Surgeon variation: a south african spinal pathology treatment survey

• Published in: European spine journal Vol. 33; no. 7; pp. 2577 - 2593
• Main Authors: Vorster, Pamela A., Burger, Ronelle, Mann, Theresa N., Nkonki, Lungiswa L., Reuter, Helmuth, Davis, Johan H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.07.2024; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Back pain; Clinical outcomes; Decision making; Developing countries; Epidural; Female; Females; Health sciences; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement - surgery; Intervertebral discs; LDCs; Male; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Neurosurgery; Original Article; Orthopedic Surgeons - statistics & numerical data; Orthopedics; Pathology; Patients; Practice Patterns, Physicians' - statistics & numerical data; Public sector; Rheumatology; South Africa; Spinal Diseases - surgery; Spine (cervical); Spine (lumbar); Spondylolisthesis; Stenosis; Surgeons; Surgery; Surgical Orthopedics; Surveys and Questionnaires; Variation; South Africa; Neurological surgery; Spine treatment variation; Surgeon difference; Survey with vignette; Orthopaedic surgery
• ISSN: 0940-6719; 1432-0932; 1432-0932
• DOI: 10.1007/s00586-024-08295-6

Purpose To investigate variation in treatment decisions among spine surgeons in South Africa and the association between surgeon characteristics and the treatment they select. Methods We surveyed 79 South African spine surgeons. We presented four vignettes (cervical spine distractive flexion injury, lumbar disc herniation, degenerative spondylolisthesis with stenosis, and insufficiency fracture) for them to assess and select treatments. We calculated the index of qualitative variation (IQV) to determine the degree of variability within each vignette. We used Fisher’s exact, and Kruskal–Wallis tests to assess the relationships between surgeons’ characteristics and their responses per vignette. We compared their responses to the recommendations of a panel of spine specialists. Results IQVs showed moderate to high variability for cervical spine distractive flexion injury and insufficiency fracture and slightly lower levels of variability for lumbar disc herniation and degenerative spondylolisthesis with stenosis. This confirms the heterogeneity in South African spine surgeons’ management of spinal pathologies. The surgeon characteristics associated with their treatment selection that were important were caseload, experience and training, and external funding. Also, 19% of the surgeons selected a treatment option that the Panel did not support. Conclusion The findings make a case for evaluating patient outcomes and costs to identify value-based care. Such research would help countries that are seeking to contract with providers on value. Greater uniformity in treatment and easily accessible outcomes reporting would provide guidance for patients. Further investment in training and participation in fellowship programs may be necessary, along with greater dissemination of information from the literature.