empowering patients to self-manage uncomplicated spinal pain with the assistance of their clinician, either through direct in-person consultation or via telehealth communication.

Personal protective equipment usage, recycling and disposal among spine surgeons: An Asia Pacific Spine Society survey.

PURPOSE: In this study we investigated on the personal protective equipment (PPE) usage, recycling, and disposal among spine surgeons in the Asia Pacific region. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out among spine surgeons in Asia Pacific. The questionnaires were focused on the usage, recycling and disposal of PPE. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-two surgeons from 19 countries participated in the survey. When we sub-analysed the differences between countries, the provision of adequate PPE by hospitals ranged from 37.5% to 100%. The usage of PPE was generally high. The most used PPE were surgical face masks (88.7%), followed by surgical caps (88.3%), gowns (85.6%), sterile gloves (83.3%) and face shields (82.0%). The least used PPE were powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) (23.0%) and shoes/boots (45.0%). The commonly used PPE for surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients were N95 masks (74.8%), sterile gloves (73.0%), gowns (72.1%), surgical caps (71.6%), face shields (64.4%), goggles (64.0%), shoe covers (58.6%), plastic aprons (45.9%), shoes/boots (45.9%), surgical face masks (36.5%) and PAPRs (21.2%). Most PPE were not recycled. Biohazard bins were the preferred method of disposal for all types of PPE items compared to general waste. CONCLUSIONS: The usage of PPE was generally high among most countries especially for surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients except for Myanmar and Nepal. Overall, the most used PPE were surgical face masks. For surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients, the most used PPE were N95 masks. Most PPE were not recycled. Biohazard bins were the preferred method of disposal for all types of PPE.

COVID-19 and Changes in Neurosurgical Workload in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Cessation of elective procedures and lower bed capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic have led to a rise in the waiting lists for surgery, but it is unclear if workload has recovered sufficiently to account for this backlog. We describe the change in neurosurgical workload at a tertiary neurosciences center in the United Kingdom after the first pandemic wave in comparison with the months before and during the first wave. METHODS: A retrospective review of theatre records and electronic referrals-between December 1, 2019, and August 31, 2020-was performed. The months of December 2019-February 2020 were designated as pre-COVID months and March-May 2020 were designated as COVID months. The time period from June to August 2020 was designated as post-wave months. Statistical analyses were performed on SPSS v22 (IBM). RESULTS: Referrals declined from 572 in January to a nadir of 352 in April before a steady rise to August. Referral volumes for degenerative spinal disease and traumatic brain injuries showed a statistically significant change during the year. On average, 212 procedures per month were performed in the pre-COVID months, 167 procedures per month during COVID months, and 232 procedures per month in the post-wave months. The number of patients on the waiting list for scheduled operations rose from March (785 patients) onward to a peak of 997 patients in July. CONCLUSIONS: In the aftermath of COVID-19, higher referral volumes and operative procedures were apparent in the post-wave months as services returned to normal. With the expectation of a second wave of infections, it is unclear whether this will be sustainable.

Neurosurgical Referral Patterns During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A United Kingdom Experience.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a severe respiratory viral illness that has spread rapidly across the world. However, the United Kingdom has been particularly affected. Evidence has suggested that stroke, cardiac, and spinal presentations decreased during the pandemic as the public avoided seeking care. The effect on neurosurgical presentations and referrals during COVID-19 is unclear. Our aim, therefore, was to describe the referral patterns to a high-volume neurosurgical department in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Electronic referrals were identified from the referrals database from January 1, 2020 to May 31, 2020, inclusive, with January used as the baseline. The demographic data and referral diagnoses were captured on Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, Washington, USA). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS, version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, USA). Differences between referral volumes were evaluated using χ2 goodness-of-fit tests. RESULTS: A total of 2293 electronic referrals had been received during the study period. The median age was 63 years. Overall, the referrals had decreased significantly in volume during the study period [χ2(4) = 60.95; P < 0.001]. We have described the patterns in the daily referrals as the pandemic progressed. The reduction in the volume of referrals for degenerative spine cases and traumatic brain injuries was statistically significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The referrals for degenerative spine and traumatic brain injuries decreased significantly during the pandemic, which can be explained by the lower vehicular traffic and patient avoidance of healthcare services, respectively. The risk of neurological deterioration and increased morbidity and mortality, as a consequence, is of concern, and neurosurgeons worldwide should consider the optimal strategies to mitigate these risks as the pandemic eases.

An Analysis of Public Interest in Elective Neurosurgical Procedures During the COVID-19 Pandemic Through Online Search Engine Trends.

OBJECTIVE: In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has recommended the temporary cessation of all elective surgeries. The effects on patients' interest of elective neurosurgical procedures are currently unexplored. METHODS: Using Google Trends, search terms of 7 different neurosurgical procedure categories (trauma, spine, tumor, movement disorder, epilepsy, endovascular, and miscellaneous) were assessed in terms of relative search volume (RSV) between January 2015 and September 2020. Analyses of search terms were performed for over the short term (February 18, 2020, to April 18, 2020), intermediate term (January 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020), and long term (January 2015 to September 2020). State-level interest during phase I reopening (April 28, 2020, to May 31, 2020) was also evaluated. RESULTS: In the short term, RSVs of 4 categories (epilepsy, movement disorder, spine, and tumor) were significantly lower in the post-CMS announcement period. In the intermediate term, RSVs of 5 categories (miscellaneous, epilepsy, movement disorder, spine, and tumor) were significantly lower in the post-CMS announcement period. In the long term, RSVs of nearly all categories (endovascular, epilepsy, miscellaneous, movement disorder, spine, and tumor) were significantly lower in the post-CMS announcement period. Only the movement disorder procedure category had significantly higher RSV in states that reopened early. CONCLUSIONS: With the recommendation for cessation of elective surgeries, patient interests in overall elective neurosurgical procedures have dropped significantly. With gradual reopening, there has been a resurgence in some procedure types. Google Trends has proven to be a useful tracker of patient interest and may be used by neurosurgical departments to facilitate outreach strategies.

Management of Neurosurgical Cases in a Tertiary Care Referral Hospital During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons from a Middle-Income Country.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been at its peak for the past 8 months and has affected more than 215 countries around the world. India is now the second most-affected nation with more than 48,000,000 cases and 79,000 deaths. Despite this, and the fact that it is a lower-middle-income nation, the number of deaths is almost one third that of the United States and one half that of Brazil. However, there has been no experience published from non-COVID-19-designated hospitals, where the aim is to manage noninfected cases with neurosurgical ailments while keeping the number of infected cases to a minimum. METHODS: We analyzed the number of neurosurgical cases (nontrauma) done in the past 5 months (March-July 2020) in our institute, which is the largest neurosurgical center by volume in southern India, and compared the same to the concurrent 5 months in 2019 and 5 months preceding the pandemic. We also reviewed the total number of cases infected with COVID-19 managed during this time. RESULTS: We operated a total of 630 cases (nontrauma) in these 5 months and had 9 COVID-19 infected cases operated during this time. There was a 57% (P = 0.002) reduction in the number of cases operated as compared with the same 5 months in the preceding year. We employed a dual strategy of rapid antigen testing and surgery for cases needing emergency intervention and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction test for elective cases. The hospital was divided into 3 zones (red, orange, and green) depending on infectivity level with minimal interaction. Separate teams were designated for each zone, and thus we were able to effectively manage even infected cases despite the absence of pulmonology/medical specialists. CONCLUSIONS: We present a patient management protocol for non-COVID-19-designated hospitals in high-volume centers with the constraints of a lower-middle-income nation and demonstrate its effectiveness. Strict zoning targeted testing and effective triage can help in management during the pandemic.

Response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic by the Spine Division at a Level-I Academic Referral Center.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a ubiquitous health concern and a global pandemic. In an effort to slow the disease spread and protect valuable healthcare resources, cessation of nonessential surgery, including many orthopaedic procedures, has become commonplace. This crisis has created a unique situation in the care of spine patients as we must balance the urgency of patient evaluation, surgical intervention, and continued training against the risk of disease exposure and resource management. The spine division of an orthopaedic surgery department has taken an active role in enacting protocol changes in anticipation of COVID-19. In the initial 4 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic the spine division went from an average of 60.4 cases to 10 cases during the same timeframe. Clinic visits decreased from 417.4 to 322 with new patient visits decreasing from 28% to 20%. Three hundred eighteen of the 322 (98.7%) clinic visits were performed via telehealth. Although these changes have been forced upon us by necessity, we feel that our division and department will emerge in a more responsive, agile, and stronger state. As we look to the coming months and beyond, it will be important to continue to adapt to the changing landscape during unprecedented times.

Telemedicine in the Evaluation and Management of Neurosurgical Spine Patients: Questionnaire Assessment of 346 Consecutive Patients.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective questionnaire study of all patients seen via telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic at a large academic institution. OBJECTIVE: This aim of this study was to compare patient satisfaction of telemedicine clinic to in-person visits; to evaluate the preference for telemedicine to in-person visits; to assess patients' willingness to proceed with major surgery and/or a minor procedure based on a telemedicine visit alone. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: One study showed promising utility of mobile health applications for spine patients. No studies have investigated telemedicine in the evaluation and management of spine patients. METHODS: An 11-part questionnaire was developed to assess the attitudes toward telemedicine for all patients seen within a 7-week period during the COVID-19 crisis. Patients were called by phone to participate in the survey. χ2 and the Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test were performed to determine significance. RESULTS: Ninety-five percent were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their telemedicine visit, with 62% stating it was "the same" or "better" than previous in-person appointments. Patients saved a median of 105 minutes by using telemedicine compared to in-person visits. Fifty-two percent of patients have to take off work for in-person visits, compared to 7% for telemedicine. Thirty-seven percent preferred telemedicine to in-person visits. Patients who preferred telemedicine had significantly longer patient-reported in-person visit times (score mean of 171) compared to patients who preferred in-person visits (score mean of 137, P = 0.0007). Thirty-seven percent of patients would proceed with surgery and 73% would proceed with a minor procedure based on a telemedicine visit alone. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine can increase access to specialty care for patients with prolonged travel time to in-person visits and decrease the socioeconomic burden for both patients and hospital systems. The high satisfaction with telemedicine and willingness to proceed with surgery suggest that remote visits may be useful for both routine management and initial surgical evaluation for spine surgery candidates.Level of Evidence: 3.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Management of Spinal Disorders - Results of a National Survey. / Auswirkungen der COVID-19-Pandemie auf die Behandlung von Wirbelsäulenerkrankungen ­ Ergebnisse einer nationalen Umfrage.

INTRODUCTION: Far-reaching political steps to contain the COVID-19 pandemic have been undertaken in recent weeks. These also impact on surgical specialties not directly involved in the management of patients infected with the coronavirus. The Spine Section, the interdisciplinary professional political arm of the German Spine Society (DWG), the Professional Association for Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery (BVOU), and the Federal Association of German Neurosurgeons (BDNC) conducted a survey on the collateral effects of the pandemic on spine surgery in Germany. METHOD: This cross-sectional study included outpatient, day-patient and inpatient facilities caring for patients with spinal disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was designed to analyse the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of inpatients and outpatients with spinal disorders and to assess the economic ramifications in the various settings. RESULTS: All members of the Spine Section (n = 134) were invited to participate in the questionnaire consented by BVOU and BDNC. The questions were answered anonymously, and the personal data entered did not permit any de-anonymisation. All in all, 68% (n = 91) of the respondents completed the survey in full. Based on the type of employment (practice 30%, practice/staff: 45% and staff: 25%) and range of activities (conservative: 5%, conservative/operative: 75%, operative: 20%) the survey by the Spine Section can be regarded as representative. 95% of the practices/outpatient clinics reported a decline in their number of patients. In addition, the number of operations performed fell by 36% (SD 17%). The percentage of elective procedures declined from approximately 78% to 6%. As a result, more than half of the physicians anticipated moderate (20 - 40%) economic challenges and 25% major (> 50%) financial problems. CONCLUSION: In order to cushion collateral damage in the wake of future pandemic management, any implications in the interdisciplinary management of patients with spinal disorders should be based on these results.