Development of multidisciplinary, evidenced-based protocol recommendations and implementation strategies for anterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery following a literature review.

The anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) procedure involves several surgical specialties, including general, vascular, and spinal surgery due to its unique approach and anatomy involved. It also carries its own set of complications that differentiate it from posterior lumbar fusion surgeries. The demonstrated benefits of treatment guidelines, such as Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in other surgical procedures, and the lack of current recommendations regarding the anterior approach, underscores the need to develop protocols that specifically address the complexities of ALIF. We aimed to create an evidence-based protocol for pre-, intra-, and postoperative care of ALIF patients and implementation strategies for our health system. A 12-member multidisciplinary workgroup convened to develop an evidence-based treatment protocol for ALIF using a Delphi consensus methodology and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system for rating the quality of evidence and strength of protocol recommendations. The quality of evidence, strength of the recommendation and specific implementation strategies for Methodist Health System for each recommendation were described. The literature search resulted in 295 articles that were included in the development of protocol recommendations. No disagreements remained once the authors reviewed the final GRADE assessment of the quality of evidence and strength of the recommendations. Ultimately, there were 39 protocol recommendations, with 16 appropriate preoperative protocol recommendations (out of 17 proposed), 9 appropriate intraoperative recommendations, and 14 appropriate postoperative recommendations. This novel set of evidence-based recommendations is designed to optimize the patient's ALIF experience from the preoperative to the postoperative period.

Investigating the Relationship between Ambulatory and Hospital Patient Experience Scores in a Neurosurgery Practice.

Patient experience is critically important on both clinical and business levels to healthcare organizations, medical groups, and physician practices. We sought to understand whether a relationship exists between patient satisfaction scores in different settings for medical providers who practice in multiple settings (such as in the ambulatory setting and the hospital) within a system. Press Ganey (PG) ambulatory and hospital-based patient satisfaction surveys of a neurosurgery practice were retrospectively compared. Questions and sections related to the care provider, likelihood to recommend, and overall experience were examined. The ambulatory dataset included 2270 surveys, and the hospital dataset included 376. Correlation analysis of hospital survey patients who also completed an ambulatory survey (N = 120) was conducted, and weak, yet statistically significant, negative correlations between hospital "Likelihood to Recommend" and ambulatory "Care Provider Overall" (r = -0.20421, p = 0.0279), "Likelihood to Recommend" (r = -0.19622, p = 0.0356), and "Survey Overall" (r = -0.28482, p = 0.0019) were found. Our analyses found weak, yet significant, negative correlations between ambulatory and hospital PG scores. This could suggest that patient perception established in ambulatory and clinic settings could translate to a patient's perception of their hospital experience and subsequent satisfaction scores.