Matthew H. Do Meade

Purpose: Patients frequently utilize internet-based resources to seek information. Cervical disc replacement (CDR) is extensively marketed on the internet and patients may research their condition in preference to a fusion. Previous literature has recommended that the readability of patient education materials (PEM) should not exceed the 6th-grade(11–12 years old) United States reading level to optimize health literacy. This study aims to evaluate the readability of online patient education materials concerning cervical disc replacement. Methods: A Google search query was performed on March 1st, 2025 using the term” Cervical Disc Replacement patient information.” The first 25 websites meeting study inclusion criteria were analyzed for readability using Flesch-Kincaid, average reading level consensus, Gunning Fog, Coleman-Liau, SMOG, and Linsear Write indices. Descriptive statistics were reported. Results: The mean of the average reading levels by Flesch-Kincaid was 11.5 (1.29). The mean Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease score was 48.8 (8.12). The mean Gunning Fog Score was 12.9 (1.39), Flesch Kincaid grade level 10.6 (1.69), Coleman Liau 12.4 (1.48), SMOG 10.5 (1.3), Automated Readability Index 11.5 (2.12), Linear Write 69.4 (6.62). Zero PEMs were at or below the recommended sixth grade(11–12 years old) United States reading level. Four of the PEMs were considered general health information(GHI), twenty-one were considered clinical practice(CP). No differences were found between CP and GHI websites (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Creating appropriate patient education materials is integral to achieving optimal health literacy. The current readability of the most accessible PEMs related to CDR is inadequate. As it stands, many patients may not appropriately comprehend the description of their anticipated surgery.

Resilience is a psychological characteristic that has been looked at similarly to mental toughness in the modern medical era, and because of this there has been particular interest in patient resilience in spine surgery. Researchers have shown positive associations between resilience and a variety of measured outcomes in patients with spinal cord injuries, neck and back pain, and postoperative spine patients. Overall, resilience shows great promise for intervention and unknown potential for modification for patients undergoing spine surgery in the future.

With the vast increase in spinal surgery research and accessibility, critical evaluation of studies is paramount. Historically, P values and confidence intervals have been the gold standard, but more recently, the inclusion of the Fragility Index has brought a more holistic approach. The Fragility Index aims to communicate the robustness of a trial and how tenuous statistical significance may be. It can be used in conjunction with more traditional methods for evaluating research.

The abstract of a research paper functions to attract readers and highlight the clinical significance of a research project in a broadly appealing manner. Abstract structure is commonly dictated by the target journal, however, a basic style typically follows the “Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion” structure of introduction, materials/methods, results, and discussion/conclusion. The abstract itself is commonly the initial accessible portion of a research paper, so writing in an engaging while informative manner is imperative for increasing manuscript views and citations. Overall, an abstract is a to-the-point synopsis of a research project that succinctly describes the entirety of your work.

Evidence-based medicine drives medical decision-making in the modern era, which has historically favored randomized control trials. Despite their notoriety, randomized control trials have multiple disadvantages when applied to spinal surgery. Observational studies are popular in spinal surgery literature and are seen in various forms, such as retrospective studies and prospective cohort studies. For researchers, learners, and practicing spine surgeons, this paper describes options for study design when applied to spinal surgery.

Electronic surveys are readily utilized for the conduction of orthopedic research and are commonly plagued by decreased response rates as compared with more conventional telephone and paper surveys. Given the rise of electronic survey usage and technological implementation into medical research, this paper aims to summarize factors both intrinsic and extrinsic which can increase survey completion in the clinical setting.