查看更多>>摘要：? 2022 Elsevier Inc.Background: Quantifying quality of health care can provide valuable information to patients, providers, and policy makers. However, the observational nature of measuring quality complicates assessments. Methods: We describe a conceptual model for defining quality and its implications about the data collected, how to make inferences about quality, and the assumptions required to provide statistically valid estimates. Twenty-one binary or polytomous quality measures collected from 101,051 adult Medicaid beneficiaries aged 18–64 years with schizophrenia from 5 U.S. states show methodology. A categorical principal components analysis establishes dimensionality of quality, and item response theory models characterize the relationship between each quality measure and a unidimensional quality construct. Latent regression models estimate racial/ethnic and geographic quality disparities. Results: More than 90% of beneficiaries filled at least 1 antipsychotic prescription and 19% were hospitalized for schizophrenia during a 12-month observational period in our multistate cohort with approximately 2/3 nonwhite beneficiaries. Four quality constructs emerged: inpatient, emergency room, pharmacologic/ambulatory, and ambulatory only. Using a 2-parameter logistic model, pharmacologic/ambulatory care quality varied from –2.35 to 1.26 (higher = better quality). Black and Latinx beneficiaries had lower pharmacologic/ambulatory quality compared with whites. Race/ethnicity modified the association of state and pharmacologic/ambulatory care quality in latent regression modeling. Average quality ranged from –0.28 (95% confidence interval, –2.15 to 1.04) for blacks in New Jersey to 0.46 [95% confidence interval, –0.89 to 1.40] for whites in Michigan. Conclusions: By combining multiple quality measures using item response theory models, a composite measure can be estimated that has more statistical power to detect differences among subjects than the observed mean per subject.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 Elsevier Inc.The UK neurosurgical community has a track record of delivering high-quality, practice-changing clinical research studies, facilitated by a robust clinical research infrastructure and close collaborations between neurosurgical centers. More recently, these large-scale studies have been conceived, developed, and delivered by neurosurgical trainees, working under the umbrella of the British Neurosurgical Trainee Research Collaborative (BNTRC). In this paper, we outline the current landscape of large-scale neurosurgical studies in the UK, focusing on the role of trainees in facilitating this research. Importantly, we focus on our experience of trainee-led studies, including the development of the network, current challenges, and future directions. We believe that a similar model can be applied in different settings and countries, which will drive up the quality of neurosurgical research, ultimately benefiting future neurosurgical patients.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 The AuthorsObjective: To investigate whether financial bias exists in hydrocephalus and vertebral augmentation literature. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed of studies concerning vertebral augmentation and cerebrospinal fluid valves. The relationship between reported conflicts of interest and the nature of the conclusion (positive vs. neutral and negative) was analyzed. Results: Having a conflict of interest was significantly associated with reporting a positive conclusion in studies investigating valves for hydrocephalus (92.3% positive conclusion vs. 36.4%; P = 0.001), but not for cement augmentation studies (80.5% positive conclusion vs. 65.7%; P = 0.087). As studies concerning vertebral augmentation implants had only positive conclusions, no analysis could be performed. Conclusions: Our findings suggest a positive relationship between reported conflict of interest and positive outcome in neurosurgical literature concerning cerebrospinal fluid valves.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 Elsevier Inc.Background: New findings and research regarding the microsurgical treatment of intracerebral aneurysms (IAs) continue to advance even in the era of endovascular therapies. Research in the past 2 decades has continued to revolve around the question of whether open surgery or endovascular treatment is preferable. The answer remains both complex and in flux. Objective: This review focuses on microsurgery, reflects on the research decisions of previous landmark studies, and proposes future study designs that may further our understanding of IAs and how best to treat them. Results: The future of IA research may include a combination of pragmatic trials, artificial intelligence integrated tools, and mining of large data sets, in addition to the publication of high-quality single-center studies. Conclusions: The future will likely emphasize testing innovative techniques, looking at granular patient data, and considering every patient encounter as a potential source of knowledge, creating a system in which data are updated daily because each patient interaction contributes to answering important research questions.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2022 The Author(s)In this narrative review, we discuss aspects of study design for research in the surgical treatment of patients with spontaneous acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We emphasize the importance of carefully defining the primary end point relevant to the intervention under investigation, whether this is technical (i.e., residual hematoma volume) or clinical (i.e., mortality or functional outcome), and the timing of its assessment. Compared with patients with acute ischemic stroke, patients with spontaneous acute ICH may take longer to fully recover. Efficient patient recruitment is essential for all research studies and deferred consent is an option to allow disabled and critically ill patients to be included. Although central concealment of the randomization process, often with a method of stratification to ensure that prognostic variables are balanced between groups, it is often appropriate to undertake analysis of the treatment effect adjusted for various predefined covariables. The definition of minimally invasive surgery, and its use and timing in relation to ICH, requires urgent assessment. Future studies could be better designed and executed as part of a large (inter)national ICH trials consortium, consisting of dedicated interdisciplinary teams of neurologists, neurosurgeons, intensivists, and epidemiologists. We advocate studies to be pragmatic and adhere to the IDEAL recommendations and CONSORT guidelines.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 The Author(s)This scoping review addresses the challenges of neuroanesthesiologic research: the population, the methods/treatment/exposure, and the outcome/results. These challenges are put into the context of a future research agenda for peri-/intraoperative anesthetic management, neurocritical care, and applied neurosciences. Finally, the opportunities of adaptive trial design in neuroanesthesiologic research are discussed.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 Elsevier Inc.Objective: Modern neurosurgery has established maximal safe resection as a cornerstone in the management of diffuse gliomas. Evaluation of the extent of resection (EOR), and its association with certain outcomes or interventions, heavily depends on an adequate methodology to draw strong conclusions. We aim to identify weaknesses and limitations that may threaten the internal validity and generalizability of studies involving the EOR in patients with glioma and to suggest methodological recommendations that may help mitigate these threats. Methods: A systematic search was performed by querying PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus since inception to April 30, 2021 using PICOS/PRISMA guidelines. Articles were then screened to identify high-impact studies evaluating the EOR in patients diagnosed with diffuse gliomas in accordance with predefined criteria. We identify common weakness and limitations during the evaluation of the EOR in the selected studies and then delineate potential methodological recommendations for future endeavors dealing with the EOR. Results: We identified 31 high-impact studies and found several research design issues including inconsistencies regarding EOR terminology, measurement, data collection, analysis, and reporting. Although some of these issues were related to now outdated reporting standards, many were still present in recent publications and deserve attention in contemporary and future research. Conclusions: There is a current need to focus more attention to the methodological aspects of glioma research. Methodological inconsistencies may introduce weaknesses into the internal validity of the studies and hamper comparative analysis of cohorts from different institutions. We hope our recommendations will eventually help develop stronger methodological designs in future research endeavors.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 Elsevier Inc.Surgery is the first-line therapy for most benign and malignant skull base tumors. Extent of resection (EOR) is a metric commonly used for preoperative surgical planning and to predict risk of postoperative tumor recurrence. Therefore, understanding the evidence on EOR in skull base neurosurgery is essential to providing optimal care for each patient. Several studies from the skull base neurosurgery literature have presented investigations of various topics related to EOR, including 1) preoperative EOR scoring systems, 2) intraoperative EOR scoring systems, 3) EOR and tumor recurrence, and 4) EOR and functional outcomes. We propose that future investigations should focus on the following elements to improve EOR research in skull base neurosurgery: 1) multi-institutional collaboratives with treatment propensity matching; 2) expert consensus and mixed-methods study design; and 3) predictive analytics/machine learning. We believe that these methods offer several advantages that have been described in the literature and that they address limitations of previous studies. The aim of this review was to inform future study design and improve the overall quality of subsequent investigations on EOR in skull base neurosurgery.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 Elsevier Inc.Clinical trials are performed to determine the safety, efficacy, or effectiveness of a medical or surgical intervention. A clinical trial is, by definition, prospective in nature with a uniform treatment of a defined patient cohort. The outcomes assessment should also be uniform. Often a control group is included. At present, the number of neurosurgical clinical trials is increasing, and the study designs have become more sophisticated. Historically, the standard of neurosurgical care has evolved from the findings from many case series and retrospective comparative studies. However, in the present report, we have focused exclusively on prospective clinical trials. An urgent need exists to understand how clinical trials have been performed in the past and how they can be improved to advance our neurosurgical practice. In the present review, we have discussed the barriers, successes, and failures regarding prospective clinical trials in neurosurgery with an outlook to the future.
查看更多>>摘要：? 2021 The Author(s)Background: Investigating neurosurgical interventions for traumatic brain injury (TBI) involves complex methodological and practical challenges. In the present report, we have provided an overview of the current state of neurosurgical TBI research and discussed the key challenges and possible solutions. Methods: The content of our report was based on an extensive literature review and personal knowledge and expert opinions of senior neurosurgeon researchers and epidemiologists. Results: Current best practice research strategies include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative effectiveness research. The performance of RCTs has been complicated by the heterogeneity of TBI patient populations with the associated sample size requirements, the traditional eminence-based neurosurgical culture, inadequate research budgets, and the often acutely life-threatening setting of severe TBI. Statistical corrections can mitigate the effects of heterogeneity, and increasing awareness of clinical equipoise and informed consent alternatives can improve trial efficiency. The substantial confounding by indication, which limits the interpretability of observational research, can be circumvented by using an instrumental variable analysis. Traditional TBI outcome measures remain relevant but do not adequately capture the subtleties of well-being, suggesting a need for multidimensional approaches to outcome assessments. Conclusions: In settings in which traditional RCTs are difficult to conduct and substantial confounding by indication can be present, observational studies using an instrumental variable analysis and “pragmatic” RCTs are promising alternatives. Embedding TBI research into standard clinical practice should be more frequently considered but will require fundamental modifications to the current health care system. Finally, multimodality outcome assessment will be key to improving future surgical and nonsurgical TBI research.
NSTL
Elsevier