» Articles » PMID: 38386137

In-House Intraoperative Monitoring in Neurosurgery in England - Benefits and Challenges

Overview
Journal J Med Syst
Date 2024 Feb 22
PMID 38386137
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IOM) is a valuable adjunct for neurosurgical operative techniques, and has been shown to improve clinical outcomes in cranial and spinal surgery. It is not necessarily provided by NHS hospitals so may be outsourced to private companies, which are expensive and at cost to the NHS trusts. We discuss the benefits and challenges of developing an in-house service.

Methods: We surveyed NHS neurosurgical departments across England regarding their expenditure on IOM over the period January 2018 - December 2022 on cranial neurosurgery and spinal surgery. Out of 24 units, all responded to our Freedom of Information requests and 21 provided data. The standard NHS England salary of NHS staff who would normally be involved in IOM, including physiologists and doctors, was also compiled for comparison.

Results: The total spend on outsourced IOM, across the units who responded, was over £8 million in total for the four years. The annual total increased, between 2018 and 2022, from £1.1 to £3.5 million. The highest single unit yearly spend was £568,462. This is in addition to salaries for staff in neurophysiology departments. The mean NHS salaries for staff is also presented.

Conclusion: IOM is valuable in surgical decision-making, planning, and technique, having been shown to lead to fewer patient complications and shorter length of stay. Current demand for IOM outstrips the internal NHS provision in many trusts across England, leading to outsourcing to private companies. This is at significant cost to the NHS. Although there is a learning curve, there are many benefits to in-house provision, such as stable working relationships, consistent methods, training of the future IOM workforce, and reduced long-term costs, which planned expansion of NHS services may provide.

References
1.
Gertsch J, Moreira J, Lee G, Hastings J, Ritzl E, Eccher M . Practice guidelines for the supervising professional: intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. J Clin Monit Comput. 2018; 33(2):175-183. PMC: 6420431. DOI: 10.1007/s10877-018-0201-9. View

2.
Goonasekera C, Jones H, Lawrence R, Hanrahan J, Iyer P, Nijhawan A . Exploring the utility of neuro-monitoring in neurosurgery: The users' perspective in a single center. Saudi J Anaesth. 2021; 15(1):7-13. PMC: 8016046. DOI: 10.4103/sja.SJA_862_20. View

3.
Kurmann A, Keller S, Tschan-Semmer F, Seelandt J, Semmer N, Candinas D . Impact of team familiarity in the operating room on surgical complications. World J Surg. 2014; 38(12):3047-52. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-014-2680-2. View

4.
Ney J, van der Goes D, Watanabe J . Cost-effectiveness of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for spinal surgeries: beginning steps. Clin Neurophysiol. 2012; 123(9):1705-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.01.020. View

5.
Rasul F, Matloob S, Haliasos N, Jankovic I, Boyd S, Thompson D . Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in paediatric Chiari surgery-help or hindrance?. Childs Nerv Syst. 2019; 35(10):1769-1776. DOI: 10.1007/s00381-019-04312-y. View