Research using the Quality Outcomes Database: accomplishments and future steps toward higher-quality real-world evidence.

Autor:	Asher AL; 1Neuroscience Institute, Carolina Neurosurgery & Spine Associates, Carolinas Healthcare System, Charlotte, North Carolina., Haid RW; 2Atlanta Brain and Spine Care, Atlanta, Georgia., Stroink AR; 3Central Illinois Neuro Health Science, Bloomington, Illinois., Michalopoulos GD; 4Mayo Clinic Neuro-Informatics Laboratory, Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.; 5Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Alexander AY; 4Mayo Clinic Neuro-Informatics Laboratory, Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.; 5Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Zeitouni D; 1Neuroscience Institute, Carolina Neurosurgery & Spine Associates, Carolinas Healthcare System, Charlotte, North Carolina., Chan AK; 6Department of Neurological Surgery, Columbia University, The Och Spine Hospital at NewYork-Presbyterian, New York, New York., Virk MS; 7Department of Neurological Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, New York., Glassman SD; 8Norton Leatherman Spine Center, Louisville, Kentucky., Foley KT; 9Department of Neurosurgery, University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee., Slotkin JR; 10Department of Neurosurgery, Geisinger Health, Danville, Pennsylvania., Potts EA; 11Department of Neurological Surgery, Indiana University, Goodman Campbell Brain and Spine, Indianapolis, Indiana., Shaffrey ME; 12Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia., Shaffrey CI; 13Department of Neurological Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina., Park P; 9Department of Neurosurgery, University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee., Upadhyaya C; 14Department of Neurosurgery, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina., Coric D; 1Neuroscience Institute, Carolina Neurosurgery & Spine Associates, Carolinas Healthcare System, Charlotte, North Carolina., Tumialán LM; 15Department of Neurosurgery, Barrow Neurological Institute, St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona., Chou D; 6Department of Neurological Surgery, Columbia University, The Och Spine Hospital at NewYork-Presbyterian, New York, New York., Fu KG; 7Department of Neurological Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, New York., Knightly JJ; 16Atlantic Neurosurgical Specialists, Morristown, New Jersey., Orrico KO; 17Washington Office, American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons, Washington, DC., Wang MY; 18Department of Neurosurgery, University of Miami, Florida., Bisson EF; 19Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; and., Mummaneni PV; 20Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California., Bydon M; 4Mayo Clinic Neuro-Informatics Laboratory, Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.; 5Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal of neurosurgery [J Neurosurg] 2023 May 19; Vol. 139 (6), pp. 1757-1775. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 May 19 (Print Publication: 2023).
DOI:	10.3171/2023.3.JNS222601
Abstrakt:	Objective: The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was established in 2012 by the NeuroPoint Alliance, a nonprofit organization supported by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. Currently, the QOD has launched six different modules to cover a broad spectrum of neurosurgical practice-namely lumbar spine surgery, cervical spine surgery, brain tumor, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), functional neurosurgery for Parkinson's disease, and cerebrovascular surgery. This investigation aims to summarize research efforts and evidence yielded through QOD research endeavors. Methods: The authors identified all publications from January 1, 2012, to February 18, 2023, that were produced by using data collected prospectively in a QOD module without a prespecified research purpose in the context of quality surveillance and improvement. Citations were compiled and presented along with comprehensive documentation of the main study objective and take-home message. Results: A total of 94 studies have been produced through QOD efforts during the past decade. QOD-derived literature has been predominantly dedicated to spinal surgical outcomes, with 59 and 22 studies focusing on lumbar and cervical spine surgery, respectively, and 6 studies focusing on both. More specifically, the QOD Study Group-a research collaborative between 16 high-enrolling sites-has yielded 24 studies on lumbar grade 1 spondylolisthesis and 13 studies on cervical spondylotic myelopathy, using two focused data sets with high data accuracy and long-term follow-up. The more recent neuro-oncological QOD efforts, i.e., the Tumor QOD and the SRS Quality Registry, have contributed 5 studies, providing insights into the real-world neuro-oncological practice and the role of patient-reported outcomes. Conclusions: Prospective quality registries are an important resource for observational research, yielding clinical evidence to guide decision-making across neurosurgical subspecialties. Future directions of the QOD efforts include the development of research efforts within the neuro-oncological registries and the American Spine Registry-which has now replaced the inactive spinal modules of the QOD-and the focused research on high-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis and cervical radiculopathy.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu