A systematic review identifying outcome measures used in evaluating adults sustaining cervical spine fractures

Objective: To assess the outcome measures used in studies investigating cervical spine fractures in adults, with or without associated spinal cord injury, to inform development of a core outcome set.
Methods: Medline, Embase and Scopus were searched for relevant studies until May 28, 2022, without a historic limit on study date. Study characteristics, population characteristics and outcomes reported were extracted and analyzed.
Results: Our literature search identifed 536 studies that met criteria for inclusion, involving 393,266 patients. Most studies were single center (87.3%), retrospective studies (88.9%) and involved a median of 40 patients (range 6–167,278). Treatments assessed included: surgery (55.2%), conservative (6.2%), halo immobilization (4.9%), or a mixture (33.2%). Median study duration was 84 months (range 3–564 months); the timing of clinical and/or radiological follow-up assessment after injury was reported in 56.7%. There was signifcant heterogeneity in outcomes used, with 79 diferent reported outcomes measures.
Diferences in use were identifed between smaller/larger, retro-/prospective and single/multicenter cohorts. Over time, the use of radiological outcomes has declined with greater emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Studies of conservative management were more likely to detail PROMs and mortality, whereas surgical studies reported Frankel/ASIA grade, radiological fusion, complication rates, duration of hospital stay and re-operation rates more frequently. In studies assessing the elderly population (>65 years), use of PROMs, mortality, hospital stay and discharge destination were more
common, whereas fusion was reported less often. Response rates for outcome assessments were lower in studies assessing elderly patients, and studies using PROMs.
Conclusions: We have classifed the various outcome measures used for patients with cervical spine fractures based on the COMET outcome taxonomy. We also described the contexts in which diferent outcomes are more commonly employed to help guide decision-making when designing future research endeavors

Aim

To assess the outcome measures used in studies investigating cervical spine fractures in adults, with or without associated spinal cord injury, to inform development of a core outcome set.

Contributors

Phillip C. Copley, Daniel Tadross, Nadia Salloum, Julie Woodfeld, Ellie Edlmann, Michael Poon, Sadaquate Khan, Paul M. Brennan1

Publication

Journal: European Spine Journal
Volume: 31
Issue:
Pages: 3365 - 3377
Year: 2022
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07369-7

Further Study Information

Current Stage: Ongoing
Date:
Funding source(s): No funding, or specific material support has been given for this study


Health Area

Disease Category: Wounds

Disease Name: Cervical spine fractures

Target Population

Age Range: 18

Sex: Either

Nature of Intervention:

Stakeholders Involved

Study Type

- Systematic review of outcome measures/measurement instruments
- Systematic review of outcomes measured in trials

Method(s)

- Systematic review

We searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, and Scopus, on March 4, 2020