2002 Curve/Countercurve Survey Results
| Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy |
|
Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapy |
| Web survey results for: Farr M, Holt RT, Wada Eiji, Fardon DF. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy -- front or back? SpineLine. 2002;3(January-February):12-15. |
|
Web survey results for: Karasek ME, Carragee EJ, Schofferman J. Intradiscal electrothermal therapy. SpineLine. 2002;3(March-April):12-18.
|
|
1. If the patient described in this case came to me for advice, I would advise:
33% would advise posterior surgery (laminoplasty)
52% would advise anterior surgery (corpectomy and fusion)
5% would advise another surgical technique, eg, "combined anterior/posterior decompression and fusion with fixation both anterior and posterior"
10% would advise no surgery |
|
1. If the patient described in the initial case presentation came to me for advice and treatment, I would:
58% would refer for IDET
27% would refer for fusion
9% would refer for pharmacologic management
0 would recommend no further treatment
|
| Painful Thoracic Disc with Neurologic Compromise -- To Operate or Not to Operate? |
|
Treatment Options for Refractory Scaroiliac Joint Pain |
| Web survey results for: Brown CW, Currier BL, Fardon DF. Painful thoracic disc with neurologic compromise -- to operate or not to operate? SpineLine. 2002;3(May-June):12-15. |
|
Web survey results for: Dreyfuss P, Graham-Smith A, Schofferman J. Treatment options for refractory sacroiliac joint pain. SpineLine. 2002;3(July-August):14-20. |
|
1. How would you have treated the patient as described at the beginning of this article?
100% would have treated the patient nonoperatively
0 would have treated the patient operatively |
|
1. Do you diagnose sacroiliac joint pain in your practice?
96% yes
4% no |
|
2. How would you have treated Case 2?
0 would have treated the patient nonoperatively
100% would have treated the patient operatively |
|
2. Is there a role for SI joint neurotomy for refractory pain?
61% yes
39% no |
|
3. How would you have treated Case 3?
100% would have treated the patient nonoperatively
0 would have treated the patient operatively |
|
3. Is there a role for SI joint fusion for refractory pain?
48% yes
52% no |
|
The Smoking Patient: To Fuse or Not to Fuse?
|
|
Should Excised Disc Material Undergo Pathologic Analysis? |
|
Web survey results for: Fardon DF, Whitesides TE Jr. SpineLine. 2002;3(September-October):10-14.
|
|
Web survey results for: Tally W, Grauer JN, Vaccaro A. Should excised disc material undergo pathologic analysis? SpineLine. 2002;3(November-December):12-14. |
|
1. Would you recommend that the patient proceed with a fusion in spite of smoking?
75% would recommend the patient proceed even if she couldn’t quit smoking
25% would recommend against the procedure |
|
1. Do you routinely send disc material for pathologic analysis?
40% yes
60% no
|
|
2. If the patient proceeds with fusion, should the fusion be:
54% believe the fusion should be the same technique as for a nonsmoker
46% believe the fusion should be a more complex procedure than for a nonsmoker |
|
|
|
3. If the patient refuses to quit smoking and fusion is not done:
38% believe she will just have to live with her problem
38% believe opioid pain management is indicated
24% believe other treatment is indicated such as:
“bone growth stimulation”
“maximize conservative care” |
|
|