Closing the loop between evidence-based medicine and care delivery: a possible role for clinical audits in spinal surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) should be the ultimate force driving change in clinical practice. This process generally occurs through a trickle-down phenomenon by which practice recommendations are revised, modified, and/or changed based on the best published data. Recommendations are subsequently incorporated by individual physicians. The fundamental assumption that drives this paradigm is that adopting evidence-based recommendations and/or treatment guidelines will result in improved outcomes. Unfortunately, to date, the paradigm does not have an effective feedback loop that would then evaluate whether the changes did, in fact, improve outcomes. PURPOSE: To explore the process of clinical audits as a mechanism by which to provide a feedback loop to evaluate the results of spinal surgery on an individual basis and whether those results can be improved. STUDY DESIGN: Review article, discussion. METHODS: A literature review of the current data regarding clinical audits was performed, and a discussion of how they may apply to spinal surgery is offered. RESULTS: Clinical audits have been used outside the United States, particularly in the United Kingdom, to fulfill this function. A clinical audit would allow a practicing spinal surgeon to examine his or her individual experience and determine if it is achieving the expected outcome based on published results. In the most important feature of a clinical audit, the reaudit, if an individual's results are found to be inconsistent with published results, it presents an opportunity to identify if there are reconcilable differences from which potential improvements can be made. Effectively, this "closes the loop" between EBM and actual clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Documenting improved outcomes through the audit process can impact spinal care in several ways. Patients would receive a clear message that their doctors are interested in improving care. Hospitals will use the information to optimize treatment algorithms. Finally, insurers might make the audit process more tenable or attractive by indicating a physician's voluntary participation as a criterion to be a preferred provider.

Prophylactic inferior vena cava filters prevent pulmonary embolisms in high-risk patients undergoing major spinal surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical case series. OBJECTIVE: To show the efficacy of prophylactic inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in preventing venous thromboembolic event (VTE) in high-risk patients undergoing major spinal surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patients undergoing major spinal surgery are at increased risk for VTEs. Recent studies have shown IVC filters are effective in preventing clinically significant pulmonary embolism (PE), but have not documented the frequency of all emboli prevented. METHODS: Patients undergoing major spinal surgery from 2006 to 2009, having IVC filters placed for VTE prophylaxis, were reviewed. Patients with 2 or more risk factors for VTE were included and their perioperative courses were reviewed for PE and device-related complications. Cavograms obtained at the time of attempted filter retrieval identified intercepted emboli. The rates of intercepted emboli and clinical PEs were compared with those of similar populations undergoing similar procedures. RESULTS: Approximately 17% of patients had entrapped thrombus present at attempted filter retrieval. An additional 17% of filters were unable to be retrieved due to change in position within the IVC. No patients experienced symptomatic PE. One patient developed a deep vein thrombus requiring pharmacologic treatment and another patient developed superficial phlebitis. There were no complications related to IVC filter use. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that the decreased rate of PE observed in this and other series is likely because of the use of IVC filters, rather than sampling bias inherent when studying a relatively rare problem. The safety of IVC filters in this population is also confirmed. The observed rate of clinical PE is consistent with other published series. Emboli intercepted by filters may more accurately estimate clinically significant emboli prevented. Therefore, cavograms may prove to be a valuable method of assessing the efficacy of these devices in future studies.