OBJECT The object of this study was to identify and quantify predictors of burnout and career satisfaction among US neurosurgeons. METHODS All US members (3247) of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) were invited to participate in a survey between September and December 2012. Responses were evaluated through univariate analysis. Factors independently associated with burnout and career satisfaction were determined using multivariable logistic regression. Subgroup analysis of academic and nonacademic neurosurgeons was performed as well. RESULTS The survey response rate was 24% (783 members). The majority of respondents were male, 40–60 years old, in a stable relationship, with children, working in a group or university practice, and trained in a subspecialty. More than 80% of respondents reported being at least somewhat satisfied with their career, and 70% would choose a career in neurosurgery again; however, only 26% of neurosurgeons believed their professional lives would improve in the future, and 52% believed it would worsen. The overall burnout rate was 56.7%. Factors independently associated with both burnout and career satisfaction included achieving a balance between work and life outside the hospital (burnout OR 0.45, satisfaction OR 10.0) and anxiety over future earnings and/or health care reform (burnout OR 1.96, satisfaction OR 0.32). While the burnout rate for nonacademic neurosurgeons (62.9%) was higher than that for academic neurosurgeons (47.7%), academicians who had practiced for over 20 years were less likely to be satisfied with their careers. CONCLUSIONS The rates of burnout and career satisfaction were both high in this survey study of US neurosurgeons. The negative effects of burnout on the lives of surgeons, patients, and their families require further study and probably necessitate the development of interventional programs at local, regional, and even national levels.

Object Bibliometrics is defined as the study of statistical and mathematical methods used to quantitatively analyze scientific literature. The application of bibliometrics in neurosurgery is in its infancy. The authors calculate a number of publication productivity measures for almost all academic neurosurgeons and departments within the US. Methods The h-index, g-index, m-quotient, and contemporary h-index (hc-index) were calculated for 1225 academic neurosurgeons in 99 (of 101) programs listed by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in January 2013. Three currently available citation databases were used: Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Bibliometric profiles were created for each surgeon. Comparisons based on academic rank (that is, chairperson, professor, associate, assistant, and instructor), sex, and subspecialties were performed. Departments were ranked based on the summation of individual faculty h-indices. Calculations were carried out from January to February 2013. Results The median h-index, g-index, hc-index, and m-quotient were 11, 20, 8, and 0.62, respectively. All indices demonstrated a positive relationship with increasing academic rank (p < 0.001). The median h-index was 11 for males (n = 1144) and 8 for females (n = 81). The h-index, g-index and hc-index significantly varied by sex (p < 0.001). However, when corrected for academic rank, this difference was no longer significant. There was no difference in the m-quotient by sex. Neurosurgeons with subspecialties in functional/epilepsy, peripheral nerve, radiosurgery, neuro-oncology/skull base, and vascular have the highest median h-indices; general, pediatric, and spine neurosurgeons have the lowest median h-indices. By summing the manually calculated Scopus h-indices of all individuals within a department, the top 5 programs for publication productivity are University of California, San Francisco; Barrow Neurological Institute; Johns Hopkins University; University of Pittsburgh; and University of California, Los Angeles. Conclusions This study represents the most detailed publication analysis of academic neurosurgeons and their programs to date. The results for the metrics presented should be viewed as benchmarks for comparison purposes. It is our hope that organized neurosurgery will adopt and continue to refine bibliometric profiling of individuals and departments.

To determine the safety and tolerability of IV and oral levetiracetam monotherapy for seizures in brain tumor patients following resection. Brain tumor patients undergoing neurosurgery with >or=1 seizure within the preceding month prior to surgery were enrolled to receive intravenous levetiracetam for a minimum of 48 h, transitioned to oral levetiracetam at the same dose, and followed for 1-month after discharge. Patients were assessed daily in the hospital, provided with a seizure diary, and supplied with 30 days of levetiracetam upon discharge. Study patients were telephoned weekly to assess their cognitive status and seizure frequency. Of the 17 patients enrolled, the baseline seizure types were tonic clonic, partial, and complex partial with secondary generalization. The most common type of tumor was glioblastoma multiforme. Levetiracetam was well tolerated with no medication discontinuation during the study period. Adverse effects reported were somnolence, nausea/vomiting, headache, and insomnia. Eleven patients were evaluable for TICS scores (64.7%) with an average score of 33.3. Two patients were deemed to be cognitively impaired (18.2%). Eleven of twelve patients (91.7%) that completed the study period achieved a >or=50% reduction in their number of seizures. A total of 92 drug interactions were avoided (P = 0.0016) with dexamethasone, acetaminophen, and fentanyl being the most common. Levetiracetam monotherapy was found to be safe and tolerable in this patient population. Nearly all patients achieved a >or=50% reduction in seizure frequency post-op with levetiracetam monotherapy. Levetiracetam also has the potential for less drug interactions compared to phenytoin in these patients.