Analyzing Large Language Models' Responses to Common Lumbar Spine Fusion Surgery Questions: A Comparison Between ChatGPT and Bard.

OBJECTIVE: In the digital age, patients turn to online sources for lumbar spine fusion information, necessitating a careful study of large language models (LLMs) like chat generative pre-trained transformer (ChatGPT) for patient education. METHODS: Our study aims to assess the response quality of Open AI (artificial intelligence)'s ChatGPT 3.5 and Google's Bard to patient questions on lumbar spine fusion surgery. We identified 10 critical questions from 158 frequently asked ones via Google search, which were then presented to both chatbots. Five blinded spine surgeons rated the responses on a 4-point scale from 'unsatisfactory' to 'excellent.' The clarity and professionalism of the answers were also evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: In our evaluation of 10 questions across ChatGPT 3.5 and Bard, 97% of responses were rated as excellent or satisfactory. Specifically, ChatGPT had 62% excellent and 32% minimally clarifying responses, with only 6% needing moderate or substantial clarification. Bard's responses were 66% excellent and 24% minimally clarifying, with 10% requiring more clarification. No significant difference was found in the overall rating distribution between the 2 models. Both struggled with 3 specific questions regarding surgical risks, success rates, and selection of surgical approaches (Q3, Q4, and Q5). Interrater reliability was low for both models (ChatGPT: k = 0.041, p = 0.622; Bard: k = -0.040, p = 0.601). While both scored well on understanding and empathy, Bard received marginally lower ratings in empathy and professionalism. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT3.5 and Bard effectively answered lumbar spine fusion FAQs, but further training and research are needed to solidify LLMs' role in medical education and healthcare communication.

Role of surgery in primary lumbar disk herniation: WFNS spine committee recommendations.

Objective: To provide the most up-to-date recommendations on the role of surgery in first-time lumbar disk herniations (LDH) in order to standardize surgical management. Methods: We performed a literature search in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase from 2012 to 2022 using the following keywords: "lumbar disk herniation AND surgery". Our initial search yielded 2610 results, which were narrowed down to 283 papers after standardized screening critera were applied. The data from these 283 papers were presented and discussed at two international meetings of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) Spine Committee, where the Delphi method was employed and ten spine experts voted on five final consensus statements. Results: and Conclusions: The WFNS Spine Committee's guidelines cover four main topics: (1) role and timing of surgery in first-time LDH; (2) role of minimally invasive techniques in LDH; (3) extent of disk resection in LDH surgery; (4) role of lumbar fusion in the context of LDH. Surgery for LDH is recommended for failure of conservative treatment, cauda equina syndrome, and progressive neurological impairment, including severe motor deficits. In the latter cases, early surgery is associated with faster recovery and may improve patient outcomes. Minimally invasive techniques have short-term advantages over open procedures, but there is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for or against the choice of a specific surgical procedure. Sequestrectomy and standard microdiscectomy demonstrated similar clinical results in terms of pain control, recurrence rate, functional outcome, and complications at short and medium-term follow-up. Lumbar fusion is not recommended as a routine treatment for first-time LDH, although it may be considered in specific patients affected by chronic axial pain or instability.

Modifiers of and Disparities in Palliative and Supportive Care Timing and Utilization among Neurosurgical Patients with Malignant Central Nervous System Tumors.

Patients with primary or secondary central nervous system (CNS) malignancies benefit from utilization of palliative care (PC) in addition to other supportive services, such as home health and social work. Guidelines propose early initiation of PC for patients with advanced cancers. We analyzed a cohort of privately insured patients with malignant brain or spinal tumors derived from the Optum Clinformatics Datamart Database to investigate health disparities in access to and utilization of supportive services. We introduce a novel construct, "provider patient racial diversity index" (provider pRDI), which is a measure of the proportion of non-white minority patients a provider encounters to approximate a provider's patient demographics and suggest a provider's cultural sensitivity and exposure to diversity. Our analysis demonstrates low rates of PC, home health, and social work services among racial minority patients. Notably, Hispanic patients had low likelihood of engaging with all three categories of supportive services. However, patients who saw providers categorized into high provider pRDI (categories II and III) were increasingly more likely to interface with supportive care services and at an earlier point in their disease courses. This study suggests that prospective studies that examine potential interventions at the provider level, including diversity training, are needed.