ORCID Profile
0000-0002-0018-9769
Current Organisations
Royal Melbourne Hospital
,
Epworth Richmond
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: American College of Physicians
Date: 09-2015
DOI: 10.7326/L15-5129-2
Publisher: AMPCo
Date: 03-2014
DOI: 10.5694/MJA13.11347
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 08-2022
DOI: 10.1016/J.IJSU.2022.106742
Abstract: Whilst there is a substantial body of evidence on the costs and benefits of smoking cessation generally, the benefits of routinely providing smoking cessation for surgical populations are less well known. This review summarises the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of preoperative smoking cessation to prevent surgical complications. A search of the Cochrane, Econlit, EMBASE, Health Technology Assessment, Medline Complete and Scopus databases was conducted from inception until June 23, 2021. Peer-reviewed, English-language articles describing economic evaluations of preoperative smoking cessation interventions to prevent surgical complications were included. Search results were independently screened for potentially eligible studies. Study characteristics, economic evaluation methods and cost-effectiveness results were extracted by one reviewer and details checked by a second. Two authors independently assessed reporting and methodological quality using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement (CHEERS) and the Quality of Health Economic Studies Instrument checklist (QHES) respectively. After removing duplicates, twenty full text articles were screened from 1423 database records, resulting in six included economic evaluations. Studies from the United States (n = 4), France (n = 1) and Spain (n = 1) were reported between 2009 and 2020. Four evaluations were conducted from a payer perspective. Two-thirds of evaluations were well-conducted (mean score 83) and well-reported (on average, 86% items reported). All studies concluded preoperative smoking cessation is cost-effective for preventing surgical complications results ranged from cost saving to €53,131 per quality adjusted life year gained. Preoperative smoking cessation is cost-effective for preventing surgical complications from a payer or provider perspective when compared to standard care. There is no evidence from outside the United States and Europe to inform healthcare providers, funders and policy-makers in other jurisdictions and more information is needed to clarify the optimal point of implementation to maximise cost-effectiveness of preoperative smoking cessation intervention. PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021257740. RESEARCH REGISTRY REGISTRATION NUMBER: reviewregistry1369.
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 10-2015
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 10-1993
Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
Date: 30-11-2016
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-2009
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 07-2013
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-01-2011
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 06-2011
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 07-2015
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 10-03-2017
DOI: 10.1007/S00586-017-5015-9
Abstract: To conduct a meta-analysis to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes in single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery for degenerative cervical disease performed by either single-level locking stand-alone cage (LSC) or anterior plate construct (APC). We performed a comprehensive database search of Medline, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews according to PRISMA guidelines and identified six articles that satisfied our inclusion criteria. We excluded all non-English language articles and articles which did not directly compare LSC and APC. Only papers which focussed on single-level ACDF were included in the study. There were no significant differences in blood loss, clinical outcomes (JOA, VAS, NDI scores) or radiological outcomes (cervical lordosis, segmental Cobb angle, subsidence and fusion) between the two groups. Operative time was significantly shorter in the LSC group (MD 7.2 min, 95% CI 0.3-14.1, p = 0.04). APC was associated with a statistically significant increase in dysphagia in the follow-up period (OR 6.2, 95% CI 1.0-36.6, p = 0.05). LSC and APC have similar clinical and radiological outcomes. Further blinded randomised trials are required to establish conclusive evidence in favour of LSC with regards to minimising post-operative dysphagia. We also encourage future studies to make use of formalised dysphagia outcome measures in reporting complications.
No related grants have been discovered for John Cunningham.