Direct medical costs after surgical or nonsurgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal disease: A nationwide matched cohort study with a 10-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: The demand for treating degenerative lumbar spinal disease has been increasing, leading to increased utilization of medical resources. Thus, we need to understand how the budget of insurance is currently used. The objective of the present study is to overview the utilization of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) by providing the direct insured cost between patients receiving surgery and patients receiving nonsurgical treatment for degenerative lumbar disease. METHODS: The NHIS-National Sample Cohort was utilized to select patients with lumbar disc herniation, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis or spondylolysis. A matched cohort study design was used to show direct medical costs of surgery (n = 2,698) and nonsurgical (n = 2,698) cohorts. Non-surgical treatment included medication, physiotherapy, injection, and chiropractic. The monthly costs of the surgery cohort and nonsurgical cohort were presented at initial treatment, posttreatment 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months and yearly thereafter for 10 years. RESULTS: The characteristics and matching factors were well-balanced between the matched cohorts. Overall, surgery cohort spent $50.84/patient/month, while the nonsurgical cohort spent $29.34/patient/month (p<0.01). Initially, surgery treatment led to more charge to NHIS ($2,762) than nonsurgical treatment ($180.4) (p<0.01). Compared with the non-surgical cohort, the surgery cohort charged $33/month more for the first 3 months, charged less at 12 months, and charged approximately the same over the course of 10 years. CONCLUSION: Surgical treatment initially led to more government reimbursement than nonsurgical treatment, but the charges during follow-up period were not different. The results of the present study should be interpreted in light of the costs of medical services, indirect costs, societal cost, quality of life and societal willingness to pay in each country. The monetary figures are implied to be actual economic costs but those in the reimbursement system instead reflect reimbursement charges from the government.

Single-Stage Versus Multistage Surgical Management of Single- and Two-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To determine postoperative complications and quality outcomes of single-stage and multistage surgical management for lumbar degenerative disease (LDD). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study using a national administrative database identified patients who underwent surgery for LDD between 2007 and 2016. Patients were stratified based on whether their surgeon chose to perform single-stage or multistage LDD surgery, and these cohorts were mutually exclusive. Propensity score matching was used to mitigate intergroup differences between single-stage and multistage patients. Patients who underwent ≥3 levels of surgical correction, who were <18 years old, or who had any prior history of trauma or tumor were excluded from the study. Baseline comorbidities, postoperative complication rates, and reoperation rates were determined. RESULTS: Primary surgery for LDD was performed in 47,190 patients; 9438 (20%) of these patients underwent multistage surgery. After propensity score matching, baseline covariates of the 2 cohorts were similar. The complication rate was 6.1% in the single-stage cohort and 11.0% in the multistage cohort. Rates of posthemorrhagic anemia, infection, wound complication, deep vein thrombosis, and hematoma all were higher in the multistage cohort. Length of stay, revisions, and readmissions were also significantly higher in the multistage cohort. Through 2 years of follow-up, multistage surgery was associated with higher payments throughout the 2-year follow-up period ($57,036 vs. $39,318, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Single-stage surgery for LDD demonstrated improved outcomes and lower health care utilization. Spine surgeons should carefully consider single-stage surgery when treating patients with LDD requiring <3 levels of correction.

Is the current insurance structure leading to seasonality in demand for spinal surgery? A quarterly, yearly, and insurance based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Elective lumbar fusion is a commonly employed procedure for degenerative lumbar spine disease. With healthcare costs rising reimbursement for procedures may be restricted by payers. Additionally, patients may undergo elective fusion once deductibles are covered, typically in the fourth quarter in a given year. The objective of this study was to analyze the trends in utilization for posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) earlier in the year (Q1-Q3) as compared to the end of the year(Q4). Variations in this proposed trend by insurance type were also studied as a primary outcome. METHODS: We queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2014 for patients diagnosed with lumbar disc degenerative disease (DDD). Outcomes of interest included utilization and frequency of PLF. RESULTS: 221,466 patients hospitalized with Lumbar DDD between 2012 and 2014 were identified. Of these, 67,343(30.4 %) underwent a PLF procedure. The likelihood of lumbar fusion in patients hospitalized with DDD was significantly higher in the 4th quarter, compared to 1st quarter (OR1.13, p < 0.001). Marginal effect analysis indicated that Medicare patients were 1.0 % more likely to undergo PLF in quarter 4 compared to quarters 1-3 (p = 0.003), while privately insured patients were 2.5 % more likely to undergo PLF in quarter 4 compared to quarters 1-3(p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These results indicate that utilization of PLF is higher at the end of the year relative to the beginning, especially for patients with private insurance. This may be due to deductibles that have previously been paid off, lowering out-of-pocket expenses.

Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy Versus Open Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To give a systematic overview of effectiveness of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) compared with open microdiscectomy (OM) in the treatment of lumbar disk herniation (LDH). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The current standard procedure for the treatment of sciatica caused by LDH, is OM. PTED is an alternative surgical technique which is thought to be less invasive. It is unclear if PTED has comparable outcomes compared with OM. METHODS: Multiple online databases were systematically searched up to April 2020 for randomized controlled trials and prospective studies comparing PTED with OM for LDH. Primary outcomes were leg pain and functional status. Pooled effect estimates were calculated for the primary outcomes only and presented as standard mean differences (SMD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) at short (1-day postoperative), intermediate (3-6 months), and long-term (12 months). RESULTS: We identified 2276 citations, of which eventually 14 studies were included. There was substantial heterogeneity in effects on leg pain at short term. There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in leg pain at intermediate (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.10-0.21) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.30-0.53). Only one study measured functional status at short-term and reported no differences. There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in functional status at intermediate (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.24-0.07) and long-term (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.45-0.24). CONCLUSION: There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in leg pain or functional status at intermediate and long-term follow-up between PTED and OM in the treatment of LDH. High quality, robust studies reporting on clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness on the long term are lacking.Level of Evidence: 2.

Greater Socioeconomic Disadvantage Is Associated with Worse Symptom Severity at Initial Presentation in Patients Seeking Care for Lumbar Disc Herniation.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of patient socioeconomic disadvantage, insurance type, and other characteristics on presenting symptom severity in patients with isolated lumbar disc herniation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Little is known of the impact of socioeconomic disadvantage and other patient characteristics on the level of self-reported symptom severity when patients first seek care for lumbar disc herniation. METHODS: Between April 2015 and December 2018, 734 patients newly presenting for isolated lumbar disc herniation who completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression Computer Adaptive Tests (CATs) were identified. Socioeconomic disadvantage was determined using the Area Deprivation Index, a validated measure of socioeconomic disadvantage at the census block group level (0-100, 100 = highest socioeconomic disadvantage). Bivariate analyses were used. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine if there was an association between socioeconomic disadvantage, insurance type, and other patient factors and presenting patient-reported health status. RESULTS: Significant differences in age, insurance type, self-reported race, marital status, and county of residence were appreciated when comparing patient characteristics by socioeconomic disadvantage levels (all comparisons, P < 0.01). In addition, significant differences in age, insurance type, marital status, and county of residence were appreciated when comparing patient characteristics by self-reported race (all comparisons, P < 0.01). Being in the most socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort was associated with worse presenting Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores (Physical Function: ß = -3.27 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.89 to -1.45), P < 0.001; Pain Interference: ß = 3.20 (95% CI: 1.58-4.83), P < 0.001; Depression: ß = 3.31 (95% CI: 1.08-5.55), P = 0.004. CONCLUSION: The most socioeconomically disadvantaged patients with symptomatic lumbar disc herniations present with worse functional limitations, pain levels, and depressive symptoms as compared to patients from the least socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort when accounting for other key patient factors.Level of Evidence: 3.

Factors Associated With Progression to Surgical Intervention for Lumbar Disc Herniation in the Military Health System.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To determine surgery-free survival of patients receiving conservative management of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in the military healthcare system (MHS) and risk factors for surgical intervention. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Radiculopathy from LDH is a major cause of morbidity and cost. METHODS: The Military Data Repository was queried for all patients diagnosed with LDH from FY2011-2018; the earliest such diagnosis in a military treatment facility (MTF) was kept for each patient as the initial diagnosis. Follow-up time to surgical intervention was defined as the time from diagnosis to first encounter for lumbar microdiscectomy or lumbar decompression in either a MTF or in the civilian sector. The Military Data Repository was also queried for history of tobacco use at any time during MHS care, age at the time of diagnosis, sex, MHS beneficiary category, and diagnosing facility characteristics. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the associations of patient and diagnosing facility characteristics with time to surgical intervention. RESULTS: A total of 84,985 MHS beneficiaries including 62,771 active duty service members were diagnosed with LDH in a MTF during the 8-year study period. A total of 10,532 (12.4%) MHS beneficiaries, including 7650 (10.9%) active duty, failed conservative management onto surgical intervention with lumbar microdiscectomy or lumbar decompression. Median follow-up time of the cohort was 5.2 (interquartile range 2.6, 7.5) years. Among all healthcare beneficiaries, several patient-level (younger age, male sex, and history of tobacco use) and facility-level characteristics (hospital vs. clinic and surgical care vs. primary care clinic) were independently associated with higher risk of surgical intervention. CONCLUSION: LDH compromises military readiness and negatively impacts healthcare costs. MHS beneficiaries with LDH have a good prognosis with approximately 88% of patients successfully completing conservative management. However, strategies to improve outcomes of conservative management in LDH should address risks associated with both patient and facility characteristics.Level of Evidence: 4.

Preliminary Findings After Nonoperative Management of Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury on a Background of Degenerative Disc Disease: Providing Optimum Patient Care and Costs Saving in a Nigerian Setting.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the hypothesis that nonoperative management would be a viable treatment option for patients with underlying degenerative disease who have traumatic cervical spinal cord injury (TCSI) without neurological deterioration and/or spinal instability during hospitalization. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from 2011 to 2016. All the patients had been treated nonoperatively with hard cervical collar immobilization. The clinical parameters assessed included the Frankel grade at presentation and discharge, the occurrence of deep vein thrombosis, urinary tract infection, sphincter dysfunction, and pressure sores. The radiographic data collected included magnetic resonance imaging signal cord changes. P ≤ 0.05 represented a significant association between the Frankel grade at presentation and the outcome parameters. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients were included in the present study. Of the patients who had presented with Frankel grade B, 85.71% had improved to a higher grade, 90.91% of the patients with Frankel grade C had improved to a higher grade, and 14.29% of the patients with Frankel grade D had improved to Frankel grade E. All the patients had satisfactory spinal stability, as evidenced by dynamic radiographs, after treatment. CONCLUSION: The findings from the present study have shown that nonoperative management can result in improved neurological outcomes for patients with underlying degenerative disease who have experienced TCSI without evidence of neurological deterioration and spinal instability. The Frankel grade at presentation was significantly associated with outcome parameters such as the neurological outcome on discharge and the occurrence of urinary tract infection. The results from the present study could be helpful to neurological surgeons in rural and other low-resource settings because the cost savings realized by nonoperative treatment will not sacrifice the provision of adequate care to their patients.

Financial Aspects of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review of Recent Literature.

Recently, there has been significant interest in understanding the cost-effectiveness of treatments in spine surgery as health care systems in the United States move toward value-based care and alternative payment models. Previous studies have shown comparable outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy fusion; however, there is a lack of consensus on the cost-effectiveness of CDA to support full adoption. Evidence of the limitations of these cost-analysis studies also exists in the literature, including industry funding, potential selection bias, and varying methods of calculating value. The goal of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the cost-effectiveness of CDA compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, and potential limitations with cost-analysis studies in spine surgery.

Preoperative and Postoperative Spending Among Working-Age Adults Undergoing Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the health care resource utilization and the associated 6 months preoperative and 6 months postoperative spending among patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a private insurance claims database for patients who underwent single-level posterior spinal fusion from January 2011 to December 2015. Outpatient health services, prescription pain medications, and inpatient admissions were assessed. RESULTS: Among 25,401 patients (mean age, 52 years; 58% female) in the final cohort, median spending during the period from 6 months before surgery to 6 months after surgery was $60,714 (interquartile range [IQR], $46,961-$79,892)/patient. Preoperative spending accounted for 7% ($121 million) of the total costs, and postoperative spending accounted for 8% ($135 million). Median preoperative spending was $3566 (IQR, $2144-$5857) per patient, with imaging accounting for the highest proportion (33%) of preoperative spending. In the 6 months period preceding surgery, 46% patients received injections and 47% received physical therapy. The median postoperative spending was $1954/patient (IQR, $735-$4416). Total postoperative spending was significantly higher among those not discharged home (median, $7525; IQR, $6779-$19,602) compared with those discharged home (median, $1617/patient; IQR, $648-$4033) and home with home care services (median, $2921; IQR, $1406-$5662) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned readmission after posterior spinal fusion was the highest contributor to postoperative spending and the second highest contributor to overall costs. Understanding factors that contribute to the costs in the preoperative and postoperative period in patients undergoing single-level posterior lumbar fusion for degenerative pathology is essential to identify targets for cost containment.

Costs Associated With a 90-Day Episode of Care After Single-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

BACKGROUND: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a commonly performed surgical procedure for the management of degenerative lumbar spine pathologic entities. Despite an increasing number of ALIFs performed nationally, to the best of our knowledge, no study has evaluated the costs associated with the 90-day episode of care postoperatively. METHODS: The 2007-2016 Humana Administrative Claims data set, a national database of commercial and Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries, was queried using Current Procedural Terminology code 22558 for patients who had undergone single-level ALIF. The 90-day costs were defined using the following categories: facility, surgeon, anesthesia, other hospitalization costs and services, radiology, office visits, physical therapy/rehabilitation, emergency department visits, and readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 365 ALIF procedures (MA, n = 244; commercial, n = 121) were included in the analysis. The average 90-day cost of single-level ALIF was $25,568 and $51,741 for the MA and commercial enrollees, respectively. The major proportion of 90-day costs was attributable to facility reimbursement (74%-76%), followed by surgeon costs (9%-11%). Postacute care (i.e., office visits and physical therapy/rehabilitation) was not a major driver of the 90-day costs, consisting of only 0.7%-1.3% of the total 90-day reimbursement. Of patients who had required readmission, the costs of the readmission increased the average 90-day costs by 65%-66%. CONCLUSIONS: Facility costs were the major drivers of a stipulated 90-day reimbursement for patients undergoing single-level ALIF. Health policy makers and providers can use these data to better understand the distribution of costs in a stipulated bundled-payment model for ALIFs and allow them to identify areas in which cost reduction strategies can be performed.

The Influence of Depression on Health Care Expenditures Among Adults with Spondylosis, Intervertebral Disc Disorders, and Other Back Problems in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Back pain is a very prevalent complaint, affecting two-thirds of the US population, and it accounts for $100 billion annually in health care expenditures. The occurrence of depression has been reported in existing literature among patients with back pain, but there is limited information regarding health care expenditures among patients with back pain and concurrent depression. OBJECTIVE: To assess excess total and subtypes of health care expenditures among adults with spondylosis, intervertebral disc disorders, and other back problems who reported having depression compared with those without depression in the United States. METHODS: We utilized a cross-sectional design, pooling Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data from 2010-2012. The eligible study sample included adults (age ≥18 years) who reported positive health care expenditure. Total and subtypes of health care expenditures constituted the dependent variable. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions on logged expenditures were performed. Four models were developed to assess influence of demographics, functional ability, and concurrent diagnoses on health care expenditures. RESULTS: A total of 6,739 adults with spondylosis, intervertebral disc disorders, and other back problems were assessed, 20.2% (N = 1,316) of whom had concurrent depression. Adults with concurrent depression had significantly higher total health care expenditures ($13,153) compared with the nondepression group ($7,477, P < 0.001). Outpatient and prescription expenditures showed similar findings. After adjusting for demographics, functional disabilities, and comorbidities, excess cost remained higher in the group reporting concurrent depression (46%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the presence of depression in adults with spondylosis, intervertebral disc disorders, and other back problems is associated with greater economic burden. These findings remained consistent after adjusting for all independent sets of variables. The study's findings suggest that interventions resulting in better management of depression have the potential to significantly reduce the economic burden in this population.

Regional Differences in the Cost and Utilization of Nonoperative Management Within 3 Months Prior to Lumbar Microdiscectomy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the regional variations in the use of nonoperative therapies in patients diagnosed with a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation 3 months prior to undergoing microdiscectomy surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Regional variations in the management of chronic pain conditions have been previously identified. Patients suffering from a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation are typically treated with a brief course of conservative management prior to attempting microdiscectomy surgery. Whether regional differences exist in the utilization or costs of maximum nonoperative therapy (MNT) remains unknown. METHODS: Medical records from patients diagnosed with a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation undergoing 1, 2, or 3-level index microdiscectomy operations between 2007 and 2017 were gathered from the HORTHO insurance database consisting of private/commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Patient regional designation was divided into Midwest, Northeast, South, and West territories and was derived from the insurance claim location. The utilization of MNT within 3 months after initial lumbar herniation diagnosis in adult patients was analyzed. RESULTS: Our population consisted of 13,106 patients who underwent primary index microdiscectomy surgery. Significant regional variation was identified in the nonoperative therapy failure rate (P<0.0001), with the highest proportion of Midwest patients failing (2.7%). There were statistical differences in the regional distribution of patients utilizing NSAIDs (P<0.0001), muscle relaxants (P <0.0001), lumbar epidural steroid injections (P <0.0001), physical therapy and occupational therapy sessions (P <0.0001), chiropractor treatments (P <0.0001), and emergency department services (P = 0.0049). The total direct cost associated with all MNT prior to microdiscectomy was $13,205,924, with 59.6% from the South, 31.1% from the Midwest, 8.3% from the West, and 1.1% from the Northeast. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that regional differences exist in the utilization and costs of MNT of a lumbar intervertebral herniated disc prior to microdiscectomy surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Physiotherapy after anterior cervical spine surgery for cervical disc disease: study protocol of a prospective randomised study to compare internet-based neck-specific exercise with prescribed physical activity.

INTRODUCTION: Patients suffering from remaining disability after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) surgery for cervical disc disease may be prescribed physical activity (PPA) or neck-specific exercises (NSEs). Currently, we lack data for the success of either approach. There is also a knowledge gap concerning the use of internet-based care for cervical disc disease. The scarcity of these data, and the high proportion of patients with various degrees of incapacity following ACDF, warrant increased efforts to investigate and improve cost-effective rehabilitation. The objective is to compare the effectiveness of a structured, internet-based NSE programme, versus PPA following ACDF surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective, randomised, multicentre study that includes 140 patients with remaining disability (≥30% on the Neck Disability Index, NDI) following ACDF for radiculopathy due to cervical disc disease. Patient recruitment occurs following attendance at routine clinical appointments, scheduled at 3 months postsurgery. Patients are then randomised to one of two groups (70 patients/group) for a 3-month treatment programme/period of either internet-based NSE or PPA. Questionnaires on background data, pain and discomfort, physical and mental capacity, satisfaction with care, and health and workplace factors are completed, along with physical measures of neck-related function conducted by independent test leaders blinded to randomisation. Measures are collected at inclusion, after the 3-month treatments (end of treatment) and at a 2-year follow-up. Radiography will be completed at the 2-year follow-up. Preoperative data will be collected from the Swedish Spine Registry. Data on healthcare consumption, drug use and sick leave will be requested from the relevant national registers. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: This study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Linköping Ref. 2016/283-31 and 2017/91- 32. The scientists are independent with no commercial ties. Patients are recruited after providing written informed consent. Patient data are presented at group level such that no connection to any individual can be made. All data are anonymised when reported, and subject to the Swedish Official Secrets Health Acts. The test leaders are independent and blinded for randomisation. Exercises, both general and neck-specific, have been used extensively in clinical practice and we anticipate no harm from their implementation other than a risk of muscle soreness. Both randomisation groups will receive care that is expected to relieve pain, although the group receiving NSE is expected to demonstrate a greater and more cost-effective improvement versu s the PPA group. Any significant harm or unintended effects in each group will be collected by the test leaders. All questionnaires and test materials are coded by the research group, with code lists stored in locked, fireproof file cabinets, housed at the university in a room with controlled (card-based) access. Only individuals in receipt of a unique website address posted by the researchers can access the programme; patients can neither communicate with each other nor with caregivers via the programme.Study participation might lead to improved rehabilitation versus non-participation, and might therefore be of benefit. The results of this study should also contribute to more effective and flexible rehabilitation, shorter waiting times, lower costs and the possibility to implement our findings on a wider level. DISSEMINATION: If effective, the protocols used in this study can be implemented in existing healthcare structures. The results of the study will be presented in scientific journals and popular science magazines of relevance to health. The findings will also be presented at local, regional, national and international conferences and meetings, as well as in the education of university students and at public lectures. Information about the results will be communicated to the general population in cooperation with patient organisations and the media. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03036007.

Cost-effectiveness of a Bone-anchored Annular Closure Device Versus Conventional Lumbar Discectomy in Treating Lumbar Disc Herniations.

STUDY DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis of an annular closure device (ACD) based on data from a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) OBJECTIVE.: The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of a novel ACD in a patient population at high risk for recurrent herniation following discectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar disc herniation patients with annular defect widths ≥6 mm are at high risk for recurrent herniation following limited discectomy. Recurrent herniation is associated with worse clinical outcomes and greater healthcare costs. A novel ACD may reduce the incidence of recurrent herniation and the associated burdens. METHODS: A decision analytical modeling approach with a Markov method was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the ACD versus conventional discectomy. Health states were created by projecting visual analogue scale (VAS) onto Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Direct costs were calculated based on Humana and Medicare 2014 claims to represent private and public payer data, respectively. Indirect costs were calculated for lost work days using 2016 US average annual wages. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was compared to willingness-to-pay thresholds. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Patients with the ACD had less symptomatic reherniations, reoperations, and complications and gained 0.0328 QALYs within the first 2 years. Total direct medical costs for the ACD group were similar to control. When productivity loss was considered, using the ACD became $2076 cheaper, per patient, than conventional discectomy. Based on direct costs alone, the ICER comparing ACD to control equaled $6030 per QALY. When indirect costs are included, the ICER became negative, which indicates that superior quality of life was attained at less cost. CONCLUSION: For lumbar disc herniations patients with annular defects ≥6 mm, the ACD was, at 2 years, a highly cost-effective surgical modality compared to conventional lumbar discectomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Drivers of Variability in 90-Day Cost for Elective Laminectomy and Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease.

BACKGROUND: Considerable variability exists in the cost of surgery following spine surgery for common degenerative spine diseases. This variation in the cost of surgery can affect the payment bundling during the postoperative 90 d. OBJECTIVE: To determine the drivers of variability in total 90-d cost for laminectomy and fusion surgery. METHODS: A total of 752 patients who underwent elective laminectomy and fusion for degenerative lumbar conditions and were enrolled into a prospective longitudinal registry were included in the study. Total cost during the 90-d global period was derived as sum of cost of surgery, cost associated with postdischarge utilization. Multivariable regression models were built for total 90-d cost. RESULTS: The mean 90-d direct cost was $29 295 (range, $28 612-$29 973). Based on our regression tree analysis, the following variables were found to drive the 90-d cost: age, BMI, gender, diagnosis, postop imaging, number of operated levels, ASA grade, hypertension, arthritis, preop and postop opioid use, length of hospital stay, duration of surgery, 90-d readmission, outpatient physical/occupational therapy, inpatient rehab, postop healthcare visits, postop nonopioid pain medication use nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAIDs), and muscle relaxant use. The R2 for tree model was 0.64. CONCLUSION: Utilizing prospectively collected data, we demonstrate that considerable variation exists in total 90-d cost, nearly 70% of which can be explained by those factors included in our modeling. Risk-adjusted payment schemes can be crafted utilizing the significant drivers presented here. Focused interventions to target some of the modifiable factors have potential to reduce cost and increase the value of care.

Analysis of Cost and 30-Day Outcomes in Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Less Invasive, Stand-Alone Lateral Transpsoas Interbody Fusion.

BACKGROUND: A comparative evaluation of operative costs between single-level transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) and stand-alone lateral transpsoas interbody fusion (LIF) has not yet been done. We analyzed the costs, operative parameters, and early outcomes of single-level stand-alone LIF versus single-level TLIF. METHODS: Ten patients who underwent single-level TLIF and 10 patients who underwent single-level stand-alone LIF were included in the analysis. Total, variable, and fixed costs from perioperative data were available from a single institution. In addition, patient demographics, length of hospital stay, and 30-day outcomes and readmission rates were reviewed. RESULTS: Total cost, variable cost, and fixed costs were significantly lower in the LIF group, and there was no difference in outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Single-level stand-alone LIF may prove to be more cost-effective and provide cost savings with analogous 30-day outcomes compared with single-level TLIF procedures.

Stand-alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody, Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody, and Anterior/Posterior Fusion: Analysis of Fusion Outcomes and Costs.

Fusion outcomes and costs of stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in association with posterior fusion, and anterior/posterior (A/P) fusion were compared using clinical, radiographic, and billing data. Adult patients with symptomatic 1- or 2-level degenerative disk disease in isolation or in association with a grade 1 or 2 degenerative or lytic spondylolisthesis and canal and/or foraminal stenosis who underwent elective stand-alone ALIF, TLIF, or A/P fusion were compared. The analysis focused primarily on fusion rates and costs and secondarily on radiographic and clinical parameters. One hundred six patients at least 2 years beyond surgery (ALIF, 53; TLIF, 17; A/P fusion, 36) were reviewed. Demographics were similar except for age, with the ALIF group being younger (mean, 37.8 years) than the other groups (TLIF, 53.1 years; A/P fusion, 48.2 years). There were no differences between the groups in fusion rates or outcomes as assessed by the Numeric Rating Scale. Compared with the other 2 groups, the ALIF group had a significantly shorter operative time, less blood loss, and a shorter stay (P<.0001). Evaluation of radiographic parameters revealed significant differences regarding disk angle (P<.001), disk height (P<.0001), and pelvic tilt (P=.001) favoring ALIF and A/P fusion over TLIF. Stand-alone ALIF should be considered in the management of patients with 1- or 2-level lumbar degenerative disk disease for which the pathology can be addressed adequately via this approach. [Orthopedics. 2018; 41(5):e655-e662.].

Fusion Techniques Are Related to a Lower Risk of Reoperation in Lumbar Disc Herniation: A 5-Year Observation Study of a Nationwide Cohort in Taiwan.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common spinal problem, with reoperation rates of 6%-24%. Although different surgical techniques are used for treatment, there is still debate regarding whether fusion techniques can reduce the reoperation rate in patients with LDH. METHODS: This retrospective study used a 5-year nationwide database to analyze reoperation rates in Taiwan. Patient age groups (≥20 and <90 years) treated by index surgery and reoperation for LDH were identified. Four surgical procedures were included in the analysis: discectomy (DC), anterior lumbar fusion with DC (FA + DC), posterior lumbar fusion (FP), and posterior lumbar fusion with DC (FP + DC). RESULTS: There were 1743 index surgeries between 2008 and 2012, with 184 (10.56%) reoperations. Index surgery DC had the highest reoperation rate (n = 121, 20%). The reoperation risk was significantly lower for patients undergoing fusion procedures (FA + DC vs. DC [hazard ratio (HR), 0.24; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.12-0.47; P < 0.01], FP versus DC [HR, 0.17; 95% C, 0.09-0.33; P <0.01], FP + DC versus DC [HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.22-0.44; P < 0.01]). Fusion procedures had significantly higher treatment costs compared with DC (FA + DC vs. FP vs. FP + DC vs. DC: 5851.74 ± 4808.94 vs. 5116.88 ± 3428.97 vs. 4782.16 ± 2902.19 vs. 3846.79 ± 3584.45 U.S. dollars/patient, respectively; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Among surgical procedures for LDH, fusion techniques are related to lower reoperation rates compared with discectomy, but at the expense of higher medical costs.

Drivers of Variability in 90-day Cost for Primary Single-level Microdiscectomy.

BACKGROUND: The healthcare reimbursement models are rapidly transitioning to pay-per-performance episode of care payment models. These models, if designed well, must account for the variability in the cost of index surgeries during the global period. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the variability in 90-d cost and determine the drivers of the variability in total 90-d cost associated with single-level microdiscectomy. METHODS: A total of 203 patients undergoing primary microdiscectomy for degenerative lumbar conditions were included in the study. The total 90-d cost was derived as the sum of cost of surgery, cost associated with postdischarge utilization. A multivariable linear regression model for total 90-d cost was built. RESULTS: The mean total cost within 90-d after single-level primary microdiscectomy was $7962 ± $2092. In a multivariable linear regression model, obesity, history of myocardial infarction, factors that lengthen the time of surgery and hospital stay, complications and readmission within 90-d, postdischarge healthcare utilization including emergency room visits, time to opioid independence, number of days on nonopioid pain medications, diagnostic imaging, and the number of days in outpatient and inpatient rehabilitation contribute to the total 90-d cost. The model performance as measured by R2 is 0.76. CONCLUSION: Utilizing prospectively collected data, we highlight major drivers of variation in cost following a single-level primary microdiscectomy. Our model explains about three-quarters of the variation in cost. The risk-adjusted cost estimates powered by models such as the one presented here can be used to formulate a sustainable total 90-d episode of care bundle payment.

Drivers of Variability in 90-Day Cost for Elective Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Degenerative Disease.

BACKGROUND: Value-based episode of care reimbursement models is being investigated to curb unsustainable health care costs. Any variation in the cost of index spine surgery can affect the payment bundling during the 90-d global period. OBJECTIVE: To determine the drivers of variability in cost for patients undergoing elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical spine disease. METHODS: Four hundred forty-five patients undergoing elective ACDF for cervical spine degenerative diagnoses were included in the study. The direct 90-d cost was derived as sum of cost of surgery, cost associated with postdischarge utilization. Multiple variable linear regression models were built for total 90-d cost. RESULTS: The mean 90-d direct cost was $17685 ± $5731. In a multiple variable linear regression model, the length of surgery, number of levels involved, length of hospital stay, preoperative history of anticoagulation medication, health-care resource utilization including number of imaging, any complications and readmission encounter were the significant contributor to the 90-d cost. The model performance as measured by R2 was 0.616. CONCLUSION: There was considerable variation in total 90-d cost for elective ACDF surgery. Our model can explain about 62% of these variations in 90-d cost. The episode of care reimbursement models needs to take into account these variations and be inclusive of the factors that drive the variation in cost to develop a sustainable payment model. The generalized applicability should take in to account the differences in patient population, surgeons' and institution-specific differences.