The Effect of the Level of Training of the First Assistant on the Outcomes of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: At academic medical centers, residents and fellows play an integral role as surgical first assistants in spinal deformity surgery. However, limited data exist on whether the experience level of the surgical assistant affects outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, multisurgeon study comparing perioperative and postoperative outcomes after adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery for the same 11 surgeons who performed cases that were assisted by residents compared with cases that were assisted by fellows. Blood loss, operative time, duration of hospitalization, complication rates, Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 questionnaire scores, and radiographic outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: We evaluated outcomes for 347 surgical procedures; 118 cases were assisted by residents and 229 were assisted by fellows. Preoperative radiographic and demographic parameters were not different between the groups. The resident group had significantly more estimated blood loss than the fellow group (939 compared with 762 mL, p = 0.02). Otherwise, the perioperative characteristics were similar between the groups, including the volume of the autologous blood recovery system product that was transfused, the operative time, and the occurrence of intraoperative neuromonitoring changes. Postoperatively, the percentage correction of the Cobb angle, the number of levels that had been fused, the number of days until the discharge criteria had been met, and the rate of major complications were similar between the groups. At the 2-year follow-up, the overall and subdomain SRS-22 questionnaire scores were not different between the groups, except that patients in the resident-assisted group had slightly worse pain scores than those in the fellow-assisted group (4.3 compared with 4.5, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The first assistant's level of training did not affect clinical or radiographic outcomes following AIS surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".