The Open Orthopaedics Journal




ISSN: 1874-3250 ― Volume 13, 2019

Private and Non-Private Disc Herniation Patients: Do they Differ?



Birgitta Gregebo , Deliang Dai 2, Birgitta Schillberg a, Martin Baehr 1, Bo Nyström*, Adam Taube 2
1 Clinic of Spinal Surgery, Strängnäs, Sweden
2 Department of Statistics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

Abstract

Objectives :

In the 2006 yearly report from the Swedish National Register for Lumbar Spine Surgery it was claimed that international studies show obvious differences between private and non-private patients with regard to results from back surgery. Therefore our aim was to reveal such possible differences by comparing the two categories of patients at a private clinic.

Material and Methods :

The material comprises 1184 patients operated on for lumbar disc herniation during the period of 1987 to 2007. Basic pre-operative data were obtained from the medical records and follow-up was performed by a questionnaire around 5 years post-operatively.

Results :

Small but statistically significant differences between private and non-private patients were seen pre-operatively regarding the proportions of a/ men and women in the samples, b/ those with physically demanding jobs, c/ those on sick leave and d/ those with lumbar pain. Over the years the admitted private patients had a decreasing mean duration of symptoms which was not seen in the non-private patients. No apparent differences (n.s.) were seen between the two categories of patients pre-operatively regarding age, presence and level of leg pain or the proportion who smoked. Post-operative improvement in leg and lumbar pain was very similar in private and non-private patients as was satisfaction with the results and the proportion of patients returning to work.

Conclusion :

Despite small pre-operative differences concerning some variables and a significant difference in symptom duration between private and non-private disc herniation patients, the final clinical results were very similar.

Keywords: Lumbar disc herniation, non-private patients, outcome, private patients, prognostic factors, surgery..


Article Information


Identifiers and Pagination:

Year: 2014
Volume: 8
First Page: 237
Last Page: 241
Publisher Id: TOORTHJ-8-237
DOI: 10.2174/1874325001408010237

Article History:

Received Date: 27/2/2014
Revision Received Date: 18/6/2014
Acceptance Date: 27/6/2014
Electronic publication date: 11/7/2014
Collection year: 2014

Article Metrics:

CrossRef Citations:
0

Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 1743
Abstract HTML Views: 1008
PDF Downloads: 199
Total Views/Downloads: 2950

Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 701
Abstract HTML Views: 579
PDF Downloads: 138
Total Views/Downloads: 1418
Geographical View

© Gregebo et al.; Licensee Bentham Open.

open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/) which permits unrestrictive use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


* Address correspondence to this author at the Clinic of Spinal Surgery, Löt, 64594 Strängnäs, Sweden; Tel: +46 152 26300; Fax: +46 152 26370; E-mail: bo.nystrom@ryggkirurgiska.se




INTRODUCTION

During the last ten years increasing interest has been evident in Sweden regarding comparisons of outcome following treatment at different clinics. A number of medical registers have been created [1National Healthcare Quality Registries in Sweden. 2007 wwwkvalitetsregisterse ] and results from various clinics are being compared on the basis of data obtained from these registers. However, comparisons between different clinics do not reflect only the effectiveness and skill of these clinics, but they are also influenced by the so-called patient mix.

In the discussion of results following back surgery, it has been claimed that the results from private clinics are not directly comparable to those from other clinics because private clinics might have a considerable proportion of private patients who are presumed to have a different and more favorable situation right from the very beginning [2Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery, 2006.]. In the 2006 yearly report from the Swedish National Register for Lumbar Spine Surgery [2Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery, 2006.] it was stated that “Most international studies show obvious differences between private patients and non-private patients with regard to the results from back surgery and it can be expected that the circumstances are the same in Sweden.” However, no references were given, nor were any found in a literature search. The question therefore remains as to whether there really are any noticeable differences between private and non-private patients undergoing back surgery. No answer can be obtained by comparing results between private and non-private clinics. This can be done only by an investigation of the two categories of patients within the individual clinics.

On the basis of data from a considerable number of patients operated on due to lumbar disc herniation (LDH) at the private Clinic of Spine Surgery in Strängnäs (CSS), we investigated such possible differences in detail.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The material comprises 1184 patients operated on for LDH at the CSS between 1987 and 2007. Basic pre-operative data were obtained from the medical records of the patients. Follow-up was performed by a questionnaire similar to that of the National Swedish Register for Lumbar Spine Surgery [3Strömqvist B, Jönsson B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Larsson B-E, Lind B. The Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 2001; 72: 99-106.]. The questionnaire differed slightly for the patients operated on between 1987 and 1996 (period I, 493 patients), between 1997 and 1999 (period II, 208 patients), and between 2000 and 2007 (period III, 483 patients). However, the main questions were the same, i.e. level of persisting leg and/or lumbar pain, return to work, and during periods II and III the patient’s statement regarding the result, i.e. whether the patient was satisfied with the results, was in some doubt, or was not satisfied. The patients during period III filled in the Swedish National Register for Lumbar Spine Surgery questionnaire pre-operatively as well as post-operatively at 1 and 2 years, including the generic SF-36. Mean follow-up time: period I: private patients 63 months (range 5-117) and non-private patients 77 months (range 30-117); period II: private patients 127 months and non-private patients 126 months (range 111-146 for both); and period III: private patients 81 months (range 27-110) and non-private patients 59 months (range 22-109).

All operations were performed using microsurgical technique [4Caspar W. A new surgical procedure for lumbar disc herniation causing less tissue damage through a microsurgical approach. Adv Neurosurg 1977; 4: 74-7.].

The term “private” in this paper includes patients who paid for their operation themselves, those who had private insurance that paid for the operation, and also those whose operations were paid for by their employer. The term “non-private” refers to patients whose operations were paid for by the county or by universal health insurance. The numbers of patients in each category during the three time periods are seen in Table 1. Since the three time periods comprise a total of two decades, and the questionnaire differed slightly between the different periods, analysis of the data from all three periods as a whole was not a clear option.

Table 1

The number of patients during each period and their manner of payment.




Ethics

The study was approved by the Central Ethics Committee, Stockholm, July 18, 2012, no. Ö 24-2012.

RESULTS

Pre-Operative State

The proportions of private and non-private patients changed markedly during the time period studied, with a very high proportion of private patients during periods I and II, but who then comprised a clear minority during period III (Table 1). This change over time was due to political decisions that made it easier for patients to be treated at private clinics with payment coming from the county.

The categorization of patients as private and non-private is definitely not a random selection. Therefore it can be expected that even statistically significant differences between these two categories can be found regarding potentially important background variables. The question is whether these differences are of such a magnitude that they might distort the subsequent analyses of the final treatment results. In the following we will concentrate on each variable in detail with regard to possible discrepancies between private and non-private patients.

Age: The age of the youngest patient was 15 years and that of the oldest was 84 years, with a mean for all patients of 42.8 years (S.D. = 10.3 years). There were only minor (n.s.) differences in age between private and non-private patients during the three time periods (Table 2).

Table 2

Ages of the patients.




Gender: The proportion of males was 73% for the private patients and 61% for the non-private patients (95% C.I. 13±7 p.u.), thus a statistically significant difference. The proportion of males decreased somewhat over time and, for the whole material, was 75%, 67% and 61%, respectively, for the three time periods.

Physical work: For all patients physical work was less common among the private patients (16%) than among the non-private patients ( 27%). The 95% C.I. for the difference was 6 to 16 p.u. Thus the difference was statistically significant. The pattern was similar during the three time periods.

Smoking: Smoking habits seemed to be practically equal among private and non-private patients during periods I and III but different during the middle period (Table 3). It is worth noting, however, that the number of non-private patients was quite small during this period.

Table 3

Proportions of patients with different characteristics among private and non-private patients before surgery.




Initial attack: The proportions of patients who got their initial attack of disc herniation symptoms “in relation to a special event” like lifting, falling, etc., were roughly equal for private and non-private patients during all three time periods. The differences were not statistically significant (not shown).

Leg pain: Among the private and non-private patients 95% and 94%, respectively, suffered from leg pain pre-operatively. No real differences between the two categories could be demonstrated (n.s.) (Table 3).

Lumbar pain: Although lumbar pain was somewhat more prevalent among the private patients (83%) than among the non-private patients (77%) for all patients (95% C.I. 7±5%) there was no clear pattern over time (Table 3).

Sick leave: There was a somewhat higher proportion of sick leave among the private patients (67%) than among the non-private patients (59%), (95% C.I. 8±6). The same pattern was found during all three periods (Table 3).

Duration of pain: As seen in Table 4, the mean duration of symptoms was shorter for the private patients than for the non-private patients during all three periods, and the difference was highly statistically significant during period III.

Table 4

Symptom duration in months.




Post-Operative State

Leg pain: No noticeable differences were found concerning post-operative improvement in leg pain when comparing private and non-private patients, or when comparing men and women (Table 5). Nor was there any noticeable difference between men and women within the private group, or within the non-private group.

Table 5

Patient assessments (proportions) regarding post-operative leg pain.




The intensity of leg pain was assessed by the patients during period III before and at 2 years after the operation (VAS, 0-100). The intensity changed from 68 (mean) pre-operatively to 11 post-operatively for the private patients and from 65 to 12 for the non-private patients (not shown). In Fig. (1) the VAS results for private and non-private patients during period III are presented graphically by means of cumulative frequencies before surgery and at follow-up. It is obvious that the distributions of values before surgery are almost identical for the two groups of patients and the same also holds true for the values at follow-up. However, there is a dramatic difference between the VAS distributions before and after the operation.

Fig. (1)

Cumulative frequency of VAS values for leg pain as assessed by private and non-private disc herniation patients before surgery and at follow-up (period III).



Lumbar pain: There were very minor differences concerning improvement in lumbar pain between private and non-private patients during all three periods (n.s., not shown).

The intensity of lumbar pain was assessed by the patients during period III before and at 2 years after the operation (VAS, 0-100). It changed from 36 (mean) pre-operatively to 12 post-operatively for the private patients and from 40 to 15, respectively, for the non-private patients.

Satisfaction with the results: During period II the level of satisfaction (satisfied, in some doubt or not satisfied) seemed to be somewhat higher for private patients (90.4%, 5.6%, 3.4%) than for non-private patients (84.4%, 15.5%, 0%,) but during period III there was almost no difference at all between the two categories.

Back to work: During period I, 403 of the private patients were employed and 385 (95.5%) went back to work. Of the non-private patients 89.8% returned to work. During period II the figures for private and non-private patients were 96.8% and 91.3%, respectively. However, there were very few non-private patients during this period (Table 1). During period III the figures were 94.7% and 93.5%, respectively.

Reoperation: The frequencies (percentages) of reoperations due to recurrence during the first 12 post-operative months were 3.9, 6.2 and 3.9 for the private patients during periods I, II and III, respectively, compared to 7.7, 0.0 and 6.3 for the non-private patients, respectively, with no statistically significant differences between the two categories of patients.

DISCUSSION

We could not demonstrate any substantial differences between private and non-private patients concerning the mean age of patients with a lumbar disc herniation, which range from 40-44 years, and this is in accord with previous reports from general Scandinavian hospitals [5Spangfort EV. The lumbar disc herniation. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1972; 142: 1-95.-8Strömqvist F, Ahmad M, Hildingsson C, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B. Gender differences in lumbar disc herniation surgery. Acta Orthop 2008; 79: 643-49.] as well as international reports [9Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD , et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation.The Spine Patient Outcome Research Trial (SPORT): A randomized trial JAMA 2006; 296: 2441-2450.]. There was, however, a difference between private and non-private patients regarding the proportion of men, generally reported to be around 56-60% [2Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery, 2006., 8Strömqvist F, Ahmad M, Hildingsson C, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B. Gender differences in lumbar disc herniation surgery. Acta Orthop 2008; 79: 643-49.,10Kotilainen E, Valtonen S, Carlson C-Å. Microsurgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation Follow-up of 237 patients. Acta Neurochir 1993; 120: 143-49.,11Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery. 2010.]. During period I the proportion of men was over 70%, but this was the case for both private and non-private patients, and this figure has also been reported in a previous, larger Swedish material [5Spangfort EV. The lumbar disc herniation. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1972; 142: 1-95.].

Results from the Swedish National Spine Register have shown better outcomes following operation for lumbar disc herniation in private hospitals as a group than in general hospitals [12Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år(The national Swedish register for lumbar spine surgery. Report 2008 www4snu/pdf) 2008.]. This observation has been analyzed in several of the yearly reports from the Register, and factors reported to be of possible importance regarding this difference are fewer smokers among private patients, a shorter duration of pre-operative pain, and a higher proportion of men [2Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery, 2006., 11Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery. 2010., 12Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år(The national Swedish register for lumbar spine surgery. Report 2008 www4snu/pdf) 2008.]. Since the outcome following disc herniation surgery has been reported to be better in men than in women [2Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery, 2006.], the proportion of men and women in the samples would affect the results. There was, however, no obvious difference in outcome in our material when analyzing the results concerning improvement in leg pain separately for men and for women (Table 5), as also reported by Kotilainen et al. [10Kotilainen E, Valtonen S, Carlson C-Å. Microsurgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation Follow-up of 237 patients. Acta Neurochir 1993; 120: 143-49.].

Concerning smoking, Strömqvist et al. [12Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år(The national Swedish register for lumbar spine surgery. Report 2008 www4snu/pdf) 2008.] reported smokers to be more frequent among non-private patients. In contrast, we found the proportion of smokers to be nearly equal for private and non-private patients during periods I and III, and during period II, smokers were in fact more frequent among the private patients (Table 3), although it should be kept in mind that there were few non-private patients during this period.

In the 2008 report from the Swedish National Spine Register [12Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år(The national Swedish register for lumbar spine surgery. Report 2008 www4snu/pdf) 2008.] the outcome at 2 years after operation for lumbar disc herniation in 771 patients was presented. The mean VAS value (0-100) for lumbar pain pre-operatively was 46, and at 2 years following operation it was 23. The respective values for leg pain were 66 and 21. The VAS values are simply an order of assessment by the patients, as they are sequences on an ordinal scale. The values are therefore not arithmetic and mean values should not be calculated, even if this is done habitually. Following this questionable tradition, our results are in agreement with the observation made in the Register, with a somewhat better outcome in our private clinic than reported in the Register. The post-operative value for leg pain (mean) in the Register was 21 and in our material it was very similar for private (11) and non-private (12) patients.

It would be logical for a long duration of pain before surgery, especially leg pain which is due to nerve root compression, to result in an inferior result compared to situations with short pain duration, and this has been reported by the Swedish National Register Group [2Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery, 2006., 11Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery. 2010.,12Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år(The national Swedish register for lumbar spine surgery. Report 2008 www4snu/pdf) 2008.] as well as by others [6Nygaard ÖP, Romner B, Trumpy JH. Duration of symptoms as a predictor of outcome after lumbar disc surgery. Acta Neurochir 1994; 128: 53-6., 13Nygaard ÖP, Kloster R, Solberg T. Duration of leg pain as a predictor of outcome after surgery for lumbar disc herniation a prospective cohort study with 1-year follow up. J Neurosurg (Spine) 2000; 92: 131-34.]. As seen in Table 4, the mean duration of pain decreased markedly over the years for private patients (periods II and III) but not at all for non-private patients, probably reflecting the situation of queues and waiting lists for operation in the Swedish healthcare system. Despite this marked difference in pain duration before operation, we found no differences between private and non-private patients regarding outcome, measured as improvement in leg pain (Table 5, Fig. 1), satisfaction with the results and return to work. It should, however, be pointed out that the mean duration of pain for private patients during period III, around 6 months, is also a long duration of pain, and a markedly shorter duration might result in even better clinical outcomes.

A statistically significant difference between private and non-private patients was seen in the proportion of patients who were on sick leave before the operation, which was somewhat higher for private than non-private patients during all three periods. This seems surprising given the assumption that private patients were thought to have non-physical jobs and a good financial situation. This difference, however, did not seem to affect the clinical results.

CONCLUSION

A statistically significant difference between private and non-private disc herniation patients was found pre-operatively concerning a/ the proportion of males and females in the samples, b/ the duration of symptoms (periods II and III), c/ the proportion of patients with physically demanding work, d/ the presence and level of lumbar pain, and e/ the proportion of patients on sick leave. This, however, did not seem to affect the clinical results.

Only minor differences (statistically n.s.) were found between private and non-private disc herniation patients pre-operatively concerning a/ the age of the patients, b/ the presence and level of leg pain, and c/ the proportion of smokers in the samples.

No statistically significant differences between private and non-private patients could be demonstrated post-operatively concerning a/ improvement in leg pain, b/ improvement in lumbar pain, c/ the level of satisfaction with the results, d/ the frequency of reoperations during the first year, or e/ the proportion of patients returning to work.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors confirm that this article content has no conflict of interest.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Declared none.

REFERENCES

[1] National Healthcare Quality Registries in Sweden. 2007 wwwkvalitetsregisterse
[2] Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery, 2006.
[3] Strömqvist B, Jönsson B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Larsson B-E, Lind B. The Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 2001; 72: 99-106.
[4] Caspar W. A new surgical procedure for lumbar disc herniation causing less tissue damage through a microsurgical approach. Adv Neurosurg 1977; 4: 74-7.
[5] Spangfort EV. The lumbar disc herniation. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1972; 142: 1-95.
[6] Nygaard ÖP, Romner B, Trumpy JH. Duration of symptoms as a predictor of outcome after lumbar disc surgery. Acta Neurochir 1994; 128: 53-6.
[7] Graver V, Haaland AK, Magnaes B, Loeb M. Seven-year clinical follow-up after lumbar disc surgery results and predictors of outcome. Brit J Neurosurg 1999; 13: 178-84.
[8] Strömqvist F, Ahmad M, Hildingsson C, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B. Gender differences in lumbar disc herniation surgery. Acta Orthop 2008; 79: 643-49.
[9] Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD , et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation.The Spine Patient Outcome Research Trial (SPORT): A randomized trial JAMA 2006; 296: 2441-2450.
[10] Kotilainen E, Valtonen S, Carlson C-Å. Microsurgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation Follow-up of 237 patients. Acta Neurochir 1993; 120: 143-49.
[11] Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Eds. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år (Yearly report from the Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery. 2010.
[12] Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B. Uppföljning av ländryggskirurgi i Sverige.Rapport år(The national Swedish register for lumbar spine surgery. Report 2008 www4snu/pdf) 2008.
[13] Nygaard ÖP, Kloster R, Solberg T. Duration of leg pain as a predictor of outcome after surgery for lumbar disc herniation a prospective cohort study with 1-year follow up. J Neurosurg (Spine) 2000; 92: 131-34.

Endorsements



"Open access will revolutionize 21st century knowledge work and accelerate the diffusion of ideas and evidence that support just in time learning and the evolution of thinking in a number of disciplines."


Daniel Pesut
(Indiana University School of Nursing, USA)

"It is important that students and researchers from all over the world can have easy access to relevant, high-standard and timely scientific information. This is exactly what Open Access Journals provide and this is the reason why I support this endeavor."


Jacques Descotes
(Centre Antipoison-Centre de Pharmacovigilance, France)

"Publishing research articles is the key for future scientific progress. Open Access publishing is therefore of utmost importance for wider dissemination of information, and will help serving the best interest of the scientific community."


Patrice Talaga
(UCB S.A., Belgium)

"Open access journals are a novel concept in the medical literature. They offer accessible information to a wide variety of individuals, including physicians, medical students, clinical investigators, and the general public. They are an outstanding source of medical and scientific information."


Jeffrey M. Weinberg
(St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, USA)

"Open access journals are extremely useful for graduate students, investigators and all other interested persons to read important scientific articles and subscribe scientific journals. Indeed, the research articles span a wide range of area and of high quality. This is specially a must for researchers belonging to institutions with limited library facility and funding to subscribe scientific journals."


Debomoy K. Lahiri
(Indiana University School of Medicine, USA)

"Open access journals represent a major break-through in publishing. They provide easy access to the latest research on a wide variety of issues. Relevant and timely articles are made available in a fraction of the time taken by more conventional publishers. Articles are of uniformly high quality and written by the world's leading authorities."


Robert Looney
(Naval Postgraduate School, USA)

"Open access journals have transformed the way scientific data is published and disseminated: particularly, whilst ensuring a high quality standard and transparency in the editorial process, they have increased the access to the scientific literature by those researchers that have limited library support or that are working on small budgets."


Richard Reithinger
(Westat, USA)

"Not only do open access journals greatly improve the access to high quality information for scientists in the developing world, it also provides extra exposure for our papers."


J. Ferwerda
(University of Oxford, UK)

"Open Access 'Chemistry' Journals allow the dissemination of knowledge at your finger tips without paying for the scientific content."


Sean L. Kitson
(Almac Sciences, Northern Ireland)

"In principle, all scientific journals should have open access, as should be science itself. Open access journals are very helpful for students, researchers and the general public including people from institutions which do not have library or cannot afford to subscribe scientific journals. The articles are high standard and cover a wide area."


Hubert Wolterbeek
(Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands)

"The widest possible diffusion of information is critical for the advancement of science. In this perspective, open access journals are instrumental in fostering researches and achievements."


Alessandro Laviano
(Sapienza - University of Rome, Italy)

"Open access journals are very useful for all scientists as they can have quick information in the different fields of science."


Philippe Hernigou
(Paris University, France)

"There are many scientists who can not afford the rather expensive subscriptions to scientific journals. Open access journals offer a good alternative for free access to good quality scientific information."


Fidel Toldrá
(Instituto de Agroquimica y Tecnologia de Alimentos, Spain)

"Open access journals have become a fundamental tool for students, researchers, patients and the general public. Many people from institutions which do not have library or cannot afford to subscribe scientific journals benefit of them on a daily basis. The articles are among the best and cover most scientific areas."


M. Bendandi
(University Clinic of Navarre, Spain)

"These journals provide researchers with a platform for rapid, open access scientific communication. The articles are of high quality and broad scope."


Peter Chiba
(University of Vienna, Austria)

"Open access journals are probably one of the most important contributions to promote and diffuse science worldwide."


Jaime Sampaio
(University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Portugal)

"Open access journals make up a new and rather revolutionary way to scientific publication. This option opens several quite interesting possibilities to disseminate openly and freely new knowledge and even to facilitate interpersonal communication among scientists."


Eduardo A. Castro
(INIFTA, Argentina)

"Open access journals are freely available online throughout the world, for you to read, download, copy, distribute, and use. The articles published in the open access journals are high quality and cover a wide range of fields."


Kenji Hashimoto
(Chiba University, Japan)

"Open Access journals offer an innovative and efficient way of publication for academics and professionals in a wide range of disciplines. The papers published are of high quality after rigorous peer review and they are Indexed in: major international databases. I read Open Access journals to keep abreast of the recent development in my field of study."


Daniel Shek
(Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)

"It is a modern trend for publishers to establish open access journals. Researchers, faculty members, and students will be greatly benefited by the new journals of Bentham Science Publishers Ltd. in this category."


Jih Ru Hwu
(National Central University, Taiwan)


Browse Contents



Webmaster Contact: info@benthamopen.net
Copyright © 2019 Bentham Open