Preliminary Findings After Nonoperative Management of Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury on a Background of Degenerative Disc Disease: Providing Optimum Patient Care and Costs Saving in a Nigerian Setting.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the hypothesis that nonoperative management would be a viable treatment option for patients with underlying degenerative disease who have traumatic cervical spinal cord injury (TCSI) without neurological deterioration and/or spinal instability during hospitalization. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from 2011 to 2016. All the patients had been treated nonoperatively with hard cervical collar immobilization. The clinical parameters assessed included the Frankel grade at presentation and discharge, the occurrence of deep vein thrombosis, urinary tract infection, sphincter dysfunction, and pressure sores. The radiographic data collected included magnetic resonance imaging signal cord changes. P ≤ 0.05 represented a significant association between the Frankel grade at presentation and the outcome parameters. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients were included in the present study. Of the patients who had presented with Frankel grade B, 85.71% had improved to a higher grade, 90.91% of the patients with Frankel grade C had improved to a higher grade, and 14.29% of the patients with Frankel grade D had improved to Frankel grade E. All the patients had satisfactory spinal stability, as evidenced by dynamic radiographs, after treatment. CONCLUSION: The findings from the present study have shown that nonoperative management can result in improved neurological outcomes for patients with underlying degenerative disease who have experienced TCSI without evidence of neurological deterioration and spinal instability. The Frankel grade at presentation was significantly associated with outcome parameters such as the neurological outcome on discharge and the occurrence of urinary tract infection. The results from the present study could be helpful to neurological surgeons in rural and other low-resource settings because the cost savings realized by nonoperative treatment will not sacrifice the provision of adequate care to their patients.

A reduction in errors is associated with prospectively recording them.

OBJECT: Error recording and monitoring is an important component of error prevention and quality assurance in the health sector given the huge impact of medical errors on the well-being of patients and the financial loss incurred by health institutions. With this in mind, assessing the effect of reporting errors should be a cause worth pursuing. The object in this study was to examine the null hypothesis that recording and publishing errors do not affect error patterns in a clinical practice. METHODS: Intraoperative errors and their characteristics were prospectively recorded between May 2000 and May 2013 in the neurosurgical practice of the senior author (M.B.). The error pattern observed between May 2000 and August 2006, which has been previously described (Group A), was compared with the error pattern observed between September 2006 and May 2013 (Group B). RESULTS: A total of 1108 cases in Group A and 974 cases in Group B were surgically treated. A total of 2684 errors were recorded in Group A, while 1892 errors were recorded in Group B. The ratios of cranial to spinal procedures performed in Groups A and B were 3:1 and 10:1, respectively, while the ratios of general to local anesthesia in the two groups were 2:1 and 1.3:1, respectively (p < 0.0001 for both). There was a significantly decreased proportion of cases with error (87% to 83%, p < 0.006), mean errors per case (2.4 to 1.9, p < 0.0001), proportion of error-related complications (16.7% to 5.5%, p < 0.002), and clinical impacts of error (2.7% to 1.0%, p < 0.0001) in Group B compared with Group A. Errors in Group B tended to be more preventable than those in Group A (85.8% vs 78.5%, p < 0.0001). A significant reduction was also noticed with most types of error. A descending trend in the mean errors per case was demonstrated from the years 2001 to 2012; however, an increased severity of errors (22.6% to 29.5%, p < 0.0001) was recorded in Group B compared with Group A. CONCLUSIONS: Data in this study showed that the act of recording errors might alter behaviors, resulting in fewer errors.