PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Purpose
This study evaluated the operability for disease of lumbar intervertebral disc (LID) of practitioners and pay doctors of orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons by examining their websites.
Materials and Methods
From March 2006 to April 2006, we searched the internet using the key words orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery, with NAVER as the portal site. There were 68 homepages of orthopedic hospitals and physician's offices (OHP) and 27 homepages of neurosurgical hospitals and physician's offices (NHP). Each homepage was visited in order to survey the operability for disease of an intervertebral disc and the number of board of orthopedists and neurosurgeons. Statistical analysis was carried out using a chi-square test.
Results
In 45.6% (31/68) of OHP and 85.2% (23/27) of NHP, the operation for LID was performed and there was significant difference (p<0.001). In 16.2% (11/68) of OHP, neurosurgeons employed by OHP performed the operation for spinal disorders. In 29.4% of OHP, the orthopedic surgeon performed the operation for LID. Orthopedists were employed in 51.9% of NHP. NHP were significantly higher than OHP in the cases in whom the orthopedists and neurosurgeons worked together in a single hospital (p<0.001).
Figures and Tables
Table 1
Criteria of the Informational Quality Score according to the United States Department of Health and Human Services
References
1. Chun BC. E-health and internet in medicine: a strategic perspective. J Korean Med Assoc. 2002. 45:4–16.
2. Ciol MA, Deyo RA, Howell E, Kreif S. An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1996. 44:285–290.
3. Couldwell WT, Rovit RL. Rethinking neurosurgical subspecialization. Surg Neurol. 2002. 58:359–363.
4. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD, Bigos SJ, Ciol MA. Morbidity and mortality in association with operations on the lumbar spine. The influence of age, diagnosis and procedure. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992. 74:536–543.
5. Dvorak MF, Collins JB, Murnaghan L, et al. Confidence in spine training among senior neurosurgical and orthopedic residents. Spine. 2006. 31:831–837.
6. Greene DL, Appel AJ, Reinert SE, Palumbo MA. Lumbar disc herniation: evaluation of information on the internet. Spine. 2005. 30:826–829.
7. Hurlbert RJ. The growing pains of spinal surgery. Can J Neurol Sci. 2004. 31:139.
8. Jeong BG, Kim JY, Hong YS, et al. An analysis of the length of admission for some musculoskeletal disorders among the national health insurance corporation data. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2006. 41:736–745.
9. Jeong ST. The proposals for improving and problems of Korean national health insurance system reviewed by orthopaedic surgeon -1st part: focus on general guide line and the cost of operation-. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2005. 40:376–390.
10. Kadam UT, Jordan K, Croft PR. Clinical comorbidity in patients with osteoarthritis: a case-control study of general practice consulters in England and Wales. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004. 63:408–414.
11. Katz JN. Lumbar spinal fusion: surgical rates, costs and complications. Spine. 1995. 20:24 Suppl. S78–S83.
12. Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Larson MG, McInnes JM, Fossel AH, Liang MH. The outcome of decompressive laminectomy for degenerative lumbar stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991. 73:809–816.
13. Koenig GH. Have neurosurgeons lost their chance to operate on spine problems? Surg Neurol. 1996. 46:103.
14. Ray CD. Clinical neurosurgery as it relates to the lumbar spine: what it does versus what it says. Neurosurgery. 1991. 29:937–941.
15. Vaccaro AR. Point of view: confidence in spine training among senior neurosurgical and orthopedic residents. Spine. 2006. 31:838.
16. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Olson PR, Bronner KK, Fisher ES. United states' trends and regional variations in lumbar spine surgery: 1992-2003. Spine. 2006. 31:2707–2714.
XML Download