Browse

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

• Refine by Access: all
• By Author: Boop, Frederick A.
• By Author: Klimo, Paul
• By Author: Ragel, Brian T.
Clear All
Restricted access

Factors associated with career satisfaction and burnout among US neurosurgeons: results of a nationwide survey

OBJECT

The object of this study was to identify and quantify predictors of burnout and career satisfaction among US neurosurgeons.

METHODS

All US members (3247) of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) were invited to participate in a survey between September and December 2012. Responses were evaluated through univariate analysis. Factors independently associated with burnout and career satisfaction were determined using multivariable logistic regression. Subgroup analysis of academic and nonacademic neurosurgeons was performed as well.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 24% (783 members). The majority of respondents were male, 40–60 years old, in a stable relationship, with children, working in a group or university practice, and trained in a subspecialty. More than 80% of respondents reported being at least somewhat satisfied with their career, and 70% would choose a career in neurosurgery again; however, only 26% of neurosurgeons believed their professional lives would improve in the future, and 52% believed it would worsen. The overall burnout rate was 56.7%. Factors independently associated with both burnout and career satisfaction included achieving a balance between work and life outside the hospital (burnout OR 0.45, satisfaction OR 10.0) and anxiety over future earnings and/or health care reform (burnout OR 1.96, satisfaction OR 0.32). While the burnout rate for nonacademic neurosurgeons (62.9%) was higher than that for academic neurosurgeons (47.7%), academicians who had practiced for over 20 years were less likely to be satisfied with their careers.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of burnout and career satisfaction were both high in this survey study of US neurosurgeons. The negative effects of burnout on the lives of surgeons, patients, and their families require further study and probably necessitate the development of interventional programs at local, regional, and even national levels.

Restricted access

Editorial: Methodology and reporting of meta-analyses in the neurosurgical literature

Restricted access

Methodology and reporting of meta-analyses in the neurosurgical literature

Object

Neurosurgeons are inundated with vast amounts of new clinical research on a daily basis, making it difficult and time-consuming to keep up with the latest literature. Meta-analysis is an extension of a systematic review that employs statistical techniques to pool the data from the literature in order to calculate a cumulative effect size. This is done to answer a clearly defined a priori question. Despite their increasing popularity in the neurosurgery literature, meta-analyses have not been scrutinized in terms of reporting and methodology.

Methods

The authors performed a literature search using PubMed/MEDLINE to locate all meta-analyses that have been published in the JNS Publishing Group journals (Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, and Neurosurgical Focus) or Neurosurgery. Accepted checklists for reporting (PRISMA) and methodology (AMSTAR) were applied to each meta-analysis, and the number of items within each checklist that were satisfactorily fulfilled was recorded. The authors sought to answer 4 specific questions: Are meta-analyses improving 1) with time; 2) when the study met their definition of a meta-analysis; 3) when clinicians collaborated with a potential expert in meta-analysis; and 4) when the meta-analysis was the only focus of the paper?

Results

Seventy-two meta-analyses were published in the JNS Publishing Group journals and Neurosurgery between 1990 and 2012. The number of published meta-analyses has increased dramatically in the last several years. The most common topics were vascular, and most were based on observational studies. Only 11 papers were prepared using an established checklist. The average AMSTAR and PRISMA scores (proportion of items satisfactorily fulfilled divided by the total number of eligible items in the respective instrument) were 31% and 55%, respectively. Major deficiencies were identified, including the lack of a comprehensive search strategy, study selection and data extraction, assessment of heterogeneity, publication bias, and study quality. Almost one-third of the papers did not meet our basic definition of a meta-analysis. The quality of reporting and methodology was better 1) when the study met our definition of a meta-analysis; 2) when one or more of the authors had experience or expertise in conducting a meta-analysis; 3) when the meta-analysis was not conducted alongside an evaluation of the authors' own data; and 4) in more recent studies.

Conclusions

Reporting and methodology of meta-analyses in the neurosurgery literature is excessively variable and overall poor. As these papers are being published with increasing frequency, neurosurgical journals need to adopt a clear definition of a meta-analysis and insist that they be created using checklists for both reporting and methodology. Standardization will ensure high-quality publications.

Restricted access

Antibiotic-impregnated shunt systems versus standard shunt systems: a meta- and cost-savings analysis

Object

Infection is a serious and costly complication of CSF shunt implantation. Antibiotic-impregnated shunts (AISs) were introduced almost 10 years ago, but reports on their ability to decrease the infection rate have been mixed. The authors conducted a meta-analysis assessing the extent to which AISs reduce the rate of shunt infection compared with standard shunts (SSs). They also examined cost savings to determine the degree to which AISs could decrease infection-related hospital expenses.

Methods

After conducting a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases to identify studies that evaluated shunt type and used shunt-related infection as the primary outcome, 2 reviewers independently evaluated study quality based on preestablished criteria and extracted data. A random effects meta-analysis of eligible studies was then performed. For studies that demonstrated a positive effect with the AIS, a cost-savings analysis was conducted by calculating the number of implanted shunts needed to prevent a shunt infection, assuming an additional cost of $400 per AIS system and$50,000 to treat a shunt infection.

Results

Thirteen prospective or retrospective controlled cohort studies provided Level III evidence, and 1 prospective randomized study provided Level II evidence. “Shunt infection” was generally uniformly defined among the studies, but the availability and detail of baseline demographic data for the control (SS) and treatment (AIS) groups within each study were variable. There were 390 infections (7.0%) in 5582 procedures in the control group and 120 infections (3.5%) in 3467 operations in the treatment group, yielding a pooled absolute risk reduction (ARR) and relative risk reduction (RRR) of 3.5% and 50%, respectively. The meta-analysis revealed the AIS to be statistically protective in all studies (risk ratio = 0.46, 95% CI 0.33–0.63) and in single-institution studies (risk ratio = 0.38, 95% CI 0.25–0.58). There was some evidence of heterogeneity when studies were analyzed together (p = 0.093), but this heterogeneity was reduced when the studies were analyzed separately as single institution versus multiinstitutional (p > 0.10 for both groups). Seven studies showed the AIS to be statistically protective against infection with an ARR and RRR ranging from 1.7% to 14.2% and 34% to 84%, respectively. The number of shunt operations requiring an AIS to prevent 1 shunt infection ranged from 7 to 59. Assuming 200 shunt cases per year, the annual savings for converting from SSs to AISs ranged from $90,000 to over$1.3 million.

Conclusions

While the authors recognized the inherent limitations in the quality and quantity of data available in the literature, this meta-analysis revealed a significant protective benefit with AIS systems, which translated into substantial hospital savings despite the added cost of an AIS. Using previously developed guidelines on treatment, the authors strongly encourage the use of AISs in all patients with hydrocephalus who require a shunt, particularly those at greatest risk for infection.