AMSTERDAM /// TuesDAY, 29 May 2012 /// Spineweek2012.com /// ISSUE 2
World Spine Care Organization
EuroSpine Program Committee
World Spine Care (WSC) was founded in 2008 as a multinational, non-profit charity organization focusing on a universal care for the devastation caused by spinal disorders in the developing world, inspired by Dr. Scott Haldeman, President and CEO. The organization consists of an inspiring and international spectrum of healthcare professionals including medical specialists, surgeons, chiropractors and physiotherapists who continually work on developing a universally applicable model for the care for spinal disorders.
What do we do?
Even though spinal disorders are amongst the most serious, often devastating, painful and debilitating health problems impacting rural communities in developing countries, there is often no effective spinal care available. The patients do not have access to neurologists, spine surgeons, rheumatologists, chiropractors or physical therapists. WSP‘s multidisciplinary aim is to work effectively and step-by-step with local healthcare partners, corporate and foundation partners, collaborating institutions in order to deliver and ensure appropriate care for those in need. WSC integrates the best available scientific evidence into the cultural, political, medical, and economic values of respective communities.
Current projects: In 2011 WSC launched the Shoshong project in Botswana which is currently the flagship assignment of the organization. The project does not only offer upto-date educational programs and significant research components, primary assessment and treat-
ment for the community but also follow-up care with specialized medical intervention. The second major project is the spine care clinic which opened in partnership with the Ranthambhore Sevika Hospital, in the town of Sawai Madhopur, India. The Sevika Hospital serves approx. 250,000 people of 96 villages and has not been able to treat any back pain complaints until now.
Main aims: Building Sustainable Capacity: The deployment of WSC clinics is key to building up capacity. Developing a Universal Spine Care Toolkit: WSC is researching the primary tools needed for the delivery of effective spinal care in the developing world. The WSC clinical model provides integrated, inter-professional protocols for screening, assessment and treatment of the full spectrum of spinal disorders. Education: Passing on knowledge is essential to the local healthcare system - the training of front line health care workers, exposure of local spine care professionals to specialist expertise brought in by WSC, and the provision of scholarships to exceptional local students in host regions. Furthermore WSC will provide community education on the prevention of spinal injuries and spine hygiene. This will enable the spine care centers to eventually be run by local practitioners. For more detailed information about the World Spine Care model and what you can do to help go to www.worldspinecare.com
Scores are scrutinized for aberrations, sometimes a wide range of scores with an overall high mean suggests controversy and this might represent a factor which would stimulate discussion after the podium presentation. We have a ‘Best of Show’ session where the highest scoring abstracts are grouped together – all of them are under consideration for the EuroSpine Award. Basic science papers are allocated to the most clinically relevant sessions to integrate the basic science advances better with clinicians. We found in previous meetings that pure science papers occupying a full session resulted in lower session attendance.
All abstracts submitted are reviewed ‘blinded’, meaning that identifiers of authors and institutes are removed. This reduces the risk of bias. Each abstract is reviewed by at least three or often even four reviewers. This improves the ‘fairness’ of the process and reduces the effect of personal preferences by the reviewers. Each abstract is scored from 0 to 15, with the highest score being the best. There are so many abstracts submitted that it would be impossible to review them all individually. This is the reason why we have categories for submission. There is a lead reviewer and 2 or 3 coreviewers for each section. There are five categories, growing spi- What are the numbers? ne and deformity, cervical spine, basic science, non-degenerative EuroSpine 2011 in Milan (trauma, tumor and fracture ) and • 878 submissions Accepted 86 full podium degenerative spine. • 75 short synchronous sessions • 98 e-posters
Spineweek Amsterdam 2012 • 498 submissions • Accepted 84 full podium • 58 ‘Quick fire’ short reports • 61 e-posters
Why the difference?
Phil J. Sell
After the blind review, which is carried out online, abstracts are ranked. Depending on the available podium time the highest scored abstracts of each category are accepted. Any papers scoring the same at the ‘cut-off ’ score will be discussed.
Well, it is probably a combination of factors. Spineweek is a combined meeting of many prestigious societies. Authors may submit to different societies. Unfortunately, multiple submissions of the same paper to different societies is not permitted. This might cost the dilution. The good news is that the chance of acceptance at Spineweek is much higher than in a dedicated SSE Congress. The average score of abstracts in Milan was 7.43 and
the average score in Amsterdam was 7.88. This is not a statistically significant difference.
Whats New? The debates in Milan were well attended and the feedback was positive. There are only two debates for this meeting: ‘Is discography dead in this decade’ and ‘Surgical management of early cervical myelopathy Not yet… not yet ….too late!’
What’s the future? If you have ideas for Liverpool 2013 or would like to join the review process we would like to hear from you. Come to the EuroSpine booth and speak with us. Philip J. Sell, chair of the 2012 Program Committee
2012 Program Committee: - Phil J. Sell, UK, chair - Jörg Franke, Germany - Selcuk Palaoglu, Turkey - Thomas Blattert, Germany - Barend van Royen, NL - Josef Grohs, Austria
Co-Reviewers: - Dietrich Schlenzka, Finland - Ashley Cole, UK - Jorge Mineiro, Portugal - José Casamitjana, Spain - Tim Pigott, UK - Dimitros Korres, Greece - Markus Schultheiss, Germany - Thomas Zweig, Switzerland - Lester Wilson, UK - Kai Scheufler, Austria - Michael Grevitt, UK - Marinus Kleuver, NL - Mark Lorenz, USA - Helmut Hiertz, Austria