4.7 Article

Practice patterns for intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring

Journal

NEUROLOGY
Volume 80, Issue 12, Pages 1156-1160

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31828868d0

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH
  2. Epilepsy Foundation
  3. Cambridge University Press

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The professional practice of intraoperative monitoring (IOM) has evolved over the past 30 years. This report describes the field's current state and how site of service affects practice. Methods: A survey queried American Academy of Neurology IOM neurologist members about their IOM volume, case type, duration, numbers of simultaneous cases, and location of the monitoring physician. Results: Physicians located locally typically monitored fewer cases annually and simultaneously compared to physicians who monitored from remote locations. Physicians at remote locations monitored proportionally more spine procedures, whereas physicians who monitored locally monitored more intracranial procedures and a greater variety of cases. Conclusions: The remote monitoring practice model is different from local models in annual volume, simultaneous cases, work per case, and types of cases. Neurology (R) 2013; 80:1156-1160

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available