Implementation of Outpatient Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression at an Academic Medical Center without Ambulatory Surgery Centers: A Cost Analysis and Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar decompressions are increasingly performed at ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). We sought to compare costs of open and minimally invasive (MIS) lumbar decompressions performed at a university without dedicated ASCs. METHODS: Lumbar decompressions performed at a tertiary academic hospital or satellite university hospital dedicated to outpatient surgery were retrospectively reviewed. Care pathways were same-day, overnight observation, or inpatient admission. Patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, Charlson Comorbidity Index, surgical characteristics, 30-day readmission, and costs were collected. A systematic review of lumbar decompression cost literature was performed. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients, mean age 55 years with 128 women (36.2%), were reviewed. There was no significant difference in age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, or Charlson Comorbidity Index between patients treated with open and minimally invasive surgery. Open decompression was associated with higher total cost ($21,280 vs. $14,407; P < 0.001); however, this was driven by care pathway and length of stay. When stratifying by care pathway, there was no difference in total cost between open versus minimally invasive surgery among same-day ($10,609 vs. $11,074; P = 0.556), overnight observation ($14,097 vs. $13,992; P = 0.918), or inpatient admissions ($24,507 vs. $27,929; P = 0.311). CONCLUSIONS: When accounting for care pathway, the cost of open and MIS decompression were no different. Transition from a tertiary academic hospital to a university hospital specializing in outpatient surgery was not associated with lower costs. Academic departments may consider transitioning lumbar decompressions to a dedicated ASC to maximize cost savings; however, additional studies are needed.

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.

Contextualizing Oncologic Imaging Utilization Through End-of-Life Spending Patterns.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of spending patterns during the final year of life on high-cost imaging utilization in the final 3 months of life. METHODS: An academic comprehensive cancer center's radiology, cancer registry, and claims records were matched to identify decedents with dates of death from April 2013 through June 2014. Spending patterns in the final year of life were identified using group-based trajectory modeling. Descriptive analysis of CT, MRI, and PET utilization across trajectories was conducted. Multivariate logistic regressions modeled the likelihood of imaging utilization in the final 3 months of life, and a sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of spending trajectories on model fit. RESULTS: Six spending trajectories were identified. Membership in the late rising trajectory was the strongest predictor of high-cost imaging in the final 3 months of life (odds ratio, 11.61; P = .000), followed by diagnosis 12 to 6 months premortem (odds ratio, 7.49; P = .000). The likelihood of imaging the final 3 months of life was no different between high persistent and low persistent trajectory patients, despite the heterogeneity between the two patient groups. Sensitivity analysis indicated that spending trajectory improved the prediction of imaging in the final 3 months of life to a greater extent than temporal proximity to death at the time of diagnosis, which may serve as a proxy for severity and/or complexity. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical measures of severity and patients' utilization histories should be considered by hospital administrators in estimations of aggregate and individual oncologic imaging utilization. This analytic approach may aid in evaluating participation in advanced payment models.