{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,30]],"date-time":"2026-10-30T00:06:32Z","timestamp":1793318792384,"version":"4.5.0"},"reference-count":39,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2023,4,18]],"date-time":"2023-04-18T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1681776000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2023,4,18]],"date-time":"2023-04-18T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1681776000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"name":"Bond University Limited"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Eur Spine J"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2023,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The rate of elective lumbar fusion has continued to increase over the past two decades. However, there remains to be a consensus on the optimal fusion technique. This study aims to compare stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with posterior fusion techniques in patients with spondylolisthesis and degenerative disc disease through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A systematic review was performed by searching the Cochrane Register of Trials, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to 2022. In the two-stage screening process, three reviewers independently reviewed titles and abstracts. The full-text reports of the remaining studies were then inspected for eligibility. Conflicts were resolved through consensus discussion. Two reviewers then extracted study data, assessed it for quality, and analysed it.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      After the initial search and removal of duplicate records, 16,435 studies were screened. Twenty-one eligible studies (3686 patients) were ultimately included, which compared stand-alone ALIF with posterior approaches such as posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF). A meta-analysis showed surgical time and blood loss was significantly lower in ALIF than in TLIF\/PLIF, but not in those who underwent PLF (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.08). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in ALIF than in TLIF, but not in PLIF or PLF. Fusion rates were similar between the ALIF and posterior approaches. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain were not significantly different between the ALIF and PLIF\/TLIF groups. However, VAS back pain favoured ALIF over PLF at one year (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200921, MD\u2009\u2212\u20091.00, CI\u2009\u2212\u20091.47,\u2009\u2212\u20090.53), and at two years (2 studies,\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200967, MD\u2009\u2212\u20091.39, CI\u2009\u2212\u20091.67,\u2009\u2212\u20091.11). The VAS leg pain scores (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200946, MD 0.50, CI 0.12 to 0.88) at two years significantly favoured PLF. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at one year were not significantly different between ALIF and the posterior approaches. At two years, ODI scores were also similar between the ALIF and the TLIF\/PLIF. However, the ODI scores at two years (2 studies,\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200967, MD\u2009\u2212\u20097.59, CI\u2009\u2212\u200913.33,\u2009\u2212\u20091.85) significantly favoured ALIF over PLF (\n                      <jats:italic>I<\/jats:italic>\n                      <jats:sup>\n                        <jats:italic>2<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:sup>\n                      \u2009=\u200970%). The Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score (JOAS) for low back pain at one year (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200921, MD\u2009\u2212\u20090.50, CI\u2009\u2212\u20090.78) and two years (two studies,\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200967, MD\u2009\u2212\u20090.36, CI\u2009\u2212\u20090.65,\u2009\u2212\u20090.07) significantly favoured ALIF over PLF. No significant differences were found in leg pain at the 2-year follow-up. Adverse events displayed no significant differences between the ALIF and posterior approaches.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Stand-alone-ALIF demonstrated a shorter operative time and less blood loss than the PLIF\/TLIF approach. Hospitalisation time is reduced with ALIF compared with TLIF. Patient-reported outcome measures were equivocal with PLIF or TLIF. VAS and JOAS, back pain, and ODI scores mainly favoured ALIF over PLF. Adverse events were equivocal between the ALIF and posterior fusion approaches.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-023-07567-x","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2023,4,18]],"date-time":"2023-04-18T06:02:58Z","timestamp":1681797778000},"page":"1911-1926","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":107,"title":["A systematic review of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF)"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"32","author":[{"given":"John","family":"Rathbone","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Matthew","family":"Rackham","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"David","family":"Nielsen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"So Mang","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Wayne","family":"Hing","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sukhman","family":"Riar","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-6162-3709","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Matthew","family":"Scott-Young","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2023,4,18]]},"reference":[{"key":"7567_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"369","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000002822","volume":"44","author":"BI Martin","year":"2019","unstructured":"Martin BI, Mirza SK, Spina N, Spiker WR, Lawrence B, Brodke DS (2019) Trends in lumbar fusion procedure rates and associated hospital costs for degenerative spinal diseases in the united states, 2004 to 2015. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 44:369\u2013376. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/BRS.0000000000002822","journal-title":"Spine (Phila Pa 1976)"},{"key":"7567_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e000391","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2011-000391","volume":"1","author":"P Willems","year":"2011","unstructured":"Willems P, de Bie R, Oner C, Castelein R, de Kleuver M (2011) Clinical decision making in spinal fusion for chronic low back pain. Results of a nationwide survey among spine surgeons. BMJ Open 1:e000391. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2011-000391","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"key":"7567_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"24","DOI":"10.3171\/spi.2004.1.1.0024","volume":"1","author":"PV Mummaneni","year":"2004","unstructured":"Mummaneni PV, Haid RW, Rodts GE (2004) Lumbar interbody fusion: state-of-the-art technical advances. Invited submission from the Joint section meeting on disorders of the Spine and peripheral nerves, march 2004. J Neurosurg Spine 1:24\u201330. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/spi.2004.1.1.0024","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"7567_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"64","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clineuro.2015.03.008","volume":"133","author":"PM Udby","year":"2015","unstructured":"Udby PM, Bech-Azeddine R (2015) Clinical outcome of stand-alone ALIF compared to posterior instrumentation for degenerative disc disease: a pilot study and a literature review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 133:64\u201369. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.clineuro.2015.03.008","journal-title":"Clin Neurol Neurosurg"},{"key":"7567_CR5","unstructured":"Rathbone J, Nielsen D, Rackham M (2021) Lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative disc disease: comparison of anterior and posterior surgical procedures. PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021240325 https:\/\/www.crd.york.ac.uk\/prospero\/display_record.php?RecordID=240325. Accessed 9 Apr 2021"},{"key":"7567_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rethlefsen M, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S et al (2020) PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews https:\/\/osf.io\/y765x\/. Accessed 14 Jan 2022","DOI":"10.31219\/osf.io\/sfc38"},{"key":"7567_CR7","unstructured":"OpenGrey Literature Database, http:\/\/www.opengrey.eu\/. Accessed 25 Oct 2021\u2026]"},{"key":"7567_CR8","unstructured":"ClinicalTrials.gov, https:\/\/clinicaltrials.gov\/. Accessed 25 Oct 2021"},{"key":"7567_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L, Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group (2009) 2009 Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane back review group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:1929\u20131941. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/BRS.0b013e3181b1c99f","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e3181b1c99f"},{"key":"7567_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"13","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-5-13","volume":"5","author":"SP Hozo","year":"2005","unstructured":"Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and sample size. BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1471-2288-5-13","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"7567_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"135","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-14-135","volume":"14","author":"X Wan","year":"2014","unstructured":"Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T (2014) Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and\/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol 14:135. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1471-2288-14-135","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"7567_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"849","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2006.11.003","volume":"60","author":"S Walter","year":"2007","unstructured":"Walter S, Yao X (2007) Effect sizes can be calculated for studies reporting ranges for outcome variables in systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 60:849\u2013852. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2006.11.003","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"7567_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.3171\/spi.2001.95.1.0001","volume":"95","author":"B Barnes","year":"2001","unstructured":"Barnes B, Rodts GE, McLaughlin M, Haid RW Jr (2001) Threaded cortical bone dowels for lumbar interbody fusion: over 1-year mean follow up in 28 patients. J Neurosurg 95:1\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/spi.2001.95.1.0001","journal-title":"J Neurosurg"},{"key":"7567_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"492","DOI":"10.3928\/01477447-20090527-12","volume":"32","author":"C Freudenberger","year":"2009","unstructured":"Freudenberger C, Lindley EM, Beard DW et al (2009) Posterior versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion with anterior tension band plating: a retrospective analysis. Orthopedics 32:492. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3928\/01477447-20090527-12","journal-title":"Orthopedics"},{"key":"7567_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"20","DOI":"10.1097\/00013414-200303000-00002","volume":"13","author":"PM Klara","year":"2003","unstructured":"Klara PM, Freidank SA, Rezaiamiri S (2003) Comparison of lumbar interbody fusion techniques using ray threaded fusion cages and pedicle screw fixation systems. Neurosurg Q 13:20\u201329. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/00013414-200303000-00002","journal-title":"Neurosurg Q"},{"key":"7567_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"567","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-002-0516-5","volume":"12","author":"SS Madan","year":"2003","unstructured":"Madan SS, Boeree NR (2003) Comparison of instrumented anterior interbody fusion with instrumented circumferential lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J 12:567\u2013575. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00586-002-0516-5","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"7567_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"689","DOI":"10.3171\/2015.8.SPINE15476","volume":"25","author":"O Adogwa","year":"2016","unstructured":"Adogwa O, Elsamadicy AA, Han JL et al (2016) Do measures of surgical effectiveness one year after lumbar spine surgery accurately predict 2-year outcomes? J Neurosurg Spine 25:689\u2013696. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2015.8.SPINE15476","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"7567_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"E655","DOI":"10.3928\/01477447-20180711-06","volume":"41","author":"AE Bozzio","year":"2018","unstructured":"Bozzio AE, Johnson CR, Fattor JA et al (2018) Stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody, transforaminal lumbar interbody, and anterior\/posterior fusion: analysis of fusion outcomes and costs. Orthopedics 41:E655\u2013E662. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3928\/01477447-20180711-06","journal-title":"Orthopedics"},{"key":"7567_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2664","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-019-05881-x","volume":"28","author":"N B\u00fcrger","year":"2019","unstructured":"B\u00fcrger N, Quante M, K\u00f6szegv\u00e1ry M et al (2019) Reconstruction of lumbar lordosis in monosegmental fusion L5\/S1 using ALIF compared to TLIF: a monocentric study with 157 cases. Eur Spine J 28:2664\u20132665","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"7567_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"159S","DOI":"10.1016\/j.wneu.2015.09.051","volume":"13","author":"O Adogwa","year":"2015","unstructured":"Adogwa O, Elsamadicy A, Knott KT et al (2015) Outcomes after ALIF versus TLIF for treatment of symptomatic L5\u2013S1 spondylolisthesis: a prospective, multi-institutional comparative effectiveness study. World Neurosurg 13:159S. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.wneu.2015.09.051","journal-title":"World Neurosurg"},{"key":"7567_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2020","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-010-1601-9","volume":"19","author":"F Vazifehdan","year":"2010","unstructured":"Vazifehdan F, Rohs C, Ropers J (2010) Posterior instrumentation + TLIF technique versus ALIF technique + anterior plate for lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J 19:2020. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00586-010-1601-9","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"7567_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"E2","DOI":"10.3171\/2020.6.focus20374","volume":"49","author":"R Bassani","year":"2020","unstructured":"Bassani R, Morselli C, Querenghi AM et al (2020) Functional and radiological outcome of anterior retroperitoneal versus posterior transforaminal interbody fusion in the management of the single-level lumbar degenerative disease. Neurosurg Focus 49:E2. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2020.6.focus20374","journal-title":"Neurosurg Focus"},{"key":"7567_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"E1259","DOI":"10.1097\/brs.0000000000002145","volume":"42","author":"L Kuang","year":"2017","unstructured":"Kuang L, Wang B, Guohua L (2017) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus mini-open anterior lumbar interbody fusion with oblique self-anchored stand-alone cages for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study with 2-year follow up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42:E1259\u2013E1265. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/brs.0000000000002145","journal-title":"Spine (Phila Pa 1976)"},{"key":"7567_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"21","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2005.09.004","volume":"6","author":"S Glassman","year":"2006","unstructured":"Glassman S, Gornet MF, Branch C et al (2006) MOS short form 36 and Oswestry disability index outcomes in lumbar fusion: a multicenter experience. Spine J 6:21\u201326. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.spinee.2005.09.004","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"key":"7567_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"812","DOI":"10.1097\/00007632-199904150-00014","volume":"24","author":"NH Kim","year":"1999","unstructured":"Kim NH, Lee JW (1999) Anterior interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion with a transpedicular fixation for isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults: a comparison of clinical results. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24:812\u2013817. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/00007632-199904150-00014","journal-title":"Spine (Phila Pa 1976)"},{"key":"7567_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"347","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e3181d0c944","volume":"36","author":"S Ohtori","year":"2011","unstructured":"Ohtori S, Koshi T, Yamashita M et al (2011) Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of selected patients with discogenic low back pain: a small-sized randomized trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:347\u2013354. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/BRS.0b013e3181d0c944","journal-title":"Spine (Phila Pa 1976)"},{"key":"7567_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"352","DOI":"10.1007\/s00776-011-0088-5","volume":"16","author":"S Ohtori","year":"2011","unstructured":"Ohtori S, Koshi T, Yamashita M et al (2011) Single-level instrumented posterolateral fusion versus non-instrumented anterior interbody fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis: a prospective study with a 2-year follow-up. J Orthop Sci 16:352\u2013358. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00776-011-0088-5","journal-title":"J Orthop Sci"},{"key":"7567_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"355","DOI":"10.1097\/00024720-200210000-00003","volume":"15","author":"BB Pradhan","year":"2002","unstructured":"Pradhan BB, Nassar JA, Delamarter RB et al (2002) Single-level lumbar spine fusion: a comparison of anterior and posterior approaches. J Spinal Disord Tech 15:355\u2013361. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/00024720-200210000-00003","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"},{"key":"7567_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"375","DOI":"10.1097\/00002517-199810000-00002","volume":"11","author":"V Vamvanij","year":"1998","unstructured":"Vamvanij V, Fredrickson BE, Thorpe JM et al (1998) Surgical treatment of internal disc disruption: an outcome study of four fusion techniques. J Spinal Disord 11:375\u2013382","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord"},{"key":"7567_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"E111","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000002262","volume":"43","author":"RJ Gala","year":"2018","unstructured":"Gala RJ, Bovonratwet P, Webb ML et al (2018) Different fusion approaches for single-level lumbar spondylolysis have similar perioperative outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 43:E111\u2013E117. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/BRS.0000000000002262","journal-title":"Spine (Phila Pa 1976)"},{"key":"7567_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"216","DOI":"10.1016\/j.wneu.2017.01.114","volume":"101","author":"N Lee","year":"2017","unstructured":"Lee N, Kim KN, Yi S et al (2017) Comparison of outcomes of anterior, posterior, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery at a single lumbar level with degenerative spinal disease. World Neurosurg 101:216\u2013226. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.wneu.2017.01.114","journal-title":"World Neurosurg"},{"key":"7567_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1035","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-009-0938-4","volume":"18","author":"B Peng","year":"2009","unstructured":"Peng B, Chen J, Kuang Z et al (2009) Diagnosis and surgical treatment of back pain originating from endplate. Eur Spine J 18:1035\u20131040. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00586-009-0938-4","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"7567_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"71S","DOI":"10.1177\/2192568219868475","volume":"10","author":"C Mikhail","year":"2020","unstructured":"Mikhail C, Pennington Z, Arnold P et al (2020) Minimizing blood loss in spine surgery. Global Spine J 10:71S-83S. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/2192568219868475","journal-title":"Global Spine J"},{"key":"7567_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5","DOI":"10.4103\/2152-7806.198732","volume":"8","author":"LB Shields","year":"2017","unstructured":"Shields LB, Clark L, Glassman SD, Shiels C (2017) Decreasing hospital length of stay following lumbar fusion utilizing multidisciplinary committee meetings involving surgeons and other caretakers. Surg Neurol Int 8:5. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4103\/2152-7806.198732","journal-title":"Surg Neurol Int"},{"key":"7567_CR35","unstructured":"Weiss A, Elixhauser A, Andrews R (2014) Characteristics of operating room procedures in U.S. Hospitals, 2011. https:\/\/www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov\/reports\/statbriefs\/sb170-Operating-Room-Procedures-United-States-2011.pdf. Accessed 16 Jan 2022"},{"key":"7567_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"707","DOI":"10.1007\/s00776-014-0591-6","volume":"19","author":"T Makino","year":"2014","unstructured":"Makino T, Kaito T, Fujiwara H et al (2014) Does fusion status after posterior lumbar interbody fusion affect patient-based QOL outcomes? An evaluation was performed using a patient-based outcome measure. J Orthop Sci 19:707\u2013712","journal-title":"J Orthop Sci"},{"key":"7567_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"155","DOI":"10.3171\/2019.1.SPINE18770","volume":"31","author":"J Finkelstein","year":"2019","unstructured":"Finkelstein J, Schwartz CE (2019) Patient-reported outcomes in spine surgery: past, current, and future directions. J Neurosurg Spine 31:155\u2013164. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3171\/2019.1.SPINE18770","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"7567_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"253","DOI":"10.1007\/s11999-016-5021-y","volume":"475","author":"B Chen","year":"2017","unstructured":"Chen B, Garland K, Roffey D et al (2017) Can surgeons adequately capture adverse events using the Spinal adverse events severity system (SAVES) and OrthoSAVES? Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:253\u2013260. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11999-016-5021-y","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"7567_CR39","unstructured":"Equator Network\u2014Enhancing the Quality and Transparency Of health Research (2022) https:\/\/www.equator-network.org\/ Accessed 12 Dec 2021"}],"container-title":["European Spine Journal"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00586-023-07567-x.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00586-023-07567-x\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00586-023-07567-x.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,6,1]],"date-time":"2023-06-01T06:06:29Z","timestamp":1685599589000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00586-023-07567-x"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2023,4,18]]},"references-count":39,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2023,6]]}},"alternative-id":["7567"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00586-023-07567-x","relation":{},"ISSN":["0940-6719","1432-0932"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0940-6719","type":"print"},{"value":"1432-0932","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2023,4,18]]},"assertion":[{"value":"28 September 2022","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"15 January 2023","order":2,"name":"revised","label":"Revised","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"25 January 2023","order":3,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"18 April 2023","order":4,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"Relevant financial activities outside the submitted work: consultancy, royalties.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}},{"value":"This study was approved by the University Human Research Ethics Committee (0000015881) of Bond University.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical approval"}}]}}