Differences across health care systems in outcome and cost-utility of surgical and conservative treatment of chronic low back pain: a study protocol

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on differences across health care systems in choice and outcome of the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) with spinal surgery and conservative treatment as the main options. At least six randomised controlled trials comparing these two options have been performed; they show conflicting results without clear-cut evidence for superior effectiveness of any of the evaluated interventions and could not address whether treatment effect varied across patient subgroups. Cost-utility analyses display inconsistent results when comparing surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP. Due to its higher feasibility, we chose to conduct a prospective observational cohort study. METHODS: This study aims to examine if1. Differences across health care systems result in different treatment outcomes of surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP2. Patient characteristics (work-related, psychological factors, etc.) and co-interventions (physiotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, return-to-work programs, etc.) modify the outcome of treatment for CLBP3. Cost-utility in terms of quality-adjusted life years differs between surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP.This study will recruit 1000 patients from orthopaedic spine units, rehabilitation centres, and pain clinics in Switzerland and New Zealand. Effectiveness will be measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at baseline and after six months. The change in ODI will be the primary endpoint of this study.Multiple linear regression models will be used, with the change in ODI from baseline to six months as the dependent variable and the type of health care system, type of treatment, patient characteristics, and co-interventions as independent variables. Interactions will be incorporated between type of treatment and different co-interventions and patient characteristics. Cost-utility will be measured with an index based on EQol-5D in combination with cost data. CONCLUSION: This study will provide evidence if differences across health care systems in the outcome of treatment of CLBP exist. It will classify patients with CLBP into different clinical subgroups and help to identify specific target groups who might benefit from specific surgical or conservative interventions. Furthermore, cost-utility differences will be identified for different groups of patients with CLBP. Main results of this study should be replicated in future studies on CLBP.

Comparative Analysis of Evolving Software Systems Using the Gini Coefficient

Software metrics offer us the promise of distilling useful information from vast amounts of software in order to track development progress, to gain insights into the nature of the software, and to identify potential problems. Unfortunately, however, many software metrics exhibit highly skewed, non-Gaussian distributions. As a consequence, usual ways of interpreting these metrics --- for example, in terms of "average" values --- can be highly misleading. Many metrics, it turns out, are distributed like wealth --- with high concentrations of values in selected locations. We propose to analyze software metrics using the Gini coefficient, a higher-order statistic widely used in economics to study the distribution of wealth. Our approach allows us not only to observe changes in software systems efficiently, but also to assess project risks and monitor the development process itself. We apply the Gini coefficient to numerous metrics over a range of software projects, and we show that many metrics not only display remarkably high Gini values, but that these values are remarkably consistent as a project evolves over time.