Search

Background and Purpose: There is a lack of evidence on the broad health-care costs of treating spine trauma patients without neurological deficits conservatively. The aim of the present study was to estimate the primary and secondary health-care sector costs associated with conservative treatment of spine fractures as well as their determinants.Methods: Patients were identified between 1999 and 2008 in the hospital's administrative system based on relevant diagnostic codes. Inclusion criteria were: (1) spine fractures (C1-L5); (2) age >18; and (3) conservative treatment. Exclusion criteria were: (1) neurological involvement and (2) fractures secondary to osteoporosis/malignancy. Health-care utilization and costs were retrieved from national administrative databases covering the entire health-care sector.Results: 201 cervical, 150 thoracic, and 140 lumbar fracture patients were included in the study. The total health cost was estimated at €18,919 (16,199; 21,756), €8571 (6062; 11,733), €5526 (3473; 7465) for cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions, respectively. Hospital admissions accounted for the vast majority of costs while primary health care accounted for less than 3 % and prescription medication for less than 2 %. The determinants of costs included fracture site (p < 0.001) and concomitant lower limb injuries (p = 0.009).Conclusions: Spinal fractures, even mild ones, appear to incur substantial health-care utilization and costs. Health-care costs in conjunction with cervical fractures are more than two-fold of those affiliated with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Among the concomitant injuries, lower limb injuries exert a substantial influence over health-care costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Historical, register-based cohort study following 85 patients in the course of a time frame extending from 2 years before to 2 years after trauma occurrence.Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of surgery versus conservative management for thoracolumbar burst fractures.Summary Of Background Data: Despite the prevalence of thoracolumbar burst fractures, consensus has still not been reached in terms of their clinical management and whereas from a health policy point of view, efficient use of resources is equally important, literature pertaining to this aspect is limited.Methods: Consecutive patients who were admitted to a university clinic between 2004 and 2008 because of CT-verified AO type A3 fractures (T11-L2), age 18 to 65 years Patients with neurological compromise, osteoporosis, or malignancy were not included. The cost parameter defined primary and secondary health-care use (2010 &OV0556;) and the effect parameter was based on three alternative measures of pain medication: morphine milligram and defined daily doses (DDD) of narcotic and nonnarcotic analgesics. For cost-effectiveness analysis, we employed a difference-in-difference approach, including control for treatment selection (age, sex, and fracture type). Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to estimate conventional 95% confidence intervals of mean estimates.Results: When taking into consideration all health-care consumption, surgical management was observed to cost an additional &OV0556;10,734 (4215; 15,144) as compared with conservative management. The differences on morphine at 527(-3031; 6,016) milligram, narcotic analgesics at -8(-176; 127) DDD, and nonnarcotic analgesics at -3(-72; 58) DDD were all insignificant The probability for surgery being cost-effective did not exceed 50% for any value of willingness to pay for effect.Conclusion: Surgical management does not seem to be a cost-effective strategy as compared with conservative management for traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurological deficits. In addition, higher-volume studies examining the clinical effect of alternative management strategies would be valuable.Level Of Evidence: 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]