Performance of Neurosurgeons Providing Safety-Net Care Under Medicare's Merit-Based Incentive Payment System.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Under the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), Medicare evaluates provider performance to determine payment adjustments. Studies examining the first year of MIPS (2017) showed that safety-net providers had lower MIPS scores, but the performance of safety-net physicians over time has not been studied. This study aimed to examine the performance of safety-net vs non-safety-net neurosurgeons in MIPS from 2017 to 2020. METHODS: Safety-net neurosurgeons were defined as being in the top quartile according to proportion of dual-eligible beneficiaries and non-safety-net in the bottom quartile. Outcomes were total MIPS scores and dual-eligible proportion over time. In this descriptive study, we evaluated ordinary least squares regression models with SEs clustered at the physician level. Covariates of interest included safety-net status, year, and average Hierarchical Condition Category risk score of beneficiaries. RESULTS: There were 2796-3322 physicians included each year between 2017 and 2020. Mean total MIPS scores were not significantly different for safety-net than non-safety-net physicians in 2017 but were greater for safety-net in 2018 (90.7 vs 84.5, P < .01), 2019 (86.4 vs 81.5, P < .01), and 2020 (90.9 vs 86.7, P < .01). Safety-net status (coefficient -9.11; 95% CI [-13.15, -5.07]; P < .01) and participation in MIPS as an individual (-9.89; [-12.66, -7.13]; P < .01) were associated with lower scores while year, the interaction between safety-net status and year, and participation in MIPS as a physician group or alternative payment model were associated with higher scores. Average Hierarchical Condition Category risk score of beneficiaries (-.011; [-.015, -.006]; P < .01) was associated with decreasing dual-eligible case mix, whereas average age of beneficiaries (.002; [.002, .003]; P < .01) was associated with increasing dual-eligible case mix. CONCLUSION: Being a safety-net physician was associated with lower MIPS scores, but safety-net neurosurgeons demonstrated greater improvement in MIPS scores than non-safety-net neurosurgeons over time. Providers with higher-risk patients were more likely to decrease their dual-eligible case mix over time.

The Impact of Neighborhood Socioeconomic Disadvantage on Operative Outcomes after Single-Level Lumbar Fusion.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between socioeconomic status and neurosurgical outcomes has been investigated with respect to insurance status or median household income, but few studies have considered more comprehensive measures of socioeconomic status. This study examines the relationship between Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a comprehensive measure of neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage, and short-term postoperative outcomes after lumbar fusion surgery. METHODS: 1861 adult patients undergoing single-level, posterior-only lumbar fusion at a single, multihospital academic medical center were retrospectively enrolled. An ADI matching protocol was used to identify each patient's 9-digit zip code and the zip code-associated ADI data. Primary outcomes included 30- and 90-day readmission, emergency department visits, reoperation, and surgical complication. Coarsened exact matching was used to match patients on key demographic and baseline characteristics known to independently affect neurosurgical outcomes. Odds ratios (ORs) were computed to compare patients in the top 10% of ADI versus lowest 40% of ADI. RESULTS: After matching (n = 212), patients in the highest 10% of ADI (compared to the lowest 40% of ADI) had significantly increased odds of 30- and 90-day readmission (OR = 5.00, P < 0.001 and OR = 4.50, P < 0.001), ED visits (OR = 3.00, P = 0.027 and OR = 2.88, P = 0.007), and reoperation (OR = 4.50, P = 0.039 and OR = 5.50, P = 0.013). There was no significant association with surgical complication (OR = 0.50, P = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Among otherwise similar patients, neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage (measured by ADI) was associated with worse short-term outcomes after single-level, posterior-only lumbar fusion. There was no significant association between ADI and surgical complications, suggesting that perioperative complications do not explain the socioeconomic disparities in outcomes.

Accumbens connectivity during deep-brain stimulation differentiates loss of control from physiologic behavioral states.

BACKGROUND: Loss of control (LOC) eating, the subjective sense that one cannot control what or how much one eats, characterizes binge-eating behaviors pervasive in obesity and related eating disorders. Closed-loop deep-brain stimulation (DBS) for binge eating should predict LOC and trigger an appropriately timed intervention. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: This study aimed to identify a sensitive and specific biomarker to detect LOC onset for DBS. We hypothesized that changes in phase-locking value (PLV) predict the onset of LOC-associated cravings and distinguish them from potential confounding states. METHODS: Using DBS data recorded from the nucleus accumbens (NAc) of two patients with binge eating disorder (BED) and severe obesity, we compared PLV between inter- and intra-hemispheric NAc subregions for three behavioral conditions: craving (associated with LOC eating), hunger (not associated with LOC), and sleep. RESULTS: In both patients, PLV in the high gamma frequency band was significantly higher for craving compared to sleep and significantly higher for hunger compared to craving. Maximum likelihood classifiers achieved accuracies above 88% when differentiating between the three conditions. CONCLUSIONS: High-frequency inter- and intra-hemispheric PLV in the NAc is a promising biomarker for closed-loop DBS that differentiates LOC-associated cravings from physiologic states such as hunger and sleep. Future trials should assess PLV as a LOC biomarker across a larger cohort and a wider patient population transdiagnostically.

Neurosurgeons Deliver Similar Quality Care Regardless of First Assistant Type: Resident Physician versus Nonphysician Surgical Assistant.

OBJECTIVE: There are limited data evaluating the outcomes of attending neurosurgeons with different types of first assistants. This study considers a common neurosurgical procedure (single-level, posterior-only lumbar fusion surgery) and examines whether attending surgeons deliver equal patient outcomes, regardless of the type of first assistant (resident physician vs. nonphysician surgical assistant [NPSA]), among otherwise exact-matched patients. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed 3395 adult patients undergoing single-level, posterior-only lumbar fusion at a single academic medical center. Primary outcomes included readmissions, emergency department visits, reoperation, and mortality within 30 and 90 days after surgery. Secondary outcome measures included discharge disposition, length of stay, and length of surgery. Coarsened exact matching was used to match patients on key demographics and baseline characteristics known to independently affect neurosurgical outcomes. RESULTS: Among exact-matched patients (n = 1402), there was no significant difference in adverse postsurgical events (readmission, emergency department visits, reoperation, or mortality) within 30 days or 90 days of the index operation between patients who had resident physicians and those who had NPSAs as first assistants. Patients who had resident physicians as first assistants demonstrated a longer length of stay (mean: 100.0 vs. 87.4 hours, P < 0.001) and a shorter duration of surgery (mean: 187.4 vs. 213.8 minutes, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the percentage of patients discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: For single-level posterior spinal fusion, in the setting described, there are no differences in short-term patient outcomes delivered by attending surgeons assisted by resident physicians versus NPSAs.