Does Body Mass Index Influence Intraoperative Costs and Operative Times for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion? A Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Spine surgeons are often unaware of drivers of cost variation for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). We used time-driven activity-based costing to assess the relationship between body mass index (BMI), total cost, and operating room (OR) times for ACDFs. METHODS: Total cost was divided into direct and indirect costs. Individual costs were obtained by direct observation, electronic medical records, and through querying multiple departments. Timestamps for all involved personnel and material resources were documented. Total intraoperative costs were estimated for all ACDFs from 2017 to 2022. All patients were categorized into distinct BMI-based cohorts. Linear regression models were performed to assess the relationship between BMI, total cost, and OR times. RESULTS: A total of 959 patients underwent ACDFs between 2017 and 2022. The average age and BMI were 58.1 ± 11.2 years and 30.2 ± 6.4 kg/m2, respectively. The average total intraoperative cost per case was $7120 ± $2963. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that BMI was not significantly associated with total cost (P = 0.36), supply cost (P = 0.39), or personnel cost (P = 0.20). Higher BMI was significantly associated with increased time spent in the OR (P = 0.018); however, it was not a significant factor for the duration of surgery itself (P = 0.755). Rather, higher BMI was significantly associated with nonoperative OR time (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Time-driven activity-based costing is a feasible and scalable methodology for understanding the true intraoperative costs of ACDF. Although higher BMI was not associated with increased total cost, it was associated with increased preparatory time in the OR.

Patient Out-of-Pocket Cost Burden With Elective Orthopaedic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for medical and surgical care can result in substantial financial burden for patients and families. Relatively little is known regarding OOP costs for commercially insured patients receiving orthopaedic surgery. The aim of this study is to analyze the trends in OOP costs for common, elective orthopaedic surgeries performed in the hospital inpatient setting. METHODS: This study used an employer-sponsored insurance claims database to analyze billing data of commercially insured patients who underwent elective orthopaedic surgery between 2014 and 2019. Patients who received single-level anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF), single-level posterior lumbar fusion (PLF), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) were identified. OOP costs associated with the surgical episode were calculated as the sum of deductible payments, copayments, and coinsurance. Monetary data were adjusted to 2019 dollars. General linear regression, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for analysis, as appropriate. RESULTS: In total, 10,225 ACDF, 28,841 PLF, 70,815 THA, and 108,940 TKA patients were analyzed. Most patients in our study sample had preferred provider organization insurance plans (ACDF 70.3%, PLF 66.9%, THA 66.2%, and TKA 67.0%). The mean OOP costs for patients, by procedure, were as follows: ACDF $3,180 (SD = 2,495), PLF $3,166 (SD = 2,529), THA $2,884 (SD = 2,100), and TKA $2,733 (SD = 1,994). Total OOP costs increased significantly from 2014 to 2019 for all procedures (P < 0.0001). Among the insurance plans examined, patients with high-deductible health plans had the highest episodic OOP costs. The ratio of patient contribution (OOP costs) to total insurer contribution (payments from insurers to providers) was 0.07 for ACDF, 0.04 for PLF, 0.07 for THA, and 0.07 for TKA. CONCLUSION: Among commercially insured patients who underwent elective spinal fusion and major lower extremity joint arthroplasty surgery, OOP costs increased from 2014 to 2019. The OOP costs for elective orthopaedic surgery represent a substantial and increasing financial burden for patients.

Microdiscectomy Is More Cost-effective Than a 6-Month Nonsurgical Care Regimen for Chronic Radiculopathy.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomized controlled trial (RCT), performed by the authors, comparing early surgical microdiscectomy with 6 months of nonoperative care for chronic lumbar radiculopathy showed that early surgery resulted in improved outcomes. However, estimates of the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), which is often expressed as the cost of gaining one quality-adjusted life year (QALY), of microdiscectomy versus nonsurgical management have varied. Radiculopathy lasting more than 4 months is less likely to improve without surgical intervention and may have a more favorable ICUR than previously reported for acute radiculopathy. QUESTION/PURPOSE: In the setting of chronic radiculopathy caused by lumbar disc herniation, defined as symptoms and/or signs of 4 to 12 months duration, is surgical management more cost-effective than 6 months of nonoperative care from the third-party payer perspective based on a willingness to pay of less than CAD 50,000/QALY? METHODS: A decision analysis model served as the vehicle for the cost-utility analysis. A decision tree was parameterized using data from our single-center RCT that was augmented with institutional microcost data from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative. Bottom-up case costing methodology generates more accurate cost estimates, although institutional costs are known to vary. There were no major surgical cost drivers such as implants or bone graft substitutes, and therefore, the jurisdictional variance would be minimal for tertiary care centers. QALYs derived from the EuroQoL-5D were the health outcome and were derived exclusively from the RCT data, given the paucity of studies evaluating the surgical treatment of lumbar radiculopathy lasting 4 to 12 months. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using the ICUR and a threshold of willingness to pay CAD 50,000 (USD 41,220) per QALY in the base case. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for the uncertainties within the estimate of cost utility, using both a probabilistic sensitivity analysis and two one-way sensitivity analyses with varying crossover rates after the 6-month nonsurgical treatment had concluded. RESULTS: Early surgical treatment of patients with chronic lumbar radiculopathy (defined as symptoms of 4 to 12 months duration) was cost-effective, in that the cost of one QALY was lower than the CAD 50,000 threshold (note: the purchasing power parity conversion factor between the Canadian dollar (CAD) and the US dollar (USD) for 2019 was 1 USD = 1.213 CAD; therefore, our threshold was USD 41,220). Patients in the early surgical treatment group had higher expected costs (CAD 4118 [95% CI 3429 to 4867]) than those with nonsurgical treatment (CAD 2377 [95% CI 1622 to 3518]), but they had better expected health outcomes (1.48 QALYs [95% CI 1.39 to 1.57] versus 1.30 [95% CI 1.22 to 1.37]). The ICUR was CAD 5822 per QALY gained (95% CI 3029 to 30,461). The 2-year probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the likelihood that early surgical treatment was cost-effective was 0.99 at the willingness-to-pay threshold, as did the one-way sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Early surgery is cost-effective compared with nonoperative care in patients who have had chronic sciatica for 4 to 12 months. Decision-makers should ensure adequate funding to allow timely access to surgical care given that it is highly likely that early surgical intervention is potentially cost-effective in single-payer systems. Future work should focus on both the clinical effectiveness of the treatment of chronic radiculopathy and the costs of these treatments from a societal perspective to account for occupational absences and lost patient productivity. Parallel cost-utility analyses are critical so that appropriate decisions about resource allocation can be made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, economic and decision analysis.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Laminoplasty for Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A National Administrative Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is effective for the treatment of single-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). However, the data surrounding multilevel CSM have remained controversial. One alternative is laminoplasty, although evidence comparing these strategies has remained sparse. In the present report, we retrospectively reviewed the readmission and reoperation rates for patients who had undergone ACDF or laminoplasty for multilevel CSM from a national longitudinal administrative claims database. METHODS: We queried the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database to identify patients who had undergone ACDF or laminoplasty for multilevel CSM from 2007 to 2016. The patients were stratified by operation type. Patients aged <18 years, patients with a history of tumor or trauma, and patients who had undergone anteroposterior approach were excluded from the present study. RESULTS: A total of 5445 patients were included, of whom 1521 had undergone laminoplasty. A matched cohort who had undergone ACDF was identified. The overall 90-day postoperative complication rate was greater in the laminoplasty cohort (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.86; P < 0.0001). The mean length of stay and 90-day readmission rates were greater in the laminoplasty cohort. The hospital and total payments of the index hospitalization were greater in the ACDF cohort, as were the total payments for ≤2 years after the index hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: In the present administrative claims database study, no difference was found in the reoperation rate between ACDF and laminoplasty. ACDF resulted in fewer complications and readmissions compared with laminoplasty but was associated with greater costs. Additional prospective research is required to investigate the factors driving the higher costs of ACDF in this population and the long-term clinical outcomes.

Cost and Complications of Single-Level Lumbar Decompression in Those Over and Under 75: A Matched Comparison.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective database analysis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare costs and complication rates following single-level lumbar decompression in patients under age 75 versus patients aged 75 and older. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar decompression is a common surgical treatment for lumbar pathology; however, its effectiveness can be debated in elderly patients because complication rates and costs by age group are not well-defined. METHODS: The Medicare database was queried through the PearlDiver server for patients who underwent single-level lumbar decompression without fusion as an index procedure. The 90-day complication and reoperation rates were compared between age groups after matching for sex and comorbidity burden. Same day and 90-day costs are compared. RESULTS: The matched cohort included 89,388 total patients (n = 44,694 for each study arm). Compared to the under 75 age group, the 75 and older age group had greater rates of deep venous thrombosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.443, P = 0.042) and dural tear (OR 1.560, P = 0.043), and a lower rate of seroma complicating the procedure (OR 0.419, P = 0.009). There was no difference in overall 90-day reoperation rate in patients under age 75 versus patients aged 75 and older (9.66% vs. 9.28%, P = 0.051), although the 75 and older age group had a greater rate of laminectomy without discectomy (CPT-63047; OR 1.175, P < 0.001), while having a lower rate of laminotomy with discectomy (CPT-63042 and CPT-63030; OR 0.727 and 0.867, respectively, P = 0.013 and <0.001, respectively). The 75 and older age group had greater same day ($3329.24 vs. $3138.05, P < 0.001) and 90-day ($5014.82 vs. $4749.44, P < 0.001) mean reimbursement. CONCLUSION: Elderly patients experience greater rates of select perioperative complications, with mildly increased costs. There is no significant difference in overall 90-day reoperation rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Evaluation of Benefit and Cost Utility of Immediate Postanesthesia Care Unit Radiographs to Predict Airway Compromise After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a commonly performed procedure that may be complicated by airway compromise postoperatively. This life-threatening complication may necessitate reintubation and reoperation. We evaluated the cost utility of conventional postoperative x-ray. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Studies have demonstrated minimal benefit in obtaining an x-ray on postoperative day 1, but there is some utility of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) x-rays for predicting the likelihood of reoperation. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of consecutive patients who underwent ACDF between September 2013 and February 2017. Patients were dichotomized into those who received PACU x-rays and those who did not (control group). Primary outcomes were reoperation, reintubation, mortality, and health care costs. RESULTS: Eight-hundred and fifteen patients were included in our analysis: 558 had PACU x-rays; 257 did not. In those who received PACU x-rays, mean age was 53.7 ±â€Š11.3 years, mean levels operated on were 2.0 ±â€Š0.79, and mean body mass index (BMI) was 30.3 ±â€Š6.9. In those who did not, mean age was 51.8 ±â€Š10.9 years, mean levels operated on were 1.48 ±â€Š0.65, and mean BMI was 29.9 ±â€Š6.3. Complications in the PACU x-ray group were reintubation-0.4%, reoperation-0.7%, and death-0.3% (due to prevertebral swelling causing airway compromise). Complications in the control group were reintubation-0.4%, reoperation-0.8%, and death-0. There were no differences between groups with respect to reoperation (P = 0.92), reintubation (P = 0.94), or mortality (P = 0.49). The mean per-patient cost was significantly higher (P = 0.009) in those who received PACU x-rays, $1031.76 ±â€Š948.67, versus those in the control group, $700.26 ±â€Š634.48. Mean length of stay was significantly longer in those who had PACU x-rays (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Although there were no differences in reoperation, reintubation, or mortality, there was a significantly higher cost for care and hospitalization in those who received PACU x-rays. Further studies are warranted to validate the results of the presented study.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.

Cost Analysis of Outpatient Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion at an Academic Medical Center without Dedicated Ambulatory Surgery Centers.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) are increasingly performed at ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs). Academic centers lacking dedicated ASCs must perform these at large university hospitals, which pose unique challenges to cost savings and efficiency. OBJECTIVE: To describe the safety and cost of outpatient ACDF at a major academic medical center without a dedicated ASC. METHODS: ACDFs performed from 2015 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were performed at the major tertiary university hospital or a satellite university hospital dedicated to outpatient surgery. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, perioperative complications, fusion at 12 months, and cost were collected. RESULTS: A total of 470 patients were included. The mean age was 56 years, with 255 women (54.3%). When comparing same-day discharge, overnight observation, or inpatient admission, there were no differences in age, gender, or number of levels fused. Same-day and overnight observation cases were associated with shorter procedure duration and less estimated blood loss. There were no differences in perioperative complications, 30-day readmissions, or fusion at 12 months. Direct and total costs were lowest for same-day cases, followed by overnight observation and inpatient admissions (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Academic centers without dedicated ASCs can safely perform ACDF as a same-day or overnight observation procedure with significant reductions in cost. The lack of a dedicated ASC should not preclude academic centers from allocating appropriately selected patients into same-day or overnight observation care pathways. This strategy can improve resource utilization and preserve precious hospital resources for the most critically ill patients while also allowing these centers to build viable outpatient spine practices.

Regional differences in prolonged non-operative therapy utilization prior to primary ACDF surgery.

There is a paucity of data characterizing regional variations in the utilization and costs of conservative management in patients suffering from cervical stenosis prior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. An understating of these regional trends becomes critical as outcomes-based reimbursement strategies become standard. The objective of this investigation was to evaluate for regional differences in the utilization and overall costs of maximal non-operative therapy (MNT) prior to ACDF surgery. Medical records from patients with symptomatic cervical stenosis undergoing a ≤3-level index ACDF procedure between 2007 and 2016 were accessed from a large insurance database. Geographic regions (Midwest, Northeast, South, and West) reflected U.S. Census Bureau definitions. MNT utilization within 2-years prior to ACDF surgery was analyzed. An index ACDF surgery was performed in 15,825 patients. Patient regional breakdown was as follows: South (67.6% of patients), Midwest (21.8% of patients), West (8.9% of patients), Northeast (1.6% of patients). Regional variations were identified in the number of patients utilizing NSAIDs (p < 0.001), opioids (p < 0.001), muscle relaxants (p < 0.001), cervical epidural steroid injections (p = 0.001), physical therapy/occupational therapy treatments (p < 0.001), and chiropractor visits (p < 0.001). The West (64.5%) and South (63.5%) had the greatest proportion of patients utilizing narcotics. When normalized by the number of opioid using-patients however, the Northeast (691.4 pills/patient) and South (674.4 pills/patient) billed for the most opioid pills. The total direct cost associated with all MNT prior to index ACDF was $17,255,828. The Midwest ($1,277.72 per patient) and South ($1,047.86 per patient) had the greatest average dollars billed.

Disparities in inpatient costs and outcomes after elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion at safety-net hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: Characterizing disparities that exist at safety-net hospitals is crucial for crafting national healthcare reform policies. Healthcare disparities in performing elective neurosurgical procedures like anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) at safety-net hospitals have not yet been examined. OBJECTIVE: We use the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), a national all-payer healthcare database of inpatient admissions, to determine whether safety-net hospitals can provide equitable care after elective ACDF. METHODS: The NIS from 2002 to 2011 was queried for patients who received ACDF in the context of degenerative spine disease. Hospital safety-net burden was designated as low (LBH), medium (MBH), or high (HBH) based on the proportion of inpatient admissions that were billed as Medicaid, self-pay, or charity care. Significance was set at p < 0.001. RESULTS: A total of 219,433 admissions were included in this analysis. HBHs were more likely than LBHs to treat patients who were Black, Hispanic, on Medicaid, or had myelopathy (p < 0.001). After adjusting for patient, hospital, and clinical factors, treatment at an HBH was associated with greater in-patient inflation-adjusted log cost (p < 0.001), but not with greater length of stay (LOS) (p = 0.04) or odds of an inpatient adverse event like death, incidental durotomy, surgical site infections, deep vein thromboses and others (OR 95 % CI = 0.86-1.42, p = 0.43) compared to LBHs. DISCUSSION: Safety net hospitals had greater inpatient costs, but no greater LOS or odds of inpatient adverse events after elective ACDF. These results demonstrate a need for policies that reduce the cost of performing ACDFs at SNHs.

Association Between Physician Industry Payments and Cost of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Neurosurgical spine specialists receive considerable amounts of industry support that may impact the cost of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between industry payments received by spine surgeons and the total hospital and operating room (OR) costs of an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedure among Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: All ACDF cases were identified among the Medicare carrier files from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2014, and matched to the Medicare inpatient baseline file. The total hospital and OR charges were obtained for these cases. Charges were converted to cost using year-specific cost-to-charge ratios. Surgeons were identified among the Open Payments database, which is used to quantify industry support. Analyses were performed to examine the association between industry payments received and ACDF costs. RESULTS: Matching resulting in the inclusion of 2209 ACDF claims from 2013-2014. In 2013 and 2014, the mean total cost for an ACDF was $21,798 and $21,008, respectively; mean OR cost was $5878 and $6064, respectively. Mann-Whitney U test demonstrated no significant differences in the mean total or OR cost for an ACDF based on quartile of general industry payment received (P = 0.21 and P = 0.54), and linear regression found no association between industry general payments, research support, or investments on the total hospital cost (P = 0.41, P = 0.13, and P = 0.25, respectively), or OR cost for an ACDF (P = 0.35, P = 0.24, and P = 0.40, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that spine surgeons performing ACDF surgeries may receive industry support without impacting the cost of care.

Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in U.S. Spine Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Increasing costs put the value of spine surgery under scrutiny. In health economics, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) are used to compare the value of competing procedures. However, inconsistent methodology prevents standardization and implementation of recommendations. The goal of this study is to perform a systematic review of all U.S. CEAs in spine surgery reported to date, highlight their strengths and weaknesses, and define metrics essential for high-quality CEAs. METHODS: We followed AMSTAR systematic review methods, identifying all U.S. spine surgery CEAs reported to March 2019 with a structured, reproducible search of PubMed, Embase, and the Tufts CEA Registry. RESULTS: We identified 40 CEA studies. Twelve (30%) used outcome data from a randomized controlled trial. To calculate costs, 22 (55%) used allowed charges but costing methods were often unclear or imprecise. Studies applying discounting had mean follow-up of 5.92 years compared with 3.00 years for studies without. Eleven of 15 (73%) cervical studies compared cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, finding cervical disc arthroplasty to be cost-effective (<$100,000/quality-adjusted life year) for 1-level and 2-level procedures. Eleven of 25 lumbar studies (44%) compared operative with nonoperative interventions for intervertebral disc herniation, lumbar stenosis, and lumbar spondylolisthesis. Lumbar studies comparing surgical with nonoperative intervention found surgery at least cost-effective for intervertebral disc herniation and lumbar stenosis, but cost-effective only for lumbar spondylolisthesis at 4 years follow-up. Most studies (70%) lacked appropriate sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Costing methodology remains obscure and inconsistent and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio results incomparable. The language of costing methodology must be standardized and sensitivity analyses of outcome and cost inputs mandatory for publication.

Later Surgical Start Time Is Associated With Longer Length of Stay and Higher Cost in Cervical Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study of a surgical cohort from a single, large academic institution. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate associations between surgical start time, length of stay, cost, perioperative outcomes, and readmission. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: One retrospective study with a smaller cohort investigated associations between surgical start time and outcomes in spine surgery and found that early start times were correlated with shorter length of stay. No examinations of perioperative outcomes or cost have been performed. METHODS: All patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) were queried from a single institution from January 1, 2008 to November 30, 2016. Patients undergoing surgery that started between 12:00 AM and 6:00 AM were excluded due to their likely emergent nature. Cases starting before and after 2:00 PM were compared on the basis of length of stay and cost as the primary outcomes using multivariable logistic regression. RESULT: The patients undergoing ACDF and PCDF were both similar on the basis of comorbidity burden, preoperative diagnosis, and number of segments fused. The patients undergoing ACDF starting after 2 PM had longer LOS values (adjusted difference of 0.65 days; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-1.03; P = 0.0006) and higher costs of hospitalization (adjusted difference of $1177; 95% CI: $549-$1806; P = 0.0002). Patients undergoing PCDF starting after 2 PM also had longer LOS values (adjusted difference of 1.19 days; 95% CI: 0.46-1.91; P = 0.001) and higher costs of hospitalization (adjusted difference of $2305; 95% CI: $826-$3785; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Later surgical start time is associated with longer LOS and higher cost. These findings should be further confirmed in the spine surgical literature to investigate surgical start time as a potential cost-saving measure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

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.

Gender differences in the 3-month utilization of nonoperative therapies prior to primary lumbar microdiscectomy.

Patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation classically trial a brief course of conservative management prior to microdiscectomy surgery. Gender differences have previously been identified in the selection and symptomatic response to commonly-utilized nonoperative treatments. However, whether gender differences exist in the degree and cost of nonoperative therapy in this cohort remains unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess for gender differences in the utilization and costs of nonoperative therapy in patients diagnosed with symptomatic lumbar intervertebral disc herniation 3-months prior to undergoing microdiscectomy. Medical records from adult patients diagnosed with a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation undergoing index microdiscectomy procedures from 2007 to 2017 were collected retrospectively from a large insurance database. The utilization of nonoperative therapy within 3-months after initial lumbar herniation diagnosis was determined. A total of 13,106 patients (55.4% Males) underwent index microdiscectomy. Male patients were more likely to fail conservative management and opt for surgery (Males: 2.9% vs. Females: 1.8%, p < 0.0001). A greater percentage of female patients utilized muscle relaxants (p = 0.0049), lumbar epidural steroid injections (p = 0.0007), and emergency department services (p = 0.001). The total direct cost of conservative treatment prior to microdiscectomy was $13,205,924, with males accountable for $7,457,023 (56.5%). When normalized by number of patients utilizing the respective therapy, males used fewer units of NSAIDs (males: 84.2 pills/patient; females: 97.3 pills/patient) and muscle relaxants (males: 77.5 pills/patient; females: 89.0 pills/patient). These results suggest that gender differences exist in the utilization of nonoperative therapies for the management of a lumbar intervertebral herniated disc prior to microdiscectomy surgery.

Cost-effectiveness Applications of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Spine Surgery.

Because of the rising health care costs in the United States, there has been a focus on value-based care and improving the cost-effectiveness of surgical procedures. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can not only give physicians and health care providers immediate feedback on the well-being of the patients but also be used to assess health and determine outcomes for surgical research purposes. Recently, PROMs have become a prominent tool to assess the cost-effectiveness of spine surgery by calculating the improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost of a procedure per QALY gained is an essential metric to determine cost-effectiveness in universal health care systems. Common patient-reported outcome questionnaires to calculate QALY include the EuroQol-5 dimensions, the SF-36, and the SF-12. On the basis of the health-related quality of life outcomes, the cost-effectiveness of various spine surgeries can be determined, such as cervical fusions, lumbar fusions, microdiscectomies. As the United States attempts to reduce costs and emphasize value-based care, PROMs may serve a critical role in spine surgery moving forward. In addition, PROM-driven QALYs may be used to analyze novel spine surgical techniques for value-based improvements.

Intraoperative neuromonitoring for one-level lumbar discectomies is low yield and cost-ineffective.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative neuromonitoring is a common, well-established modality used in spine surgery to prevent intraoperative neural injury. Neuromonitoring use in lumbar discectomy, however, is based on surgeon preference, without evidence-based data. The purpose of this research was to determine intraoperative utility and overall cost effectiveness of neuromonitoring for lumbar discectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed adult patients who underwent a lumbar discectomy, with at least 1 month of follow-up at a single tertiary care center. Patient age, sex, body mass index (BMI), lumbar level operated, and operative time and cost were collected. Neuromonitoring and operative reports were reviewed for any electromyography (EMG) abnormalities noted intraoperatively, pre- and post-operative motor exam and post-operative pain relief were collected. RESULTS: Ninety-one (47 with and 44 without neuromonitoring) lumbar discectomy cases were reviewed. There was no significant difference between mean age, sex, and BMI between the two groups. There was a significant (p = 0.006) increase in operating room time (174 min; with vs. 144 min; without neuromonitoring). Neuromonitoring was associated with a significant (p = 0.006) overall operative cost ($21,949; with vs. $18,064; without). Of the 47 cases with neuromonitoring; one had abnormal intraoperative EMG activity, which returned to normal by case conclusion. No patient in either group demonstrated new post-operative motor weakness. There was no difference in the number of patients who endorsed post-operative pain relief between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Neuromonitoring for lumbar discectomy confers greater operative time and cost, without any difference in neurological outcome.

Total Health Care Expenditure in Patients With a Herniated Lumbar Disk That Ultimately Require Surgery: A 3- and 6-month Cost Comparison of Maximum Nonoperative Treatment.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost of maximum nonoperative therapy (MNT) in patients diagnosed with a herniated lumbar disk undergoing primary (1-3 mo) versus prolonged (4-6 mo) conservative management before microdiscectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patients diagnosed with a herniated lumbar disk often attempt a 3-month trial of conservative management before microdiscectomy. A paucity of data exists characterizing the cost of a subsequent round of nonoperative therapies in patients who fail their initial trial, rather than undergo surgery. METHODS: Clinical records from patients diagnosed with a herniated lumbar disk undergoing index microdiscectomy surgery from 2007 to 2017 were gathered from a large insurance database. Records were searchable by International Classification of Diseases diagnosis/procedure codes, Current Procedural Terminology codes, and generic drug codes. Two cohorts were established: patients undergoing primary (1-3 mo) versus prolonged (4-6 mo) courses of conservative management. Nonoperative therapy utilization was documented from initial herniation diagnosis to microdiscectomy surgery. "Utilization" encompassed cost billed to patients, prescriptions written, and quantity of units dispensed. RESULTS: The 3-month MNT cohort included 4587 patients and the 6-month MNT cohort contained 1506 patients. A greater percentage of 6-month cohort patients utilized opioids (P=0.0052), muscle relaxants (P=0.0061), and lumbar steroid injections (P<0.0001). When considering the average amount spent on conservative management, 6-month patients ($1824/patient) spent 1.55 times more than 3-month patients ($1178/patient). The 6-month:3-month average spending ratio was <2.0 for all of the nonoperative therapies except nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (2.66) and epidural steroid injections (2.25). When normalized by the number of opioid users, the number of opioid medications dispensed was proportionally less in 3-month patients compared with 6-month patients, with a 6-month:3-month ratio of 1.52. CONCLUSIONS: The costs associated with a subsequent course of nonoperative therapies for symptomatic lumbar disk herniation seem to be slightly less than that of the primary trial. Assuming a minimal clinical benefit after the initial trial of nonsurgical therapies, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of a subsequent trial versus surgery may be unfavorable. Future studies identifying patients likely to benefit from surgery earlier in the treatment course is required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Disparities in Outcomes by Insurance Payer Groups for Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study of clinical outcomes at a single institution. OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative complication and readmission rates of payer groups in a cohort of patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Studies examining associations between primary payer and outcomes in spine surgery have been equivocal. METHODS: Patients at Mount Sinai having undergone ACDF from 2008 to 2016 were queried and assigned to one of five insurance categories: uninsured, managed care, commercial indemnity insurance, Medicare, and Medicaid, with patients in the commercial indemnity group serving as the reference cohort. Multivariable logistic regression equations for various outcomes with the exposure of payer were created, controlling for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiology Physical Status Classification (ASA Class), the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, and number of segments fused. A Bonferroni correction was utilized, such that alpha = 0.0125. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred eighty seven patients underwent ACDF during the time period. Both Medicare (P < 0.0001) and Medicaid (P < 0.0001) patients had higher comorbidity burdens than commercial patients when examining ASA Class. Managed care (2.86 vs. 2.72, P = 0.0009) and Medicare patients (2.99 vs. 2.72, P < 0.0001) had more segments fused on average than commercial patients. Medicaid patients had higher rates of prolonged extubation (odds ratio [OR]: 4.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-22.0; P = 0.007), and Medicare patients had higher rates of prolonged length of stay (LOS) (OR: 2.44, 95% CI: 1.13-5.27%, P = 0.004) than the commercial patients. Medicaid patients had higher rates of 30- (OR: 4.12; 95% CI: 1.43-11.93; P = 0.0009) and 90-day (OR: 3.28; 95% CI: 1.34-8.03; P = 0.0009) Emergency Department (ED) visits than the commercial patients, and managed care patients had higher rates of 30-day readmission (OR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.00-11.57; P = 0.0123). CONCLUSION: Medicare and Medicaid patients had higher rates of prolonged LOS and postoperative ED visits, respectively, compared with commercial patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Long-Term Comparison of Health Care Utilization and Reoperation Rates in Patients Undergoing Cervical Disc Arthroplasty and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease.

BACKGROUND: Thus study was a retrospective cohort analysis. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been the gold-standard procedure for single-level degenerative disc disease (DDD). Recently, cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has become increasingly prevalent as an alternative intervention. OBJECTIVE: To examine the long-term costs and reoperation rates associated with CDA and ACDF for the treatment of single-level DDD. METHODS: In the present study, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis using the MarketScan database of patients who underwent either ACDF or CDA between 2007 and 2011 and had 5 years postsurgery follow-up. Outcomes related to the health care utilization, cost, and reoperation were analyzed after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: Of 12,434 patients, 12,099 underwent ACDF and 335 CDA. Length of hospital stay and initial hospitalization cost was higher after ACDF compared with CDA. More patients undergoing CDA had early physical therapy compared with patients undergoing ACDF (CDA 30.15% vs. ACDF 22.39%; P = 0.0176). Five years after surgery, there was no significant difference in overall payments between patients undergoing ACDF and patients undergoing CDA. Reoperation rates were comparable at 5 years after the index procedure (CDA 8.06% vs. ACDF 9.25%; P = 0.5862). Patients who underwent ACDF showed decreased use of tramadol after surgery (15.09% before surgery vs. 9.55% after surgery; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference in health care utilization between ACDF and CDA procedures for DDD 5 years after surgery. Also, there was no difference in reoperation rates during the study period. ACDF resulted in significant reduction in overall opioid use after versus before procedure.