Search

Background: Diversity, equity, and inclusion within the healthcare workforce are conducive to providing culturally competent care. However, few existing studies have assessed the level of racial and ethnic diversity among resident physicians and residency applicants. Our objective was to provide a comparative analysis of the trends in racial and ethnic representation within different subspecialties in medicine., Methods: Using data from the American Association of Medical Colleges and the Journal of the American Medical Association, we evaluated the racial and ethnic identification of residency applicants and current residents in 9 procedural-focused specialties from 2005 to 2019 and performed a descriptive analysis to compare the different levels of racial and ethnic diversity in these specialties., Results: Among the specialties analyzed during the study period, neurosurgery had the greatest magnitude of differences between Black/African-American residency applicants and current residents. The percentage of Black/African-American applicants was 92% greater than that of Black/African-American residents (10% of applicants vs. 5.2% of residents). In contrast, the percentage of White neurosurgery residents was 17.6% greater than that of White neurosurgery applicants (53.9% of applicants vs. 63.4% of residents). Similar trends were noted in all the specialties evaluated. Obstetrics and gynecology demonstrated the least disparity between Black/African-American applicants and residents (13.7% of applicants vs. 10.2% of residents; 35.4% difference). Hispanic and Asian representation varied widely between specialties., Conclusions: Among the surveyed specialties, neurosurgery demonstrated the greatest disparity between the percentage of Black/African-American residency applicants and current residents. To further drive progress in this domain, we advocate for a series of initiatives designed to increase underrepresented minority participation in neurosurgery practice and scholarship., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Credentialing and certification are essential processes during hiring to ensure that the physician is competent and possesses the qualifications and skill sets claimed. Peer review ensures the continuing evolution of these skills to meet a standard of care. We have provided an overview and discussion of these processes in the United States. Credentialing is the process by which a physician is determined to be competent and able to practice, used to ensure that medical staff meets specific standards, and to grant operative privileges at an institution. Certification is a standardized affirmation of a physician's competence on a nationwide basis. Although not legally required to practice in the United States, many institutions emphasize certification for full privileges on an ongoing basis at a hospital. In the United States, peer review of adverse events is a mandatory prerequisite for accreditation. The initial lack of standardization led to the development of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act, which protects those involved in the peer review process from litigation, and the National Provider Databank, which was established as a national database to track misconduct. A focus on quality improvement in the peer review process can lead to improved performance and patient outcomes. A thorough understanding of the processes of credentialing, certification, and peer review in the United States will benefit neurosurgeons by allowing them to know what institutions are looking for as well and their rights and responsibilities in any given situation. It could also be useful to compare these policies and practices in the United States to those in other countries., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: The Council of State Neurosurgical Societies surveyed neurosurgeons applying for oral board certification in 2008 to assess their preparedness to practice. This survey was repeated in 2013 for a subsequent group of board applicants to evaluate the quality of neurosurgery training and identify opportunities for improvement., Methods: Applicants for the American Board of Neurological Surgeons oral examination from 2008 to 2013 were provided an anonymous survey focused on clinical and socioeconomic skills. Survey responses were compared with the published results of a similar survey using an inferential statistical analysis., Results: In total, 110 of 655 neurosurgeons responded (response rate 16.8%). Significantly more respondents from the 2013 survey felt prepared to perform the following techniques: angiography, endoscopic surgery, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, kyphoplasty, and deep brain stimulation. Significantly more respondents in 2013 attested to receiving appropriate education on Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and pay-for-performance practice models of health care. However, significantly fewer respondents in 2013 felt prepared in open vascular neurosurgery techniques. In both surveys, fewer than 35% of respondents felt adequately prepared in endovascular neurosurgery techniques, medical coding, negotiating an employment contract, and issues regarding practice management and the economics of neurosurgery., Conclusions: The 2013 survey suggests that candidates for board certification in neurosurgery perceive themselves to be adequately prepared to independently perform nearly all neurosurgical procedures. However, additional work is required to optimize neurosurgery training in endovascular procedures and the socioeconomic aspects of neurosurgery practice., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To perform an ecological study to analyze the geospatial distribution of neurosurgeons ≥60 years old and compare these data with the spread of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) across the United States., Methods: Data regarding distribution of COVID-19 cases were collected from the Environmental Systems Research Institute, and demographic statistics were collected from the American Association of Medical Colleges 2019 State Workforce Reports. These figures were analyzed using geospatial mapping software., Results: As of July 5, 2020, the 10 states with the highest number of COVID-19 cases showed older neurosurgical workforce proportions (the proportion of active surgeons ≥60 years old) of 20.6%-38.9%. Among states with the highest number of COVID-19 deaths, the older workforce proportions were 25.0%-43.4%. Connecticut demonstrated the highest with 43.4% of neurosurgeons ≥60 years old., Conclusions: Regional COVID-19 hotspots may coincide with areas where a substantial proportion of the neurosurgical workforce is ≥60 years old. Continuous evaluation and adjustment of local and national clinical practice guidelines are warranted throughout the pandemic era., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Surgery is an effective but costly treatment for many patients with drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy (DR-TLE). We aim to evaluate whether, in the United States, surgery is cost-effective compared to medical management for patients deemed surgical candidates and whether surgical evaluation is cost-effective for patients with DR-TLE in general., Methods: We use a semi-Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgery and surgical evaluation over a lifetime horizon. We use second-order Monte Carlo simulations to conduct probabilistic sensitivity analyses to estimate variation in model output. We adopt both health care and societal perspectives, including direct health care costs (e.g., surgery, antiepileptic drugs) and indirect costs (e.g., lost earnings by patients and care providers.) We compare the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to societal willingness to pay (∼$100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) to determine whether surgery is cost-effective., Results: Epilepsy surgery is cost-effective compared to medical management in surgically eligible patients by virtue of being cost-saving ($328,000 vs $423,000) and more effective (16.6 vs 13.6 QALY) than medical management in the long run. Surgical evaluation is cost-effective in patients with DR-TLE even if the probability of being deemed a surgical candidate is only 5%. From a societal perspective, surgery becomes cost-effective within 3 years, and 89% of simulations favor surgery over the lifetime horizon., Conclusion: For surgically eligible patients with DR-TLE, surgery is cost-effective. For patients with DR-TLE in general, referral for surgical evaluation (and possible subsequent surgery) is cost-effective. Patients with DR-TLE should be referred for surgical evaluation without hesitation on cost-effectiveness grounds., (© 2020 American Academy of Neurology.)

Background: Previous reports have suggested an increasing rate of utilization of spinal fusions, but contemporary data have not been analyzed, and there has been little investigation of putative drivers of increased utilization., Objective: To investigate whether there is an ongoing trend of increased utilization of spinal fusions in recent data, and if there may be associations with an increasing proportion of elderly in the population, changing patterns of payer-types, and changing reimbursement rates., Methods: We analyze 7.1 million cases from the National Inpatient Sample between 1998 and 2014. We measure annual utilization per 100 000 persons and conduct trend analyses with subgroup analysis of the senior (65 + ) population. Spine surgery utilization is compared with nonspine surgical procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting, hernia repair, hip, and knee replacement). We assess trends in charges, payer type, Medicare reimbursement rates, and hospital type., Results: There was an 88% increase in the utilization rate of spinal fusion procedures from 1998 to 2014 (from 74 to 139 cases per 100 000 persons) with a significant upward trend (P < .001) that persisted in the 65 + subgroup (P < .001). An increasing proportion of spinal fusions is paid for by public payers, but per-procedure reimbursement for spinal fusions by Medicare has decreased recently (5% reduction from 2014 to 2016)., Conclusion: Utilization of spinal fusions continues to increase and is not explained by increased proportion of elderly in the population, increased utilization of surgeries across specialties, or increased Medicare reimbursement. In fact, increased utilization of spinal fusions temporally correlated with decreasing per-procedure Medicare reimbursement., (Copyright © 2019 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.)

The BRAIN Initiative arose from a grand challenge to "accelerate the development and application of new technologies that will enable researchers to produce dynamic pictures of the brain that show how individual brain cells and complex neural circuits interact at the speed of thought." The BRAIN Initiative is a public-private effort focused on the development and use of powerful tools for acquiring fundamental insights about how information processing occurs in the central nervous system (CNS). As the Initiative enters its fifth year, NIH has supported >500 principal investigators, who have answered the Initiative's challenge via hundreds of publications describing novel tools, methods, and discoveries that address the Initiative's seven scientific priorities. We describe scientific advances produced by individual laboratories, multi-investigator teams, and entire consortia that, over the coming decades, will produce more comprehensive and dynamic maps of the brain, deepen our understanding of how circuit activity can produce a rich tapestry of behaviors, and lay the foundation for understanding how its circuitry is disrupted in brain disorders. Much more work remains to bring this vision to fruition, and the National Institutes of Health continues to look to the diverse scientific community, from mathematics, to physics, chemistry, engineering, neuroethics, and neuroscience, to ensure that the greatest scientific benefit arises from this unique research Initiative., (Copyright © 2018 the authors 0270-6474/18/386427-12$15.00/0.)