Early in my practice I had the great opportunity to participate in the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT), an NIH-funded clinical trial comparing surgical vs non-surgical treatment for common lumbar spine disorders (HNP, spinal stenosis, and degenerative spondylolisthesis). Some of my colleagues suggested that this study was funded to prove that “surgery is no better than non-surgical treatment.” However, I believed that the surgical care we delivered was really helping people, and the SPORT study, despite some methodological limitations arising from “crossovers”, was a “home run” in favor of surgical treatment. What I learned from participating in that study was that clinical trials are very important to spine care, and participation has great rewards, including publishing articles in top journals. It also reinforced my faith in surgical treatment of spinal disease when nonoperative management does not relieve symptoms.

In 2016 as the Program Chair for the NASS Annual Meeting, I had the opportunity to help mold the “NASS Agenda,” presenting what, at the time, were “new topics” like Physician Burnout. As program chair, it really felt like NASS had a unique position astride the “comprehensive spine care universe, which is unique to NASS and one of its strengths, even as we are a “surgical society.”

There are three mentors that I have looked to as role models, and I am forever appreciative of their guidance to me: Robert Hensinger, MD, Henry Bohlman, MD, and Dan Spengler, MD. As my spine fellowship mentor, Dr Bohlman had the greatest impact, and his “bearing”, his “quiet compassion” for his patients, and his love of cervical spine surgery and the clinical research and standards that guided his work have remained with me to this day.