Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Best Practices in Intraoperative Neuromonitoring in Spine Deformity Surgery: Development of an Intraoperative Checklist to Optimize Response

  • Delphi Consensus Report
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study Design

Consensus-based creation of a checklist and guideline.

Objective

To develop a consensus-based checklist to guide surgeon responses to intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) changes in patients with a stable spine and to develop a consensus-based best practice guideline for IONM practice in the United States.

Summary of Background Data

Studies show that checklists enhance surgical team responses to crisis situations and improve patient outcomes. Currently, no widely accepted guidelines exist for the response to IONM changes in spine deformity surgery.

Methods

After a literature review of risk factors and recommendations for responding to IONM changes, 4 surveys were administered to 21 experienced spine surgeons and 1 neurologist experienced in IONM. Areas of equipoise were identified and the nominal group process was used to determine items to be included in the checklist. The authors reevaluated and modified the checklist at 3 face-to-face meetings over 12 months, including a period of clinical validation using a modified Delphi process. The group was also surveyed on current IONM practices at their institutions. This information and existing IONM position statements were used to create the IONM best practice guideline.

Results

Consensus was reached for the creation of 5 checklist headings containing 26 items to consider in the response to IONM changes. Consensus was reached on 5 statements for inclusion in the best practice guideline; the final guideline promotes a team approach and makes recommendations aimed at decreasing variability in neuromonitoring practices.

Conclusions

The final products represent the consensus of a group of expert spine surgeons. The checklist includes the most important and high-yield items to consider when responding to IONM changes in patients with a stable spine, whereas the IONM guideline represents the group consensus on items that should be considered best practice among IONM teams with the appropriate resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schwartz DM, Auerbach JD, Dormans JP, et al. Neurophysiological detection of impending spinal cord injury during scoliosis surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:2440–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fu KMG, Smith JS, Polly DW, et al. Morbidity and mortality associated with spinal surgery in children: a review of the Scoliosis Research Society morbidity and mortality database. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2011;7:37–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vitale MG, Moore DW, Matsumoto H, et al. Risk factors for spinal cord injury during surgery for spinal deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010;92:64–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Devlin VJ, Schwartz DM. Intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring during spinal surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2007;15:549–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pelosi L, Lamb J, Grevitt M, et al. Combined monitoring of motor and somatosensory evoked potentials in orthopaedic spinal surgery. Clin Neurophysiol 2002;113:1082–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sutter M, Eggspuehler A, Muller A, et al. Multimodal intraoperative monitoring: an overview and proposal of methodology based on 1,017 cases. Eur Spine J 2007;16(suppl 2):S153–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Quraishi NA, Lewis SJ, Kelleher MO, et al. Intraoperative multimodality monitoring in adult spinal deformity: analysis of a prospective series of one hundred two cases with independent evaluation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:1504–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Thuet ED, Winscher JC, Padberg AM, et al. Validity and reliability of intraoperative monitoring in pediatric spinal deformity surgery: a 23-year experience of 3436 surgical cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:1880–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Noonan KJ, Walker T, Feinberg JR, et al. Factors related to false-versus true-positive neuromonitoring changes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27:825–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Winter RB. Neurologic safety in spinal deformity surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997;22:1527–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fehlings MG, Brodke DS, Norvell DC, et al. The evidence for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in spine surgery: does it make a difference? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35(9 suppl):S37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pahys JM, Guille JT, D’Andrea LP, et al. Neurologic injury in the surgical treatment of idiopathic scoliosis: guidelines for assessment and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2009;17:426–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lall RR, Hauptman JS, Munoz C, et al. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in spine surgery: indications, efficacy, and role of the preoperative checklist. Neurosurg Focus 2012;33:E10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Weiser TG, Haynes AB, Dziekan G, et al. Effect of a 19-item surgical safety checklist during urgent operations in a global patient population. Ann Surg 2010;251:976–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ziewacz JE, Arriaga AF, Bader AM, et al. Crisis checklists for the operating room: development and pilot testing. J Am Coll Surg 2011;213:212–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Harrison TK, Manser T, Howard SK, et al. Use of cognitive aids in a simulated anesthetic crisis. Anesth Analg 2006;103:551–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Nuwer MR, Dawson EG, Carlson LG, et al. Somatosensory evoked potential spinal cord monitoring reduces neurologic deficits after scoliosis surgery: results of a large multicenter survey. Electroence-phalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1995;96:6–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Stecker MM, Robertshaw J. Factors affecting reliability of interpretations of intraoperative evoked potentials. J Clin Monit Comput 2006;20:47–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gonzalez AA, Jeyanandarajan D, Hansen C, et al. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spine surgery: a review. Neurosurg Focus 2009;27:E6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vitale MG, Riedel MD, Glotzbecker MP, et al. Building consensus: development of a best practice guideline (BPG) for surgical site infection (SSI) prevention in high-risk pediatric spine surgery. J Pediatr Orthop 2013;33:471–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 2000;32:1008–15.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, et al. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health 1984;74:979–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, et al. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 2009;360:491–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Weiser TG, Haynes AB, Lashoher A, et al. Perspectives in quality: designing the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist. Int J Qual Health Care 2010;22:365–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ziewacz JE, Berven SH, Mummaneni VP, et al. The design, development, and implementation of a checklist for intraoperative neuromonitoring changes. Neurosurg Focus 2012;33:E11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jarvis JG, Strantzas S, Lipkus M, et al. Responding to neuromonitoring changes in 3-column posterior spinal osteotomies for rigid pediatric spinal deformities. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:E493–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Tamkus AA, Rice KS, Kim HL. Differential rates of false-positive findings in transcranial electric motor evoked potential monitoring when using inhalational anesthesia versus total intravenous anesthesia during spine surgeries. Spine J 2013; S1529-9430(13)01484-8 [Epub ahead of print].

    Google Scholar 

  28. SRS Information Statement. Scoliosis Research Society (SRS). Available at: http://www.srs.org/professionals/education_materials/. Accessed February 18, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  29. AANEM Position Statement: The role of the intraoperative monitoring team. Available at: http://www.aanem.org/getmedia/44fbb8e3-27db-44e8-90df-81797109be2f/IOMMonitoringTeam_000.pdf.aspx. Accessed February 18, 2014.

  30. Bosk CL, Dixon-Woods M, Goeschel CA, et al. Reality check for checklists. Lancet 2009;374:444–5. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19681190. Accessed January 28, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    Michael G. Vitale MD, MPH, Gregory I. Pace BA, Margaret L. Wright BS, Hiroko Matsumoto MA & David P. Roye MD

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 90027, USA

    David L. Skaggs MD

  3. Department of Neurological Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    Richard C. E. Anderson MD

  4. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA

    Douglas L. Brockmeyer MD

  5. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    John P. Dormans MD & John M. Flynn MD

  6. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    John B. Emans MD & Michael P. Glotzbecker MD

  7. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, 80202, USA

    Mark A. Erickson MD

  8. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Loyola University, Chicago, IL, 60660, USA

    Kamal N. Ibrahim MD

  9. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 2S8, Canada

    Stephen J. Lewis MD

  10. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA

    Scott J. Luhmann MD & Lawrence G. Lenke MD

  11. Department of Neurology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    Anil Mendiratta MD

  12. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital, Dallas, TX, 75219, USA

    B. Stephens Richards III MD & Daniel J. Sucato MD, MS

  13. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, 14627, USA

    James O. Sanders MD

  14. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Nemours/AI duPont, Wilmington, DE, 19803, USA

    Suken A. Shah MD

  15. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA

    John T. Smith MD

  16. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shriners Hospitals for Children, Los Angeles, CA, 90020, USA

    Kit M. Song MD

  17. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA

    Paul D. Sponseller MD

Authors
  1. Michael G. Vitale MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David L. Skaggs MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gregory I. Pace BA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Margaret L. Wright BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hiroko Matsumoto MA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Richard C. E. Anderson MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Douglas L. Brockmeyer MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. John P. Dormans MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. John B. Emans MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Mark A. Erickson MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. John M. Flynn MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Michael P. Glotzbecker MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Kamal N. Ibrahim MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Stephen J. Lewis MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Scott J. Luhmann MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Anil Mendiratta MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. B. Stephens Richards III MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. James O. Sanders MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Suken A. Shah MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. John T. Smith MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Kit M. Song MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Paul D. Sponseller MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Daniel J. Sucato MD, MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. David P. Roye MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Lawrence G. Lenke MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroko Matsumoto MA.

Additional information

Author disclosures: MGV (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from SRS, POSNA, Chest Wall and Spine Deformity Research Foundation, other from Biomet, outside the submitted work); DKS (Biomet, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, Medtronic, during the conduct of the study; grants from POSNA & SRS, personal fees from Biomet; Medtronic, nonfinancial support from Growing Spine Study Group, Scoliosis Research Society, Growing Spine Foundation Medtronic Strategic Advisory Board, personal fees from expert testimony, from Stryker, and from Wolters Kluwer HealtheLippincott Williams & Wilkins; Biomet Spine, other from Medtronic, other from Stryker; Biomet, Medtronic, outside the submitted work; in addition, Dr. Skaggs has a patent Medtronic issued); GIP (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); MLW (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); HM (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from SRS, POSNA, Children’s Spine Foundation (Grant no.: CWSD005, CWSD0004, CWSD0022, CWSD0026, CWSD0049), Cerebral Palsy International Research Foundation, outside the submitted work); RCEL (none); DLB (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); JPD (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; other from Elsevier, other from Veritas Health, Shriner’s International, outside the submitted work); JBE (none); MAE (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; and POSNA Board of Directors); JMF (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; other from Biomet, other from LWW, outside the submitted work); MPG (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); KNI (DePuy Synthes, other from SpineCraft, outside the submitted work); SJL (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; personal fees and other from Medtronic, personal fees and other from Stryker, personal fees and other from AO spine, outside the submitted work); SJL (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Medtronic, personal fees from Stryker, personal fees from Orthofix, personal fees from DePuy Synthes, personal fees from Lippincott, from Globus, outside the submitted work); AM (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); SR(none); JOS (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from CWSDSG Foundation, personal fees from DePuy, outside the submitted work); SAS (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants and other from Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation, grants and personal fees from DePuy Synthes Spine, outside the submitted work); JTS (Depuy Synthes, other from Spineguard, other from Ellipse Technologies, outside the submitted work); KMS (none); PDS (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from DePuy Synthes Spine, personal fees from Globus, personal fees from JBJS, personal fees from Oakstone Medical Publishing, outside the submitted work); DJS (Grants from Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America, personal fees from AAOS YOC, grants from Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation, other from Scoliosis Research Society Board Membership, grants from Department of Defense, grants from DePuy Spine, grants from University of Washington St. Louis, outside the submitted work); DPR (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from SRS, POSNA, Children’s Spine Foundation (Grant no.: CWSD005, CWSD0004, CWSD0022, CWSD0026, CWSD0049), OREF, CPIRF (Grant no.: R-808-12), other from OMeGA, Biomet, outside the submitted work); LGL (none).

This study was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Medtronic Somafor Danek, Stryker Spine, DePuy Synthes Spine, Biomet Spine, and the ST. GILES FOUNDATION.

A work product of the combined SRS/POSNA task force on quality and safety in scoliosis care, and endorsed by the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America and the Scoliosis Research Society.

For an electronic version of the checklist please contact Michael G. Vitale, MD, MPH at mgv1@columbia.edu.

Author disclosures: MGV (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from SRS, POSNA, Chest Wall and Spine Deformity Research Foundation, other from Biomet, outside the submitted work); DKS (Biomet, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, Medtronic, during the conduct of the study; grants from POSNA & SRS, personal fees from Biomet; Medtronic, nonfinancial support from Growing Spine Study Group, Scoliosis Research Society, Growing Spine Foundation Medtronic Strategic Advisory Board, personal fees from expert testimony, from Stryker, and from Wolters Kluwer HealtheLippincott Williams & Wilkins; Biomet Spine, other from Medtronic, other from Stryker; Biomet, Medtronic, outside the submitted work; in addition, Dr. Skaggs has a patent Medtronic issued); GIP (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); MLW (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); HM (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from SRS, POSNA, Children’s Spine Foundation (Grant no.: CWSD005, CWSD0004, CWSD0022, CWSD0026, CWSD0049), Cerebral Palsy International Research Foundation, outside the submitted work); RCEL (none); DLB (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); JPD (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; other from Elsevier, other from Veritas Health, Shriner’s International, outside the submitted work); JBE (none); MAE (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; and POSNA Board of Directors); JMF (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; other from Biomet, other from LWW, outside the submitted work); MPG (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); KNI (DePuy Synthes, other from SpineCraft, outside the submitted work); SJL (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; personal fees and other from Medtronic, personal fees and other from Stryker, personal fees and other from AO spine, outside the submitted work); SJL (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Medtronic, personal fees from Stryker, personal fees from Orthofix, personal fees from DePuy Synthes, personal fees from Lippincott, from Globus, outside the submitted work); AM (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study); SR(none); JOS (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from CWSDSG Foundation, personal fees from DePuy, outside the submitted work); SAS (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants and other from Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation, grants and personal fees from DePuy Synthes Spine, outside the submitted work); JTS (Depuy Synthes, other from Spineguard, other from Ellipse Technologies, outside the submitted work); KMS (none); PDS (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from DePuy Synthes Spine, personal fees from Globus, personal fees from JBJS, personal fees from Oakstone Medical Publishing, outside the submitted work); DJS (Grants from Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America, personal fees from AAOS YOC, grants from Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation, other from Scoliosis Research Society Board Membership, grants from Department of Defense, grants from DePuy Spine, grants from University of Washington St. Louis, outside the submitted work); DPR (Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, during the conduct of the study; grants from SRS, POSNA, Children’s Spine Foundation (Grant no.: CWSD005, CWSD0004, CWSD0022, CWSD0026, CWSD0049), OREF, CPIRF (Grant no.: R-808-12), other from OMeGA, Biomet, outside the submitted work); LGL (none).

This study was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Medtronic Somafor Danek, Stryker Spine, DePuy Synthes Spine, Biomet Spine, and the ST. GILES FOUNDATION.

A work product of the combined SRS/POSNA task force on quality and safety in scoliosis care, and endorsed by the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America and the Scoliosis Research Society.

For an electronic version of the checklist please contact Michael G. Vitale, MD, MPH at mgv1@columbia.edu.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vitale, M.G., Skaggs, D.L., Pace, G.I. et al. Best Practices in Intraoperative Neuromonitoring in Spine Deformity Surgery: Development of an Intraoperative Checklist to Optimize Response. Spine Deform 2, 333–339 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.05.003

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.05.003

Level of Evidence

Keywords

Search

Navigation