Advertisement

Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 155, Issue 4, pp 747–754 | Cite as

Evidence-based clinical management and utilization of new technology in European neurosurgery

  • Clemens Weber
  • Asgeir S. Jakola
  • Sasha Gulati
  • Øystein P. Nygaard
  • Ole Solheim
Clinical Article - Neurosurgical Techniques

Abstract

Background

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) has become one of the pillars of modern patient care. However, neurosurgery has always been an experience-based and technology-driven discipline, and it remains unknown to which extent European neurosurgeons follow high-level evidence-based recommendations.

Methods

We conducted a Web-based survey with a 15-item questionnaire about evidence-based clinical management and utilization of new technology among European neurosurgeons. Two different sum scores were calculated from the questions concerning clinical practice; evidence-based treatment score and new technology score. A high evidence-based treatment score means that more clinical conditions (i.e., study questions) were managed in compliance with the available highest levels of evidence from published clinical trials. A high new technology score reflects the use of a high number of modern tools in neurosurgical practice.

Results

A total of 239 neurosurgeons from 30 different European countries answered the questionnaire. There were large variations among European neurosurgeons in providing evidence-based care and in utilization of various modern tools. There were significant regional differences in evidence-based treatment scores and modern technology scores with higher scores in northern and western Europe. High-volume institutions were not associated with better evidence-based treatment scores, but had significantly higher new technology scores. There were significantly higher new technology scores at university hospitals and a trend towards higher evidence-based treatment scores compared to other hospitals.

Conclusions

Clinical management in neurosurgery does not always comply with the best available evidence and there are large regional differences in clinical management and in utilization of various modern tools. The position of evidence-based medicine in European neurosurgery seems weak and this may be a threat to the quality of care.

Keywords

Neurosurgery Evidence-based medicine Technology Survey 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Bård Tommy Nilsen and Kyrre Svarva, Faculty of Social Sciences and Technology Management at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, for their help with the Internet-based survey tool.

Conflicts of interests

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Bandopadhayay P, Goldschlager T, Rosenfeld JV (2008) The role of evidence-based medicine in neurosurgery. J Clin Neurosci 15:373–378PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barker FG 2nd, Curry WT Jr, Carter BS (2005) Surgery for primary supratentorial brain tumors in the United States, 1988 to 2000: the effect of provider caseload and centralization of care. Neuro Oncol 7:49–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barth M, Weiss C, Thomé C (2008) Two-year outcome after lumbar microdiscectomy versus microscopic sequestrectomy: part 1: evaluation of clinical outcome. Spine 33:265–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barth M, Diepers M, Weiss C, Thomé C (2008) Two-year outcome after lumbar microdiscectomy versus microscopic sequestrectomy: part 2: radiographic evaluation and correlation with clinical outcome. Spine 33:272–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bartek J Jr, Hansen-Schwartz J, Bergdal O, Degn J, Romner B, Welling KL, Fischer W (2011) Alteplase (rtPA) treatment of intraventricular hematoma (IVH): safety of an efficient methodological approach for rapid clot removal. Acta Neurochir Suppl 111:409–413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carragee EJ, Deyo RA, Kovacs FM, Peul WC, Lurie JD, Urrútia G, Corbin TP, Schoene ML (2009) Clinical Research: Is the Spine Field a Mine Field? Spine 34:423–430Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cenic A, Kachur E (2009) Lumbar discectomy: a national survey of neurosurgeons and literature review. Can J Neurol Sci 36:196–200PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chandler WF, Knake JE, McGillicuddy JE, Lillehei KO, Silver TM (1982) Intraoperative use of real-time ultrasonography in neurosurgery. J Neurosurg 57:157–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Curfman GD, Redberg RF (2011) Medical devices—balancing regulation and innovation. N Engl J Med 365:975–977PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    CRASH trial collaborators (2005) Final results of MRC CRASH, a randomized placebo-controlled trial of intravenous corticosteroids in adults with head injury: outcomes at 6 months. Lancet 365:1957–1959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dey M, Jaffe J, Stadnik A, Awad IA (2012) External ventricular drainage for intraventricular hemorrhage. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 12:24–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Downing NS, Aminawung JA, Shah ND, Braunstein JB, Krumholz HM, Ross JS (2012) Regulatory review of novel therapeutics. Comparison of three regulatory agencies. N Engl J Med 366:2284–2293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eftekhar B, Ghodsi M, Nejat F, Ketabchi E, Esmaeeli B (2004) Prophylactic administration of ceftriaxone for the prevention of meningitis after traumatic pneumocephalus: results of a clinical trial. J Neurosurg 101:757–761PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Farah JO, Varma TRK (2008) Evidence-based neurosurgery – is it possible? Br J Neurosurg 22:461–461PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaberel T, Magheru C, Parienti JJ, Huttner HB, Vivien D, Emery E (2011) Intraventricular fibrinolysis versus external ventricular drainage alone in intraventricular hemorrhage: a meta-analysis. Stroke 42:2776–2781PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haines SJ (2003) Evidence-based neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 52:36–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hart MG, Grant R, Walker M, Dickinson H (2005) Surgical resection and whole brain radiation therapy versus whole brain radiation therapy alone for single brain metastases Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD003292, vol 1Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jakola AS, Myrmel KS, Kloster R, Torp SH, Lindal S, Unsgård G, Solheim O (2012) Comparison of a strategy favoring early surgical resection vs a strategy favoring watchful waiting in low-grade gliomas. JAMA 308:1881–1888PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jannetta PJ (1968) The surgical binocular microscope in neurological surgery. Am Surg 34:31–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kosugi Y, Watanabe E, Goto J, Watanabe T, Yoshimoto S, Kakakura K, Ikebe J (1988) An articulated neurosurgical navigation system using MRI and CT images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 35:147–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leksell L (1983) Stereotactic radiosurgery. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 46:797–803PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lunsford LD, Parrish R, Albright L (1984) Intraoperative imaging with a therapeutic computed tomographic scanner. Neurosurgery 15:559–561PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maconochie I, Ross M (2010) Head injury (moderate to severe). Clin Evid (online) 10:1210Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC, Nicholl J, for the Balliol Collaboration (2009) No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 374:1105–1112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pang T, Gray M, Evans T (2006) A 15th grand challenge for global public health. Lancet 367:284–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ratilal BO, Costa J, Sampaio C (2006) Antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical introduction of intracranial ventricular shunts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD005365, vol 3Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ratilal BO, Costa J, Sampaio C, Pappamikail L (2011) Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing meningitis in patients with basilar skull fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD004884, vol 8Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rothoerl RD, Klier J, Woertgen C, Brawanski A (2003) Level of evidence and citation index in current neurosurgical publications. Neurosurg Rev 26:257–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312:71–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Santarius T, Kirkpatrick PJ, Ganesan D, Chia HL, Jalloh I, Smielewski P, Richards HK, Marcus H, Parker RA, Price SJ, Kirollos RW, Pickard JD, Hutchinson PJ (2009) Use of drains versus no drains after burr-hole evacuation of chronic subdural haematoma: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 374:1067–1073PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Seiz M, Freyschlag CF, Schenkel S, Weiss C, Thomé C, Schmieder K, Stummer W, Tuettenberg J (2011) Management of patients with low-grade gliomas – A survey among German neurosurgical departments. Cent Eur Neurosurg 72:186–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Solheim O, Cappelen J (2011) Bigger is bigger. Better is better. Acta Neurochir 153:1237–1243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Solheim O, Jakola AS, Gulati S, Johannesen TB (2012) Incidence and causes of perioperative mortality after primary surgery for intracranial tumors: a national, population-based study. J Neurosurg 116:825–834PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Thomé C, Barth M, Scharf J, Schmiedek P (2005) Outcome after lumbar sequestrectomy compared with microdiscectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Neurosurg Spine 2:271–278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Webb AJ, Ullman NL, Mann S, Muschelli J, Awad IA, Hanley DF (2012) Resolution of intraventricular hemorrhage varies by ventricular region and dose of intraventricular thrombolytic: the Clot Lysis: Evaluating Accelerated Resolution of IVH (CLEAR IVH) program. Stroke 43:1666–1668PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yarascavitch BA, Chuback JE, Almenawer SA, Reddy K, Bhandari M (2012) Levels of evidence in the neurosurgical literature: more tribulations than trials. Neurosurgery 6:1131–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yaşargil MG, Krayenbühl H (1970) The use of the binocular microscope in neurosurgery. Bibl Ophthalmol 81:62–65PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clemens Weber
    • 1
  • Asgeir S. Jakola
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Sasha Gulati
    • 1
    • 2
  • Øystein P. Nygaard
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ole Solheim
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgerySt. Olavs University HospitalTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Department of NeuroscienceNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  3. 3.National Center of Competence in Ultrasound and Image-Guided TherapyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations