Search

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs), morbidity, and costs of TLIF vs PLF to determine whether one treatment was superior in the setting of single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis.Methods: Patients undergoing TLIF or PLF for single-level spondylolisthesis were included for retrospective analysis. EQ-5D, ODI, SF-12 MCS/PCS, NRS-BP/LP scores were collected at baseline and 24 months after surgery. 90-day post-operative complications, revision surgery rates, and satisfaction scores were also collected. Two-year resource use was multiplied by unit costs based on Medicare payment amounts (direct cost). Patient and caregiver workday losses were multiplied by the self-reported gross-of-tax wage rate (indirect cost). Total cost was used to assess mean total 2-year cost per QALYs gained after surgery.Results: 62 and 37 patients underwent TLIF and PLF, respectively. Patients in the PLF group were older (p < 0.01). No significant differences were seen in baseline or 24-month PROs between the two groups. There was a significant improvement in all PROs from baseline to 24 months after surgery (p < 0.001). Both groups had similar rates of 90-day complications, revision surgery, satisfaction, and similar gain in QALYs and cost per QALYs gained. There was no significant difference in 24-month direct, indirect, and total cost.Conclusions: Overall costs and health care utilization were similar in both the groups. Both TLIF and PLF for single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis provide improvement in disability, pain, quality of life, and general health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: With growing older population and increasing rates of cervical spinal surgery, it is vital to understand the value of cervical surgery in this population. We set forth to determine the cost utility following anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative disease in older patients.Methods: Patients undergoing ACDF for degenerative diseases were enrolled into prospective longitudinal registry. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded at baseline, 1-year, and 2-year postoperatively. Two-year medical resource utilization, missed work, and health-state values [quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] were assessed to compute cost per QALY gained. Patients were dichotomized based on age: <65 years (younger) and ≥65 years (older) to compare the cost utility in these age groups.Results: Total 218 (87%) younger patients and 33 (13%) older patients who underwent ACDF were analyzed. Both the groups demonstrated a significant improvement in PROs 2-year following surgery. The older patients had a lower mean cumulative gain in QALYs compared to younger patients at 1 year (0.141 vs. 0.28, P = 0.05) and 2 years (0.211 vs. 0.424, P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the mean total 2-year cost between older [$21,041 (95% CI $18,466-$23,616)] and younger [$22,669 (95% CI $$21,259-$24,079)] patients (P = 0.27). Two-year cost per QALY gained in older vs. younger patients was ($99,720/QALYs gained vs. ($53,464/QALYs gained, P = 0.68).Conclusion: ACDF surgery provided a significant gain in health-state utility in older patients with degenerative cervical pathology, with a mean cumulative 2-year cost per QALY gained of $99,720/QALY. While older patients have a slightly higher cost utility compared to their younger counterparts, surgery in the older cohort does provide a significant improvement in pain, disability, and quality-of-life outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Diabetes has been associated with poor outcomes following elective spine surgery. The purpose of our study was to determine if diabetes predicts worse patient-reported outcomes at two years postoperatively and to evaluate the effect of perioperative blood glucose levels and control on patient-reported outcomes in patients with diabetes.Methods: One thousand and five patients undergoing elective spine surgery were included in this prospective cohort study. The presence of diabetes and baseline and one and two-year patient-reported outcomes (Short Form-12 [SF-12], EuroQol-5D [EQ-5D], Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] or Neck Disability Index [NDI], and Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] pain scores) were recorded. The mean blood glucose measurements in patients with diabetes were collected during the postoperative period. Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to determine predictors of one and two-year outcomes as well as the relationship between perioperative blood glucose and patient-reported outcomes in patients with diabetes.Results: Four hundred and thirty-four patients (43%) had diabetes. When compared with patients without diabetes at two years, patients with diabetes had lower SF-12 Physical Component Summary scores (34.4 points for the diabetic group compared with 38.6 points for the non-diabetic group), lower EQ-5D scores (0.67 for the diabetic group compared with 0.74 for the non-diabetic group), higher ODI or NDI scores (32.1 points for the diabetic group compared with 26.8 points for the non-diabetic group), and higher NRS scores (5.1 points for the diabetic group compared with 4.3 points for the non-diabetic group) (p < 0.05 for all). Although patients with diabetes improved significantly over time, they did not improve to the extent that patients without diabetes did in the ODI or NDI and EQ-5D scores (p < 0.05). Diabetes and preoperative opioid use were independent predictors of decreased SF-12 scores, decreased EQ-5D scores, increased ODI or NDI scores, and increased NRS scores (p < 0.05). Diabetes was associated with increased ODI or NDI (by 6.6 points) and decreased EQ-5D (by 0.1) at two years. Perioperative blood glucose control did not predict outcomes at either one or two years in patients with diabetes.Conclusions: Diabetes was associated with worse patient-reported outcomes when patients with diabetes were compared with patients without diabetes at two years following elective spine surgery. Although patients with diabetes improved when compared from baseline to the time following elective spine surgery, they did not improve to the same extent as patients without diabetes in the ODI or NDI and EQ-5D scores. Providers may use this information to counsel patients with diabetes on expectations following spine surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: This study retrospectively analyzes prospectively collected data.Objective: Here we aim to develop predictive models for 3-month medical and surgical readmission after elective lumbar surgery, based on a multi-institutional, national spine registry.Summary Of Background Data: Unplanned readmissions place considerable stress on payers, hospitals, and patients. Medicare data reveals a 30-day readmission rate of 7.8% for lumbar-decompressions and 13.0% for lumbar-fusions, and hospitals are now being penalized for excessive 30-day readmission rates by virtue of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.Methods: The Quality and Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing elective lumbar surgery for degenerative diseases. The QOD prospectively captures 3-month readmissions through electronic medical record (EMR) review and self-reported outcome questionnaires. Distinct multivariable logistic regression models were fitted for surgery-related and medical readmissions adjusting for patient and surgery-specific variables.Results: Of the total 33,674 patients included in this study 2079 (6.15%) reported at least one readmission during the 90-day postoperative period. The odds of medical readmission were significantly higher for older patients, males versus females, African Americans versus Caucasion, those with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, diabetes, coronary artery disease, higher numbers of involved levels, anterior only or anterior-posterior versus posterior approach; also, for patients who were unemployed compared with employed patients and those with high baseline Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The odds of surgery-related readmission were significantly greater for patients with a higher body mass index (BMI), a higher ASA grade, female versus male, and African Americans versus Caucasians; also, for patients with severe depression, more involved spinal levels, anterior-only surgical approaches and higher baseline ODI scores.Conclusion: In this study we present internally validated predictive models for medical and surgical readmission after elective lumbar spine surgery. These findings set the stage for targeted interventions with a potential to reduce unnecessary readmissions, and also suggest that medical and surgical readmissions be treated as distinct clinical events.Level Of Evidence: 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Meaningful quality measurement and public reporting have the potential to facilitate targeted outcome improvement, practice-based learning, shared decision making, and effective resource utilization. Recent developments in national quality reporting programs, such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Qualified Clinical Data Registry (QCDR) reporting option, have enhanced the ability of specialty groups to develop relevant quality measures of the care they deliver. QCDRs will complete the collection and submission of Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) quality measures data on behalf of individual eligible professionals. The National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database (N(2)QOD) offers 21 non-PQRS measures, initially focused on spine procedures, which are the first specialty-specific measures for neurosurgery. Securing QCDR status for N(2)QOD is a tremendously important accomplishment for our specialty. This program will ensure that data collected through our registries and used for PQRS is meaningful for neurosurgeons, related spine care practitioners, their patients, and other stakeholders. The 2015 N(2)QOD QCDR is further evidence of neurosurgery's commitment to substantively advancing the health care quality paradigm. The following manuscript outlines the measures now approved for use in the 2015 N(2)QOD QCDR. Measure specifications (measure type and descriptions, related measures, if any, as well as relevant National Quality Strategy domain[s]) along with rationale are provided for each measure.