Impact of Faculty Mentorship in the Orthopedic Surgery Interest Group at a New Medical School: A Blueprint for Future Initiatives.

OBJECTIVES: Orthopedic surgery is a highly competitive field. The residency applicant pool is expected to grow with the increasing number of new medical schools in the United States, posing significant challenges for applicants. This study explored the impact of an engaged faculty mentor in an orthopedic surgery interest group (OSIG) at a new medical school and the impact it has on students. The study aimed to uncover the most valuable features of an OSIG at a new medical school to create a blueprint for other student-leaders and/or faculty in future initiatives. METHODS: An observational study was conducted via survey responses from active OSIG members at a new medical school in Texas. Questions were mostly in a "before and after" format asking about students' perspectives of the group before and after the addition of an engaged faculty advisor. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Twenty of 21 (95.2%) eligible OSIG members participated in the study. The survey results revealed that faculty engagement significantly enhanced the OSIG and its members' medical school experience. Following faculty involvement, average OSIG event attendance more than tripled, there was a statistically significant increase in medical student well-being, and confidence in their ability to be a competitive orthopedic surgery applicant nearly doubled. OSIG participation influenced their career interests significantly more after faculty engagement. A total of 93.3% of participants voted that they felt having an engaged faculty advisor is critical for the OSIG. CONCLUSIONS: Mentorship was identified as the most crucial activity for career development, followed by clinical exposure and research. The study provides valuable insights for new medical schools in establishing and optimizing OSIGs and potentially other interest groups, particularly in competitive specialties.

Utilization Patterns, Efficacy, and Complications of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Strategies in Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty as Reported by American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Candidates.

BACKGROUND: The optimum venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis strategy to minimize risk of VTE and bleeding complications following revision total hip and knee arthroplasty (rTHA/rTKA) is controversial. The purpose of this study is to describe current VTE prophylaxis patterns following revision arthroplasty procedures to determine efficacy, complication rates, and prescribing patterns for different prophylactic strategies. METHODS: The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II (oral) examination case list database was analyzed. Current Procedural Terminology codes for rTHA/rTKA were queried and geographic region, VTE prophylaxis strategy, and complications were obtained. Less aggressive prophylaxis patterns were defined if only aspirin and/or sequential compression devises were utilized. More aggressive VTE prophylaxis patterns were considered if any of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin), warfarin, rivaroxaban, fondaparinux, or other strategies were used. RESULTS: In total, 6387 revision arthroplasties were included. The national rate of less aggressive VTE prophylaxis strategies was 35.3% and more aggressive in 64.7%. Use of less aggressive prophylaxis strategy was significantly associated with patients having no complications (89.8% vs 81.9%, P < .001). Use of more aggressive prophylaxis patterns was associated with higher likelihood of mild thrombotic (1.2% vs 0.3%, P < .001), mild bleeding (1.7% vs 0.6%, P < .001), moderate thrombotic (2.6% vs 0.4%, P < .001), moderate bleeding (6.2% vs 4.0%, P < .001), severe bleeding events (4.4% vs 2.4%, P < .001), infections (6.4% vs 3.8%, P < .001), and death within 90 days (3.1% vs 1.3%, P < .001). There were no significant differences in rates of fatal pulmonary embolism (0.1% vs 0.04%, P = .474). Subgroup analysis of rTHA and rTKA patients showed similar results. CONCLUSION: The individual rationale for using a more aggressive VTE prophylaxis strategy was unknown; however, more aggressive strategies were associated with higher rates of bleeding and thrombotic complications. Less aggressive strategies were not associated with a higher rate of thrombosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody graft placement using an articulating delivery arm facilitates increased segmental lordosis with superior anterior and midline graft placement.

OBJECTIVE: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a frequently performed method of lumbar arthrodesis in patients failing medical management of back and leg pain. Accurate placement of the interbody graft and restoration of lordosis has been shown to be crucial when performing lumbar fusion procedures. We performed a single-surgeon, prospective, randomized study to determine whether a novel articulating versus traditional straight graft delivery arm system allows for superior graft placement and increased lordosis for single-level TLIF. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients undergoing single-level TLIF were included and prospectively randomized to one of the 2 groups (articulated vs. straight delivery arm system). Three radiographic characteristics were evaluated at 6-week follow-up: (1) degree of segmental lumbar lordosis at the fused level; (2) the percent anterior location of the interbody graft in disk space; and (3) the distance (mm) off midline of the interbody graft placement. RESULTS: Randomization yielded 16 patients in the articulated delivery arm cohort and 14 in the straight delivery arm cohort. The articulating delivery arm system yielded an average of 14.7-degree segmental lordosis at fused level, 35% anterior location, and 3.6 mm off midline. The straight delivery arm system yielded an average of 10.7-degree segmental lordosis at fused level, 46% anterior location, and 7.0 mm off midline. All 3 comparisons were statistically significant (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that an articulating delivery arm system facilitates superior anterior and midline TLIF graft placement allowing for increased segmental lordosis compared with a traditional straight delivery arm system.

Cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of revision fusion for lumbar pseudoarthrosis: defining the value of surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Single cohort study of patients undergoing revision fusion for lumbar pseudoarthrosis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the 2-year comprehensive costs of revision arthrodesis for lumbar pseudoarthrosis at our institution and determine the associated cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in this patient population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The proportion of lumbar spine operations involving a fusion procedure has increased over the past 2 decades. Similarly, there has been a corresponding increase in the incidence and prevalence of pseudoarthrosis. However, the cost-effectiveness of revision surgery for pseudoarthrosis-associated back pain has yet to be examined. METHODS: Forty-seven patients undergoing revision instrumented arthrodesis for pseudoarthrosis-associated back pain were included. Two-year total back-related medical resource utilization, missed work, and health-state values (QALYs, calculated from EuroQuol 5D with US valuation) were assessed. Two-year resource use was multiplied by unit costs based on Medicare national allowable payment amounts (direct cost) and patient and care-giver work-day losses were multiplied by the self-reported gross-of-tax wage rate (indirect cost). The mean total 2-year cost per QALY gained after revision surgery was assessed. RESULTS: The mean (±SD) duration of time between prior fusion and development of symptomatic pseudoarthrosis was 2.69±3.09 years. None of the patients developed symptomatic pseudoarthrosis after 2 years of revision surgery. A mean cumulative 2-year gain of 0.35 QALYs was reported. The mean (±SD) total 2-year cost of revision fusion was $41,631±$9691 (surgery cost: $23,865±$270; outpatient resource utilization cost: $4885±$2301; indirect cost: $12,879±$8171). Revision instrumented arthrodesis was associated with a mean 2-year cost per QALY gained of $118,945. CONCLUSIONS: Revision arthrodesis was associated with improved 2-year quality of life in patients with pseudoarthrosis-related back pain. Nevertheless, in our experience revision surgery was shown to be marginally cost-effective at $118,945 per QALY gained.

Long-term outcomes after revision neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: defining the effectiveness of surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Single-cohort study of patients undergoing revision neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term outcomes of revision surgery using validated patient-reported outcomes measures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recurrent lumbar stenosis may occur after lumbar spine surgery, leading to significant discomfort and radicular pain. Although numerous studies have reported clinical outcomes after primary lumbar surgery, there remains a paucity of data on the outcomes after revision surgery for recurrent same-level stenosis. METHODS: Fifty-three patients undergoing revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for same-level recurrent stenosis-associated back and leg pain were included in this study. Baseline and 2-year visual analog scale for leg pain (LP-VAS), visual analog scale for low back pain (BP-VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Zung self-reported depression score (ZDS), time to narcotic independence, time to return to work, health-state utility [EuroQol (EQ-5D)], and physical and mental quality of life [SF-12 physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS)] were assessed. RESULTS: Mean±SD duration of time between index surgery and revision surgery was 4.00±4.19 years. A significant improvement from baseline was observed in BP-VAS (9.28±1.01 vs. 5.00±2.94, P=0.001), LP-VAS (9.55±0.93 vs. 3.45±2.95, P=0.001), and ODI (36.02±6.01 vs. 21.75±12.08, P=0.001). Mean±SD SF-12 PCS (7.17±11.22, P=0.001), SF-12 MCS (12.57±13.03, P=0.001), ZDS (12.37±16.80, P=0.001), and EQ-5D (0.42±0.34, P=0.001) were also significantly improved. The mean cumulative 2-year gain in health-utility state was 0.84 QALY. Median (interquartile range) duration of postoperative narcotic use was 6 (1.4-12.2) months and time of missed work was 6 (4.0-10.0) months. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for recurrent same-level stenosis provides significant improvement in all patient-assessed outcome metrics and should be offered as a viable treatment option.

Effect of Antibiotic Spacer Dosing on Treatment Success in Two-Stage Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

INTRODUCTION: In two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), adding antibiotics to cement spacers is the standard of care; however, little is known about optimal dosage. There is emphasis on using >3.6 g of total antibiotic, including ≥2.0 g of vancomycin, per 40 g of cement, but these recommendations lack clinical evidence. We examined whether recommended antibiotic spacer doses affect treatment success. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of 202 patients who underwent two-stage exchange for PJI from 2004 to 2020 with at least 1-year follow-up. Patients were separated into high (>3.6 g of total antibiotic per 40 g of cement) and low-dose spacer groups. Primary outcomes were overall and infectious failure. RESULTS: High-dose spacers were used in 80% (162/202) of patients. High-dose spacers had a reduced risk of overall (OR, 0.37; P = 0.024) and infectious (OR, 0.35; P = 0.020) failure for infected primary arthroplasties, but not revisions. In multivariate analysis, vancomycin dose ≥2.0 g decreased the risk of infectious failure (OR, 0.31; P = 0.016), although not overall failure (OR, 0.51; P = 0.147). CONCLUSION: During two-stage exchange for PJI, spacers with greater than 3.6 g of total antibiotic may reduce overall and infectious failure for infected primary arthroplasties. Furthermore, using at least 2.0 g of vancomycin could independently decrease the risk of infectious failure.

Comparison of Static and Articulating Spacers After Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

INTRODUCTION: There is no consensus on whether articulating or static spacers are superior during two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection. We aimed to compare surgical time, need for extensile exposure, surgical costs, and treatment success for articulating and static spacers. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of 229 periprosthetic joint infections treated with two-stage exchange with a minimum of one-year follow-up. For articulating and static spacers, we compared the need for extensile exposure during reimplantation and treatment failure based on an updated definition. Surgical time and costs at both stages were also compared. Subgroup analysis was performed for total knee and hip arthroplasties. RESULTS: There was no difference in the surgical time for spacer insertion; however, articulating spacers demonstrated reduced surgical time during reimplantation (181 vs. 234 minutes, P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, there was no difference in extensile exposures (odds ratio 2.20, P = 0.081), but treatment failure was more likely for static spacers (odds ratio 2.17, P = 0.009). Overall surgical costs for two-stage exchange were similar between groups (23,782 vs. 23,766, P = 0.495). CONCLUSION: Articulating spacers demonstrated shorter surgical times and a trend toward decreased extensile exposures during reimplantation. They also had higher treatment success rates and similar surgical costs for overall two-stage exchange.

Virtual Reality as a Learning Tool for Trainees in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of virtual reality (VR) as a teaching augment for arthroplasty has not been well examined for unfamiliar multistep procedures such as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). This study sought to determine whether VR improves surgical competence over traditional procedural preparation when performing a UKA. METHODS: Twenty-two orthopaedic surgery trainees were randomized to two surgical preparation cohorts: (1) "Guide" group (control) with access to manufacture's technique guide and surgical video and (2) "VR" group with access to an immersive commercially available VR learning module. Surgical performance of UKA on a SawBone model was assessed through time and the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) validated rating system. RESULTS: Participants were equally distributed among all training levels and previous exposure to UKA. No difference in mean surgical times was observed between Guide and VR groups (Guide = 42.4 minutes versus VR = 43.0 minutes; P = 0.9) or mean total OSATS (Guide = 15.7 versus VR = 14.2; P = 0.59). Most trainees felt VR would be a useful tool for resident education (77%) and would use VR for case preparation if available (86.4%). CONCLUSION: In a randomized controlled trial of trainees at a single, large academic center performing a complex, multistep, unfamiliar procedure (UKA), VR training demonstrated equivalent surgical competence compared with the use of traditional technique guides, as measured by surgical time and OSATS scores. Most of the trainees found the VR technology beneficial. This study suggests that VR technology may be considered as an adjunct to traditional surgical preparation/training methods.

Medicaid Payer Status Is Associated with Increased 90-Day Morbidity and Resource Utilization Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid payer status has been shown to affect risk-adjusted outcomes and resource utilization across multiple medical specialties. The purpose of this study was to examine resource utilization via readmission rates, length of stay, and total cost specific to Medicaid payer status following primary total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was utilized to identify patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty in 2013 as well as corresponding "Medicaid" or "non-Medicaid" payer status. Demographic data, 14 individual comorbidities, readmission rates, length of stay, and direct cost were evaluated. A propensity-score-based matching model was utilized to control for baseline confounding variables between payer groups. Following propensity-score matching, the chi-square test was used to compare readmission rates between the 2 payer groups. The relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated to quantify readmission risk. Length of stay and total cost comparisons were evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 5,311 Medicaid and 144,814 non-Medicaid patients managed with total hip arthroplasty were identified from the 2013 NRD. A propensity score was estimated for each patient on the basis of the available baseline demographics, and 5,311 non-Medicaid patients were matched by propensity score to the 5,311 Medicaid patients. Medicaid versus non-Medicaid payer status yielded significant differences in overall readmission rates of 28.8% versus 21.0% (p < 0.001; RR = 1.37 [95% CI, 1.28 to 1.46]) and 90-day hip-specific readmission rates of 2.5% versus 1.8% (p = 0.01; RR = 1.38 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.78]). Mean length of stay was greater in the Medicaid group than in the non-Medicaid group at 4.5 versus 3.3 days (p < 0.0001), as was the mean total cost at $71,110 versus $65,309 (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that Medicaid payer status is independently associated with increased resource utilization, including readmission rates, length of stay, and total cost following primary total hip arthroplasty. Providers may have a disincentive to treat patient populations who require increased resource utilization following surgery. Risk adjustment models accounting for Medicaid payer status are necessary to avoid decreased access to care for this patient population and to avoid financial penalty for physicians and hospitals alike. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Medicaid is associated with increased readmission and resource utilization after primary total knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid payer status has been shown to affect resource utilization across multiple medical specialties. There is no large database assessment of Medicaid and resource utilization in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), which this study sets out to achieve. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database was used to identify patients who underwent TKA in 2013 and corresponding "Medicaid" or "non-Medicaid" payer statuses. Demographics, 15 individual comorbidities, readmission rates, length of stay, and direct cost were evaluated. A propensity score-based matching model was then used to control for baseline confounding variables between payer groups. A chi-square test for paired proportions was used to compare readmission rates between the 2 groups. Length of stay and direct cost comparisons were evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 8372 Medicaid and 268,261 non-Medicaid TKA patients were identified from the 2013 Nationwide Readmissions Database. A propensity score was estimated for each patient based on the baseline demographics, and 8372 non-Medicaid patients were propensity score matched to the 8372 Medicaid patients. Medicaid payer status yielded a statistically significant increase in overall readmission rates of 18.4% vs 14.0% (P < .0001, relative risk = 1.31, 95% confidence interval [1.23-1.41]) with non-Medicaid status and 90-day readmission rates of 10.0% vs 7.4%, respectively (P < .001, relative risk = 1.35, 95% confidence interval [1.22-1.48]). The mean length of stay was longer in the Medicaid group compared with the non-Medicaid group at 4.0 days vs 3.3 days (P < .0001) as well as the mean total cost of $64,487 vs $61,021 (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that Medicaid payer status is independently associated with increased resource utilization, including readmission rates, length of stay, and total cost after TKA.

Synthetic mesh vs. allograft extensor mechanism reconstruction in total knee arthroplasty - A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Extensor mechanism disruption after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a devastating complication. Reconstruction with allograft and synthetic mesh has been described. However, these reports have typically been small case series, and controversy exists with regard to which reconstruction technique is optimal. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic review using PUBMED, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews identifying 14 articles meeting inclusion criteria and producing 204 knees for comparison. Studies with repairs performed under full knee extension were included. Case reports and non-English studies were excluded. Available demographics and clinical outcome data were collected from each study. Appropriate statistical analysis was performed to compare the variables. RESULTS: Baseline demographics and patient complexity were similar between the two cohorts. Reconstruction success rates (76% allograft vs. 74% mesh), average time to diagnosis/treatment, Knee Society Scores (KSS), knee range of motion/extensor lag, and complication rates yielded no statistical difference. Synthetic mesh was used more frequently with concomitant revision of components. DISCUSSION: This systematic review shows equivalent success of allograft and synthetic mesh with approximately 25% failure rate in both groups. Periprosthetic joint infection remains a common and significant complication and reason for failure in both groups. Overall, synthetic mesh showed equivalent extensor mechanism reconstruction success as allograft but with much lower cost, near universal availability, lack of disease transmission, and potential for diminishing graft stretch-out. Future research in larger case series or comparative study is needed to help aid in management of this largely unsolved problem in total knee reconstruction.

Are Low Patient Satisfaction Scores Always Due to the Provider?: Determinants of Patient Satisfaction Scores During Spine Clinic Visits.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of various components on patient satisfaction scores SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: Patient satisfaction has become an important component of quality assessments. However, with many of these sources collecting satisfaction data reluctant to disclose detailed information, little remains known about the potential determinants of patient satisfaction. METHODS: Two hundred patients were contacted via phone within 3 weeks of new patient encounter with 11 spine providers. Standardized patient satisfaction phone survey consisting of 25 questions (1-10 rating scale) was administered. Questions inquired about scheduling, parking, office staff, teamwork, wait-time, radiology, provider interactions/behavior, treatment, and follow-up communication. Potential associations between these factors and three main outcome measures were investigated: (1) provider satisfaction, (2) overall clinic visit satisfaction, and (3) quality of care. RESULTS: Significant associations (P < 0.0001) with provider satisfaction, overall clinic visit satisfaction, and perceived overall quality of care were found with appointment scheduling, parking, office staff, teamwork, wait time, radiology, provider interactions/behavior, treatment, and follow-up communication. Nurse-practitioner/resident involvement was positively associated with scores (P ≤ 0.03). A "candy-man" effect was not noted, as pain medication prescribing did not play a significant role in satisfaction (P > 0.05).In multivariate regression analysis, explanation of medical condition/treatment (P = 0.002) and provider empathy (P = 0.04) were significantly associated with provider satisfaction scores, while the amount of time spent with the provider was not. Conversely, teamwork of staff/provider and follow-up communication were significantly associated with both overall clinic visit satisfaction and quality of care (P ≤ 0.03), while provider behaviors or satisfaction were not. CONCLUSION: Satisfaction with the provider was associated with better explanations of the spine condition/treatment plan and provider empathy, but was not a significant factor in either overall clinic visit satisfaction or perceived quality of care. Patients' perception of teamwork between staff and providers along with reliable follow-up communication were found to be significant determinants of overall patient satisfaction and perceived quality of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Increased Preoperative Narcotic Use and Its Association With Postoperative Complications and Length of Hospital Stay in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort analysis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of preoperative narcotic use on the incidence of 30- and 90-day postoperative complications, as well as length of hospital stay (LOS) in patients undergoing spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous work has associated an increased incidence of complications and length of stay following surgery in patients with increased preoperative narcotic use. Despite this and recent national attention highlighting the negative effects of narcotics, they remain commonly used for the management of pain in patients undergoing spine surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 583 patients undergoing spine surgery for a structural lesion were evaluated. Self-reported preoperative narcotic consumption was obtained and converted to morphine equivalents at the initial preoperative visit. LOS was recorded upon discharge and presence/type of a postoperative complication within 30/90 days was obtained. A multivariable logistic and linear regression analysis was performed for the incidence of complications and length of stay controlling for clinically important covariates. RESULTS: Narcotic use was not associated with 30- or 90-day complications; however, smoking status was significantly associated with 30-day complications. Increased preoperative narcotic use was significantly associated with increased LOS, as was age, type of surgery, and depression. CONCLUSIONS: Increased preoperative narcotic use and depression are associated with increased LOS in patients undergoing spine surgery. We calculated that for every 100 morphine equivalents a patient is taking preoperatively; their stay is extended 1.1 days. Narcotic use was not associated with 30- or 90-day postoperative complications. As reimbursement is bundled before surgery, providing interventions for patients with treatable causes for increased length of stay can save cost overall.

Cost-effectiveness of cell saver in short-segment lumbar laminectomy and fusion (≤3 levels).

STUDY DESIGN: Mixed retrospective-prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To characterize practice patterns for the use of Cell Saver at our institution, investigate its cost-effectiveness, and propose a new tool for patient selection. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Blood loss is an exceedingly common complication of spine surgery, and Cell Saver intraoperative cell salvage has been used to decrease reliance on allogeneic blood transfusions for blood volume replacement. The cost-effectiveness of Cell Saver has not been established for lumbar spinal surgery, and no universal guidelines exist for clinicians to decide when to utilize this tool. Other authors have proposed cutoffs for anticipated blood loss volumes which indicate that Cell Saver should be used. METHODS: Five hundred and eight patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy in 3 or fewer levels were reviewed from our prospective spinal outcomes registry. Cost information for Cell Saver and allogeneic transfusions was collected from our institution's billing and collections department. Logistic regression was used to identify patient characteristics associated with use of Cell Saver. An incremental cost effectiveness ratio was calculated based on transfusion and cost data. A clinical prediction score was derived using logistic regression. RESULTS: Use of Cell Saver correlated with increased age, higher body mass index, diabetes, greater American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and greater number of previous spine surgeries. Outcomes for patients who did and did not have Cell Saver set up intraoperatively were equivocal. Cell Saver was not cost effective based on current usage patterns, but may become cost effective if used for patients with high expected blood loss. A simple clinical prediction rule is proposed which may aid in selection of patients to have Cell Saver present intraoperatively. CONCLUSION: Cell Saver is not a cost-effective intervention but may become cost effective if a threshold of expected intraoperative blood loss is used to select patients more judiciously. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

What Patient Characteristics Could Potentially Affect Patient Satisfaction Scores During Spine Clinic?

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. OBJECTIVE: Assess which patient factors are associated with patient satisfaction scores in the outpatient spine clinic setting. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patient satisfaction has become an important component of quality assessments, and thereby pay-for-performance metrics, made by government, hospitals, and insurance providers. METHODS: During a 7-month period, 200 patients were contacted via phone within 3 weeks of a new patient encounter with 1 of 11 spine providers. A standardized patient satisfaction phone survey consisting of 25 questions, answered using a 1-10 scale, was then administered. Patient demographics, medical/social history, and previous treatment were prospectively recorded. Potential associations between these patient factors and 3 outcomes of interest were investigated: (1) provider satisfaction, (2) overall clinic visit satisfaction, and (3) overall quality of care during clinic visit. RESULTS: Younger age, less formal education, and smoking were associated with diminished provider satisfaction, overall clinic visit satisfaction, and perceived overall quality of care (P ≤ 0.0001). Male patients were significantly less satisfied with their clinic visit compared with females (P = 0.029). Those treated under a worker's compensation claim were significantly less satisfied with their provider and overall quality of care (P ≤ 0.02). Marital status, working status, mental health history, travel distance, pain characteristics, previous treatments, and current narcotic use were not significant determinants of patient satisfaction (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study found that those patients who were younger, with less formal education, and active smokers had lower patient satisfaction scores. Because patient satisfaction is increasingly being used in assessments of quality of care, it is essential that these factors be considered when evaluating a given provider's practice. This information is important to providers by helping guide individualized patient interactions while in clinic, as well as, the various agencies collecting satisfaction scores allowing them to account for potential sampling bias. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Preoperative opioid use and its association with perioperative opioid demand and postoperative opioid independence in patients undergoing spine surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether preoperative opioid use is associated with increased perioperative opioid demand and postoperative opioid independence in patients undergoing spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous work has demonstrated increased opioid requirements during the intraoperative and immediate postoperative period in patients with high levels of preoperative opioid use. Despite this, they remain a common agent class used for the management of pain in patients prior to spine surgery. METHODS: A total of 583 patients were included. Self-reported daily opioid consumption was obtained preoperatively and converted into morphine equivalent amounts and opioid use was recorded at the 12-month postoperative time. Intraoperative and immediate postoperative opioid demand was calculated. Linear regression analyses for intraoperative and immediate postoperative opioid demand while logistic regression analyses for opioid independence at 12 months including relevant covariates such as depression and anxiety were performed. RESULTS: The median preoperative morphine equivalent amount for the cohort was 8.75 mg, with 55% of patients reporting some degree of opioid use. Younger age, more invasive surgery, anxiety, and primary surgery were significantly associated with increased intraoperative opioid demand (P < 0.05). Younger age, anxiety, and greater preoperative opioid use were significantly associated with increased immediate postoperative opioid demand (P < 0.05). More invasive surgery, anxiety, revision surgery, and greater preoperative opioid use were significantly associated with a decreased incidence of opioid independence at 12 months postoperatively (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Greater preoperative opioid use prior to undergoing spine surgery predicts increased immediate postoperative opioid demand and decreased incidence of postoperative opioid independence. Psychiatric diagnoses in those using preoperative opioids were predictors of continued opioid use at 12 months. Patients may benefit from preoperative counseling that emphasizes minimizing opioid use prior to undergoing spine surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) for lumbar spondylolisthesis allows for the surgical treatment of back/leg pain while minimizing tissue injury and accelerating the patient's recovery. Although previous results have shown shorter hospital stays and decreased intraoperative blood loss for MIS versus open TLIF, short- and long-term outcomes have been similar. Therefore, we performed comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis for MIS versus open TLIF. METHODS: A total of 100 patients (50 MIS, 50 open) undergoing TLIF for lumbar spondylolisthesis were prospectively studied. Back-related medical resource use, missed work, and quality-adjusted life years were assessed. Cost of in-patient care, direct cost (2-year resource use × unit costs based on Medicare national allowable payment amounts), and indirect cost (work-day losses × self-reported gross-of-tax wage rate) were recorded, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated. RESULTS: Length of hospitalization and time to return to work were less for MIS versus open TLIF (P = 0.006 and P = 0.03, respectively). MIS versus open TLIF demonstrated similar improvement in patient-reported outcomes assessed. MIS versus open TLIF was associated with a reduction in mean hospital cost of $1758, indirect cost of $8474, and total 2-year societal cost of $9295 (P = 0.03) but similar 2-year direct health care cost and quality-adjusted life years gained. CONCLUSIONS: MIS TLIF resulted in reduced operative blood loss, hospital stay and 2-year cost, and accelerated return to work. Surgical morbidity, hospital readmission, and short- and long-term clinical effectiveness were similar between MIS and open TLIF. MIS TLIF may represent a valuable and cost-saving advancement from a societal and hospital perspective.

Utility of Postoperative Radiographs for Pediatric Scoliosis: Association Between History and Physical Examination Findings and Radiographic Findings.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative radiographs are routinely obtained following surgery for the correction of scoliosis in pediatric patients. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the utility of obtaining routine postoperative radiographs in the management of these patients. METHODS: A total of 1969 clinic notes and corresponding radiographs regarding 451 consecutive patients with scoliosis (age range, ten to eighteen years) who had surgical correction over a ten-year period at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Curve etiology, preoperative curve characteristics, and surgical procedures performed were recorded. All postoperative clinic notes and radiographs were reviewed for abnormalities and changes in treatment course. It was then determined whether clinical signs and symptoms and/or abnormal radiographic findings led to a change in treatment course, which was defined as a therapeutic intervention or further diagnostic testing. RESULTS: Of the 451 patients in this study (average age [and standard deviation], 14.7 ± 2.4 years), 72.5% had adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, 23.3% had neuromuscular scoliosis, and 4.2% had other underlying causes of scoliosis. A change in treatment course occurred in the cases of forty-two patients, all of whom had symptomatic findings on postoperative history and physical examination and only fifteen of whom had supportive abnormal findings on postoperative radiographs. Curve etiology and surgical procedures performed had no impact on radiographic utility. A significant increase in utility was seen for radiographs obtained at visits one year or more following surgery compared with those obtained at visits less than one year following surgery (1.7% compared with 0.3%, p = 0.001). The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of routine postoperative radiographs in guiding treatment course were 35.7%, 98.1%, 28.8%, and 98.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Routine radiographs provide low utility in guiding the course of treatment for asymptomatic pediatric patients following surgery for scoliosis. The results of this study suggest that patient or caregiver complaints, comorbidities, and clinical suspicion should be considered before obtaining radiographs at postoperative visits in order to minimize radiation exposure in pediatric patients and reduce medical costs without compromising care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Preoperative Opioid Use as a Predictor of Adverse Postoperative Self-Reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are commonly used for preoperative pain management in patients undergoing spine surgery. The objective of this investigation was to assess whether preoperative opioid use predicts worse self-reported outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery. METHODS: Five hundred and eighty-three patients undergoing lumbar, thoracolumbar, or cervical spine surgery to treat a structural lesion were included in this prospective cohort study. Self-reported preoperative opioid consumption data were obtained at the preoperative visit and were converted to the corresponding daily morphine equivalent amount. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed at three and twelve months postoperatively via the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey and the EuroQol-5D questionnaire, as well as, when appropriate, the Oswestry Disability Index and the Neck Disability Index. Separate multivariable linear regression analyses were then performed. RESULTS: At the preoperative evaluation, of the 583 patients, 56% (326 patients) reported some degree of opioid use. Multivariable analyses controlling for age, sex, diabetes, smoking, surgery invasiveness, revision surgery, preoperative Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire score, preoperative Zung Depression Scale score, and baseline outcome score found that increased preoperative opioid use was a significant predictor (p < 0.05) of decreased 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey and EuroQol-5D scores, as well as of increased Oswestry Disability Index and Neck Disability Index scores at three and twelve months postoperatively. Every 10-mg increase in daily morphine equivalent amount taken preoperatively was associated with a 0.03 decrease in the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical component summary and mental component summary scores, a 0.01 decrease in the EuroQol-5D score, and a 0.5 increase in the Oswestry Disability Index and Neck Disability Index score at twelve months postoperatively. Higher preoperative Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire and Zung Depression Scale scores were also significant negative predictors (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Increased preoperative opioid consumption, Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire score, and Zung Depression Scale score prior to undergoing spine surgery predicted worse patient-reported outcomes. This suggests the potential benefit of psychological and opioid screening with a multidisciplinary approach that includes weaning of opioid use in the preoperative period and close opioid monitoring postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Approach to pain management in chronic opioid users undergoing orthopaedic surgery.

Opioids are commonly used for the management of pain in patients with musculoskeletal disorders; however, national attention has highlighted the potential adverse effects of the use of opioid analgesia in this and other nonmalignant pain settings. Chronic opioid users undergoing orthopaedic surgery represent a particularly challenging patient population in regard to their perioperative pain control and outcomes. Preoperative evaluation provides an opportunity to estimate a patient's preoperative opioid intake, discuss pain-related fears, and identify potential psychiatric comorbidities. Patients using high levels of opioids may also require referral to an addiction specialist. Various regional blockade and pharmaceutical options are available to help control perioperative pain, and a multimodal pain management approach may be of particular benefit in chronic opioid users undergoing orthopaedic surgery.