http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Simon G. Ammanuel,Andrew K. Chan,Anthony M. DiGiorgio,Mohanad Alazzeh,Kelechi Nwachuku,Leslie C. Robinson,Errol Lobo,Praveen V. Mummaneni 대한척추신경외과학회 2020 Neurospine Vol.17 No.2
Objective: Lean management strategies aim to increase efficiency by eliminating waste or by improving processes to optimize value. The operating room (OR) is an arena where these strategies can be implemented. We assessed changes in OR efficiency after the application of lean methodology on perioperative anesthesia associated with posterior cervical spine surgeries. Methods: We utilized pre- and post-lean study design to identify inefficiencies during the perioperative anesthesia process and implemented strategies to improve the process. Patient characteristics were recorded to assess for differences between the 2 groups (group 1, prelean; group 2, post-lean). In the pre-lean period, key steps in the perioperative anesthesia process were identified that were amenable to lean implementation. The time required for each identified key step was recorded by an independent study coordinator. The times for each step were then compared between the groups utilizing univariate analyses. Results: After lean implementation, there was a significant decrease in overall perioperative anesthesia process time (88.4 ± 4.7 minutes vs. 76.2 ± 3.2 minutes, p = 0.04). This was driven by significant decreases in the steps: transport and setup (10.4 ± 0.8 minutes vs. 8.0 ± 0.7 minutes, p = 0.03) and positioning (20.8 ± 2.1 minutes vs. 15.7 ± 1.3 minutes, p = 0.046). Of note, the total time spent in the OR was lower for group 2 (270.1 ± 14.6 minutes vs. 252.8 ± 14.1 minutes) but the result was not statistically significant, even when adjusting for number of operated levels. Conclusion: Lean methodology may be successfully applied to posterior cervical spine surgery whereby improvements in the perioperative anesthetic process are associated with significantly increased OR efficiency.
Alexander F. Haddad,John F. Burke,Praveen V. Mummaneni,Andrew K. Chan,Michael M. Safaee,John J. Knightly,Rory R. Mayer,Brenton H. Pennicooke,Anthony M. Digiorgio,Philip R. Weinstein,Aaron J. Clark,Dea 대한척추신경외과학회 2021 Neurospine Vol.18 No.2
Objective: The use of telemedicine has dramatically increased due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Many neurosurgeons are now using telemedicine technologies for preoperative evaluations and routine outpatient visits. Our goal was to standardize the telemedicine motor neurologic examination, summarize the evidence surrounding clinical use of telehealth technologies, and discuss financial and legal considerations. Methods: We identified a 12-member panel composed of spine surgeons, fellows, and senior residents at a single institution. We created an initial telehealth strength examination protocol based on published data and developed 10 agree/disagree statements summarizing the protocol. A blinded Delphi method was utilized to build consensus for each statement, defined as >80% agreement and no significant disagreement using a 2-way binomial test (significance threshold of p<0.05). Any statement that did not meet consensus was edited and iteratively resubmitted to the panel until consensus was achieved. In the final round, the panel was unblinded and the protocol was finalized. Results: After the first round, 4/10 statements failed to meet consensus (<80% agreement, and p=0.031, p=0.031, p=0.003, and p=0.031 statistical disagreement, respectively). The disagreement pertained to grading of strength of the upper (3/10 statements) and lower extremities (1/10 statement). The amended statements clarified strength grading, achieved consensus (>80% agreement, p>0.05 disagreement), and were used to create the final telehealth strength examination protocol. Conclusion: The resulting protocol was used in our clinic to standardize the telehealth strength examination. This protocol, as well as our summary of telehealth clinical practice, should aid neurosurgical clinics in integrating telemedicine modalities into their practice.