Publications by authors named "T J Choma"
Purpose: Orthopaedic patient education materials (PEMs) have repeatedly been shown to be well above the recommended reading level by the National Institute of Health and American Medical Association. The purpose of this study is to create a standardized method to improve the readability of PEMs describing spine-related conditions and injuries. It is hypothesized that reducing the usage of complex words (≥ 3 syllables) and reducing sentence length to < 15 words per sentence improves readability of PEMs as measured by all seven readability formulas used.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFArticle Synopsis
- Variability in documentation for evaluation and management (E&M) billing can impact medical management and compensation, prompting a study to evaluate reimbursement differences between templated and non-templated documentation for specific spine surgeries before and after 2021 billing changes.
- Data was analyzed from 76 patients who underwent single-level lumbar microdiscectomy and 82 patients who had anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) across two time periods, utilizing independent coders to determine billing levels.
- Results indicated that templated documentation led to a significant increase in billing levels, particularly for lumbar microdiscectomy post-2021 changes, although this effect was not observed for ACDF visits.
Study Design: Cross-sectional survey.
Objectives: This study aimed to investigate work-related neck pain among AO spine surgeons in different regions by estimating its prevalence, predictors, consequences, and management methods.
Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 411 spine surgeon members of AO spine was conducted during March-May 2021, using the Modified Nordic Questionnaire and the Neck Disability Index.
Article Synopsis
- - The study aimed to compare the recovery speed and quality from rocuronium neuromuscular blockade (NMB) using two reversal agents, sugammadex and neostigmine, in geriatric patients undergoing spine surgery.
- - Results showed that sugammadex led to a significantly faster recovery time (average 4 minutes) compared to neostigmine (average 26 minutes), with sugammadex demonstrating less variability in recovery time.
- - Although sugammadex improved operating room efficiency and had less hemodynamic instability, both reversal agents did not differ in post-anesthesia care unit stay, first ambulation time, or total hospital duration.