| Title |
Productivity benefits of minimally invasive surgery in patients with chronic sacroiliac joint dysfunction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceor.s101607 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Josh D Saavoss, Lane Koenig, Daniel J Cher |
| Abstract |
Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is associated with a marked decrease in quality of life. Increasing evidence supports minimally invasive SIJ fusion as a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of chronic SIJ dysfunction. The impact of SIJ fusion on worker productivity is not known. Regression modeling using data from the National Health Interview Survey was applied to determine the relationship between responses to selected interview questions related to function and economic outcomes. Regression coefficients were then applied to prospectively collected, individual patient data in a randomized trial of SIJ fusion (INSITE, NCT01681004) to estimate expected differences in economic outcomes across treatments. Patients who receive SIJ fusion using iFuse Implant System(®) have an expected increase in the probability of working of 16% (95% confidence interval [CI] 11%-21%) relative to nonsurgical patients. The expected change in earnings across groups was US $3,128 (not statistically significant). Combining the two metrics, the annual increase in worker productivity given surgical vs nonsurgical care was $6,924 (95% CI $1,890-$11,945). For employees with chronic, severe SIJ dysfunction, minimally invasive SIJ fusion may improve worker productivity compared to nonsurgical treatment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 26% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 April 2016.
All research outputs
#15,228,078
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#274
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,042
of 314,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#10
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.