Perioperative visual loss and consent for adult spine surgery: a national survey of the practice amongst spine surgeons and anaesthetists

被引:0
作者
Pitsika, Marina [1 ]
Paschou, Vasiliki-Maria [2 ]
Pollard, Rachel [2 ]
Nissen, Justin J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Royal Victoria Infirm, Dept Neurosurg, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne & Wear, England
[2] John Radcliffe Hosp, Dept Anaesthesia, Oxford, England
关键词
Blindness; consent; Montgomery judgement; perioperative visual loss; sspine surgery; INFORMED-CONSENT; COMPLICATION; PATIENT;
D O I
10.1080/02688697.2023.2275621
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Perioperative Visual Loss (POVL) is a devastating complication for patients undergoing spine surgery. Consent process for POVL amongst spine surgeons and anaesthetist remains variable. The aim of this study is to evaluate their practice and views about it. Methods: Two similar questionnaires were distributed to members of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS), British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS), and Neuroanaesthsia and Critical Care Society (NACCS). Results: A total of 271 responses were received (SBNS/BASS n = 149, NACCS n = 122). Fewer surgeons considered POVL as a material risk for patients compared to the anaesthetists (57.7 versus 79.7%). Outpatient/pre-assessment clinics were considered as the optimal setting for discussing POVL by the majority of the clinicians (81.2 and 93.4%). POVL should be discussed by both specialists according to 75% of the anaesthetists. Estimated incidence of POVL was considered to be higher by the anaesthetists (0.03-0.2% by 63% of the anaesthetist versus 0.0001-0.004% by 57% of the surgeons). Twenty-three surgeons and 10 anaesthetists had a patient who suffered from POVL, which led to a change of practice in most of them. This questionnaire will lead to a change in practice/consent to 18.1% of the surgeons and 23.5% of the anaesthetists. Conclusions: Most of the surgeons and anaesthetist feel that POVL is a material risk that ideally needs to be firstly discussed before the day of surgery, by both specialties. However, a significant number of clinicians have an opposite view. A national guidance from respective societies should encourage POVL to be discussed routinely.
引用
收藏
页码:457 / 464
页数:8
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2013, APSF Newslett
[2]   Do people mean what they say? Implications for subjective survey data [J].
Bertrand, M ;
Mullainathan, S .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2001, 91 (02) :67-72
[3]  
British Association of Spinal Surgeons/Society of BritishNeurosurgeons, 2017, Letter to all members. Major vascular injury duringlumbar discectomy.
[4]  
Clayton A, Substantial settlement for loss of sight caused duringspinal surgery.
[5]   Patients' Perspective on Full Disclosure and Informed Consent Regarding Postoperative Visual Loss Associated With Spinal Surgery in the Prone Position [J].
Corda, David M. ;
Dexter, Franklin ;
Pasternak, Jeffrey J. ;
Trentman, Terrence L. ;
Nottmeier, Eric W. ;
Brull, Sorin J. .
MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS, 2011, 86 (09) :865-868
[6]   Is the SBNS/BASS joint statement on major vascular injury in lumbar discectomy sufficient? [J].
Dando, Alex ;
Merzougui, Wassim ;
Hall, Samuel ;
Sadek, Ahmed-Ramadan ;
Nader-Sepahi, Ali .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2020, 34 (02) :236-236
[7]  
Epstein N, 2016, Surg Neurol Int., V7
[8]   Informed consent WHERE ARE WE IN 2015? [J].
Foy, M. A. .
BONE & JOINT JOURNAL, 2015, 97B (09) :1159-1161
[9]  
General Medical Council, 2020, GMC/DMC/0920
[10]   Consent for post-operative visual loss in prone spinal surgery: aligning clinical practice with legal standards [J].
Greenway, Fay ;
Tulloch, Isabel ;
Laban, James .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 32 (06) :604-609