Prognosticators of Functional Outcome After Supratentorial Minimally Invasive Intracranial Hemorrhage Evacuation With Tubular Retractor Systems.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prognosticators of good functional outcome after minimally invasive surgical (MIS) intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) evacuation are poorly defined. This study aims to investigate clinical and radiographic prognosticators of poor functional outcome after MIS evacuation of ICH with tubular retractor systems. METHODS: Single-center retrospective review of adult (age ≥18 years) patients who underwent surgical evacuation of a spontaneous supratentorial ICH evacuation using tubular retractors from 2013 to 2022 was performed. Clinical and radiographic factors, such as antiplatelet/anticoagulant use, initial NIH Stroke Scale, ICH score, premorbid modified Rankin Scale (mRS), intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) severity according to the modified Graeb scale, and preoperative/postoperative ICH volume, were collected. The main outcome was poor functional outcome, defined as mRS score of 4-6 within 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were included. Clinical follow-up data were available for 64 (73%) patients. Of those, 43 (67%) had a poor functional outcome. On multivariate Cox regression, postoperative ICH volume ≥15 mL (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.46 [95% CI: 1.25-4.87]; P = .010) and higher modified Graeb score (HR = 1.04 [95% CI: 1-1.1]; P = .035] significantly increased the risk of poor functional outcome. Elevated postoperative ICH volume was predicted by the presence of lobar ICH (vs nonlobar, OR = 3.32 [95% CI: 1.01-11.55]; P = .043) and higher preoperative ICH volume (OR = 1.05 [1.02-1.08]; P < .001). A minimum of 60% ICH evacuation yielded an improvement in mRS 4-6 rates (HR 0.3 [95% CI: 0.1-0.8], P = .013). In patients without IVH and with a >80% ICH evacuation, the rate of mRS 4-6 was 42% compared with 67% in the whole patient sample ( P = .017). CONCLUSION: Increased IVH volumes and residual postoperative ICH volumes are associated with poor functional outcome after MIS ICH evacuation. Postoperative ICH volume was associated with lobar ICH location as well as preoperative ICH volume. These factors may help to prognosticate patient outcomes and improve selection criteria for MIS ICH evacuation techniques.

Flow diversion for the treatment of intracranial bifurcation aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Flow diversion (FD: flow diversion, flow diverter) is an endovascular treatment for many intracranial aneurysm types; however, limited reports have explored the use of FDs in bifurcation aneurysm management. We analyzed the safety and efficacy of FD for the management of intracranial bifurcation aneurysms. METHODS: A systematic review identified original research articles that used FD for treating intracranial bifurcation aneurysms. Articles with >4 patients that reported outcomes on the use of FDs for the management of bifurcation aneurysms along the anterior communicating artery (AComA), internal carotid artery terminus (ICAt), basilar apex (BA), or middle cerebral artery bifurcation (MCAb) were included. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. RESULTS: 19 studies were included with 522 patients harboring 534 bifurcation aneurysms (mean size 9 mm, 78% unruptured). Complete aneurysmal occlusion rate was 68% (95% CI 58.7% to 76.1%, I2=67%) at mean angiographic follow-up of 16 months. Subgroup analysis of FD as a standalone treatment estimated a complete occlusion rate of 69% (95% CI 50% to 83%, I2=38%). The total complication rate was 22% (95% CI 16.7% to 28.6%, I2=51%), largely due to an ischemic complication rate of 16% (95% CI 10.8% to 21.9%, I2=55%). The etiologies of ischemic complications were largely due to jailed artery hypoperfusion (47%) and in-stent thrombosis (38%). 7% of patients suffered permanent symptomatic complications (95% CI 4.5% to 9.8%, I2=6%). CONCLUSION: FD treatment of bifurcation aneurysms has a modest efficacy and relatively unfavorable safety profile. Proceduralists may consider reserving FD as a treatment option if no other surgical or endovascular therapy is deemed feasible.

Management of Patients with Spine Tumors Strengthened by a Dedicated Multidisciplinary Spine Tumor Board: A 15-Year Single-Institutional Experience.

BACKGROUND: Patients with spine tumors frequently require timely, multistep, and multidisciplinary care. A Spine Tumor Board (STB) provides a consistent forum wherein diverse specialists can interact, facilitating complex coordinated care for these patients. This study aims to present a single, large academic center's STB experience specifically reviewing case diversity, recommendations, and quantifying growth over time. METHODS: All patient cases discussed at STB from May 2006 (STB inception) to May 2021 were evaluated. Collected data submitted by presenting physicians and formal documentation completed during the STB are summarized. RESULTS: A total of 4549 cases were reviewed by STB over the study period, representing 2618 unique patients. Over the course of the study, a 266% increase in number of cases presented per week was observed (4.1 to 15.0). Cases were presented by surgeons (74%), radiation oncologists (18%), neurologists (2%), and other specialists (6%). The most common pathologic diagnoses discussed were spinal metastases (n = 1832; 40%), intradural extramedullary tumors (n = 798; 18%), and primary glial tumors (n = 567; 12%). Treatment recommendations included surgery, radiation therapy, or systemic therapy for 1743 cases (38%), continued routine follow-up/expectant management for 1592 cases (35%), supplementary imaging to better clarify the diagnosis for 549 cases (12%), and variable tailored recommendations for the remainder of cases (18%). CONCLUSIONS: Care of patients with spine tumors is complex. We believe that the formation of a stand-alone STB is instrumental to accessing multidisciplinary input, enhancing confidence in management decisions for both patients and providers, assisting with care orchestration, and improving quality of care for patients with spine tumors.

A Retrospective Analysis of the L3-L4 Disc and Spinopelvic Parameters on Outcomes in Thoracolumbar Fusion: Was Art Steffee Right?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the L3-L4 disc angle may be a surrogate marker for global lumbar alignment in thoracolumbar fusion surgery and to explore the relationship between radiographic and patient-reported outcomes after thoracolumbar fusion surgery. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who had undergone a lumbar fusion involving levels from T9 to pelvis. EuroQol-Five Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) scores and adverse events including adjacent-segment disease and degeneration, pseudoarthrosis, proximal junctional kyphosis, stenosis, and reoperation were collected. Pre- and postoperative spinopelvic parameters were measured on weight-bearing radiographs, with the L3-L4 disc angle of novel interest. Univariate logistic and linear regression were performed to assess the associations of radiographic parameters with adverse event incidence and improvement in EQ-5D-3L, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 182 patients met inclusion criteria. Univariable analysis revealed that increased magnitude of L3-L4 disc angle, anterior pelvic tilt, and pelvic incidence measures are associated with increased likelihood of developing postoperative adverse events. Conversely, increased lumbar lordosis demonstrated a decreased incidence of developing a postoperative adverse event. Linear regression showed that radiographic parameters did not significantly correlate with postoperative EQ-5D-3L scores, although scores were significantly improved postfusion in all dimensions except Self-Care (P = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: L3-L4 disc angle magnitude may serve as a surrogate marker of global lumbar alignment. The degree of spinopelvic alignment did not correlate to improvement in EQ-5D-3L score in the present study, suggesting that quality of life metric change may not be a sensitive or specific marker of postfusion alignment.

The Utility of Remote Video Technology in Continuing Neurosurgical Care in the COVID-19 Era: Reflections from the Past Year.

OBJECTIVE: In 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic exposed existing stressors in the neurosurgical care infrastructure in the United States. We aimed to detail innovative technologic solutions inspired by the pandemic-related restrictions that augmented neurosurgical education and care delivery. METHODS: Several digital health and audiovisual innovations were implemented, including use of remote video technology to facilitate inpatient consultations and outpatient ambulatory virtual visits, optimize regional hospital neurosurgical coverage, expand interdisciplinary patient management conferences (i.e., tumor board), and further enhance the neurosurgical resident education program. Enterprise patient experience data were queried to evaluate patient satisfaction following the switch to virtual visits. RESULTS: Between January 2020 and April 2021, use of virtual visits more than doubled in the Department of Neurosurgery. A survey of 10,772 patients following ambulatory visits showed that virtual visits were equal if not better in providing satisfactory patient care than in-person visits. After switching our interdisciplinary spine tumor board to a virtual meeting, we increased surgeon participation and attendance by 49.29%. Integration of remote audiovisual technology in resident didactics and clinical training improved our ability to provide comprehensive and personalized educational experiences our trainees. CONCLUSIONS: Digital health technology has improved neurosurgical care and comprehensive training at our institution. Investment in the technologic infrastructure required for these remote audiovisual services during the COVID-19 pandemic will facilitate the expansion of neurosurgical care provision for patients across the United States in the future. Governing bodies within organized neurosurgery should advocate for the continued financial and licensing support of these service on a national fiscal and policy level.

The change in postoperative opioid prescribing after lumbar decompression surgery following state-level opioid prescribing reform.

OBJECTIVE: On August 31, 2017, the state of Ohio implemented legislation limiting the dosage and duration of opioid prescriptions. Despite the widespread adoption of such restrictions, few studies have investigated the effects of these reforms on opioid prescribing and patient outcomes. In the present study, the authors aimed to evaluate the effect of recent state-level reform on opioid prescribing, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and postoperative emergency department (ED) visits and hospital readmissions after elective lumbar decompression surgery. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent elective lumbar laminectomy for degenerative disease at one of 5 hospitals within a single health system in the years prior to and after the implementation of the statewide reform (September 1, 2016-August 31, 2018). Patients were classified according to the timing of their surgery relative to implementation of the prescribing reform: before reform (September 1, 2016-August 31, 2017) or after reform (September 1, 2017- August 31, 2018). The outcomes of interest included total outpatient opioids prescribed in the 90 days following discharge from surgery as measured in morphine-equivalent doses (MEDs), total number of opioid refill prescriptions written, patient-reported pain at the first postoperative outpatient visit as measured by the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, improvement in patient-reported health-related quality of life as measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Global Health (PROMIS-GH) questionnaire, and ED visits or hospital readmissions within 90 days of surgery. RESULTS: A total of 1031 patients met the inclusion criteria for the study, with 469 and 562 in the before- and after-reform groups, respectively. After-reform patients received 26% (95% CI 19%-32%) fewer MEDs in the 90 days following discharge compared with the before-reform patients. No significant differences were observed in the overall number of opioid prescriptions written, PROs, or postoperative ED or hospital readmissions within 90 days in the year after the implementation of the prescribing reform. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing surgery in the year after the implementation of a state-level opioid prescribing reform received significantly fewer MEDs while reporting no change in the total number of opioid prescriptions, PROs, or postoperative ED visits or hospital readmissions. These results demonstrate that state-level reforms placing reasonable limits on opioid prescriptions written for acute pain may decrease patient opioid exposure without negatively impacting patient outcomes after lumbar decompression surgery.

Osteobiologics.

BACKGROUND: Osteobiologics are engineered materials that facilitate bone healing and have been increasingly used in spine surgery. Autologous iliac crest bone grafts have been used historically, but morbidity associated with graft harvesting has led surgeons to seek alternative solutions. Allograft bone, biomaterial scaffolds, growth factors, and stem cells have been explored as bone graft substitutes and supplements. OBJECTIVE: To review current and emerging osteobiologic technologies. METHODS: A literature review of English-language studies was performed in PubMed. Search terms included combinations of "spine," "fusion," "osteobiologics," "autologous," "allogen(e)ic," "graft," "scaffold," "bone morphogenic protein," and "stem cells." RESULTS: Evidence supports allograft bone as an autologous bone supplement or replacement in scenarios where minimal autologous bone is available. There are promising data on ceramics and P-15; however, comparative human trials remain scarce. Growth factors, including recombinant human bone morphogenic proteins (rhBMPs) 2 and 7, have been explored in humans after successful animal trials. Evidence continues to support the use of rhBMP-2 in lumbar fusion in patient populations with poor bone quality or revision surgery, while there is limited evidence for rhBMP-7. Stem cells have been incredibly promising in promoting fusion in animal models, but human trials to this point have only involved products with questionable stem cell content, thereby limiting possible conclusions. CONCLUSION: Engineered stem cells that overexpress osteoinductive factors are likely the future of spine fusion, but issues with applying viral vector-transduced stem cells in humans have limited progress.

Late-week surgery and discharge to specialty care associated with higher costs and longer lengths of stay after elective lumbar laminectomy.

OBJECTIVE: In a healthcare landscape in which costs increasingly matter, the authors sought to distinguish among the clinical and nonclinical drivers of patient length of stay (LOS) in the hospital following elective lumbar laminectomy-a common spinal surgery that may be reimbursed using bundled payments-and to understand their relationships with patient outcomes and costs. METHODS: Patients ≥ 18 years of age undergoing laminectomy surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis within the Cleveland Clinic health system between March 1, 2016, and February 1, 2019, were included in this analysis. Generalized linear modeling was used to assess the relationships between the day of surgery, patient discharge disposition, and hospital LOS, while adjusting for underlying patient health risks and other nonclinical factors, including the hospital surgery site and health insurance. RESULTS: A total of 1359 eligible patients were included in the authors' analysis. The mean LOS ranged between 2.01 and 2.47 days for Monday and Friday cases, respectively. The LOS was also notably longer for patients who were ultimately discharged to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) or rehabilitation center. A prolonged LOS occurring later in the week was not associated with greater underlying health risks, yet it nevertheless resulted in greater costs of care: the average total surgical costs for lumbar laminectomy were 20% greater for Friday cases than for Monday cases, and 24% greater for late-week cases than for early-week cases ultimately transferred to SNFs or rehabilitation centers. A Poisson generalized linear model fit the data best and showed that the comorbidity burden, surgery at a tertiary care center versus a community hospital, and the incidence of any postoperative complication were associated with significantly longer hospital stays. Discharge to home healthcare, SNFs, or rehabilitation centers, and late-week surgery were significant nonclinical predictors of LOS prolongation, even after adjusting for underlying patient health risks and insurance, with LOSs that were, for instance, 1.55 and 1.61 times longer for patients undergoing their procedure on Thursday and Friday compared to Monday, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Late-week surgeries are associated with a prolonged LOS, particularly when discharge is to an SNF or rehabilitation center. These findings point to opportunities to lower costs and improve outcomes associated with elective surgical care. Interventions to optimize surgical scheduling and perioperative care coordination could help reduce prolonged LOSs, lower costs, and, ultimately, give service line management personnel greater flexibility over how to use existing resources as they remain ahead of healthcare reforms.

Key drivers of patient satisfaction with spine surgeons in the outpatient setting.

OBJECTIVE: The Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician & Group Survey (CG-CAHPS) was developed as a result of the value-based purchasing initiative by the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It allows patients to rate their experience with their provider in the outpatient setting. These ratings are then reported in aggregate and made publicly available, allowing patients to make informed choices during physician selection. In this study, the authors sought to elucidate the primary drivers of patient satisfaction in the office-based spine surgery setting as represented by the CG-CAHPS. METHODS: All patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery between 2009 and 2017 and completed a patient experience survey were studied. The satisfied group comprised patients who selected a top-box score (9 or 10) for overall provider rating (OPR) on the CG-CAHPS, while the unsatisfied group comprised the remaining patients. Demographic and surgical characteristics were compared using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the Student t-test for continuous variables. A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to analyze the association of patient and surgeon characteristics with OPR. Survey items were then added to the baseline model individually, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: The study population included 647 patients who had undergone lumbar spine surgery. Of these patients, 564 (87%) selected an OPR of 9 or 10 on the CG-CAHPS and were included in the satisfied group. Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. The two groups did not differ significantly regarding patient-reported health status measures. After adjusting for potential confounders, the following survey items were associated with the greatest odds of selecting a top-box OPR: did this provider show respect for what you had to say? (OR 21.26, 95% CI 9.98-48.10); and did this provider seem to know the important information about your medical history? (OR 20.93, 95% CI 11.96-45.50). CONCLUSIONS: The present study sought to identify the key drivers of patient satisfaction in the postoperative office-based spine surgery setting and found several important associations. After adjusting for potential confounders, several items relating to physician communication were found to be the strongest predictors of patient satisfaction. This highlights the importance of effective communication in the patient-provider interaction and elucidates avenues for quality improvement efforts in the spine care setting.

The association of preoperative TNF-alpha inhibitor use and reoperation rates in spinal fusion surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Preoperative TNF-AI use has been associated with increased rate of postoperative infections and complications in a variety of orthopedic procedures. However, the association between TNF-AI use and complications following spine surgery has not yet been studied. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to assess the risk of reoperation in patients prescribed TNF-AI undergoing spinal fusion surgery. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective review. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 427 patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery at a large healthcare system from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2018. OUTCOME MEASURE: Reoperation within 1 year. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery at a large healthcare system from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2018. There were three distinct cohorts of spine surgery patients under study: patients with TNF-AI use in 90 days before surgery, patients with non-TNF-AI DMARD medications use in the 90 days before surgery, and patients taking neither TNF-AI nor other DMARD medications in 90 days before surgery. The primary outcome of interest was reoperation for any reason within 1 year following surgery. RESULTS: Our study included 90 TNF-AI, 90 DMARD, and 123 control patients. Reoperation up to 1-year postsurgery occurred in 19% (n=17) of the TNF-AI group, 11% (n=10) of the DMARD group, and 6% (n=7) of the control group. The reasons for reoperation for TNF-AI group were 47% (n=8) infection and 53% (n=9) other causes which included failure to fuse and adjacent segment disease. Reasons for reoperation at 1 year were 40% (n=4) infection and 60% (n=6) other causes for DMARD patients and 14% (n=1) infection with 86% (n=6) other causes for control patients. The cox-proportional hazard model of reoperation within 1 year indicated that the odds of reoperation were 3.1 (95% CI:1.4-7.0) and 2.2 (95% CI 0.96-5.3) times higher in the TNF-AI and DMARD groups, respectively, compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients taking TNF-AIs before surgery were found to have a significantly higher rate of reoperation in the 1 year following surgery compared to controls. The higher rate of reoperation associated with TNF-AI use before spinal fusion surgery represents the potential for higher morbidity and costs for patient which is important to consider for both surgeon and patient in preoperative decision making.

The Impact of Preoperative Depression on Patient Satisfaction With Spine Surgeons in the Outpatient Setting.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the association between preoperative depression and patient satisfaction in the outpatient spine clinic after lumbar surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Clinician and Group Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey is used to measure patient experience in the outpatient setting. CG-CAHPS scores may be used by health systems in physician incentive programs and quality improvement initiatives or by prospective patients when selecting spine surgeons. Although preoperative depression has been shown to predict poor patient-reported outcomes and less satisfaction with the inpatient experience following lumbar surgery, its impact on patient experience with spine surgeons in the outpatient setting remains unclear. METHODS: Patients who underwent lumbar surgery and completed the CG-CAHPS survey at postoperative follow-up with their spine surgeon between 2009 and 2017 were included. Data were collected on patient demographics, Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) scores, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global Health Physical Health (PROMIS-GPH) subscores. Patients with preoperative PHQ-9 scores ≥10 (moderate-to-severe depression) were included in the depressed cohort. The association between preoperative depression and top-box satisfaction ratings on several dimensions of the CG-CAHPS survey was examined. RESULTS: Of the 419 patients included in this study, 72 met criteria for preoperative depression. Depressed patients were less likely to provide top-box satisfaction ratings on CG-CAHPS metrics pertaining to physician communication and overall provider rating (OPR). Even after controlling for patient-level covariates, our multivariate analysis revealed that depressed patients had lower odds of reporting top-box OPR (odds ratio [OR]: 0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06-0.63, P = 0.007), feeling that their spine surgeon provided understandable explanations (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11-0.91, P = 0.032), and feeling that their spine surgeon provided understandable responses to their questions or concerns (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.06-0.63, P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Preoperative depression is independently associated with lower OPR and satisfaction with spine surgeon communication in the outpatient setting after lumbar surgery.Level of Evidence: 3.

Is it safe to stop at C7 during multilevel posterior cervical decompression and fusion? - multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Despite a number of studies addressing the anatomical and biomechanical challenges of long segment, posterior cervical fusion surgery, recommendations for appropriate caudal "end level" vary widely. PURPOSE: Compare revision rates, patient reported outcomes and radiographic outcomes in patients in whom 3+ level posterior fusions ended in the cervical spine versus those in whom the fusion was extended into the thoracic spine. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective analysis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), cervical lordosis, C2-C7 sagittal plumbline, T1 slope, and revision rate. METHODS: We assembled a radiographic and clinical database of patients that had undergone three or more level posterior cervical fusions for degenerative disease from January 2013 to May 2015 at one of four busy spine centers. Only those patients with at least 2 years of postoperative (postop) follow-up were included. Patients were divided into two groups: group I (fusion ending at C6 or C7) and group II (fusion extending into the thoracic spine). All radiographic measurements (cervical lordosis, T1 slope, and C2-C7 sagittal plumbline) were performed by an independent experienced clinical researcher. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-four patient cases were reviewed and sorted into the two outlined groups, Group I (n=168) and Group II (n=96). Demographically, mean age, percentage of females, non-smokers and anterior support were greater in Group II than in Groups I (p<.05). Mean estimated blood loss (EBL), operative time (OR) and length of hospital stay (LOS) were significantly higher in Group II (p<.05). Rate of revision was not clinically or statistically significantly different (p>.05) between Group I (11.1%) and Group II (9.4%). The majority of the revision surgeries occurred between 2 to 5 years postop. A greater number of subjacent degeneration/spondylolisthesis events were noted in Group I compared with Group II (3.6% vs. 1.2%). There were significant improvements in mean clinical outcomes (ie, VAS and ODI) at two years postop in both groups, but there were no statistically significant differences between the groups (p>.05). Mean cervical lordosis at 2 years postop improved in all groups (12.8° vs. 14.1°); however, there was no significant statistical difference in change for mean cervical lordosis (2 weeks vs. 2 year postop) between the two groups. Similary, there were no significant statistical differences in change for mean C2-C7 sagittal plumbline and T1 slope (2 weeks vs. 2 year postop) between the two groups(p>.05). CONCLUSIONS: Caudal end level did not significantly affect revision rates, patient reported outcomes or radiographic outcomes. Higher EBL, OR, and LOS in group II suggest that, absent focal C7-T1 pathology, extension of posterior cervical fusions into the thoracic spine may not be necessary. Extension of posterior cervical fusions into the thoracic spine may be recommended for higher risk patients with limitations to strong C7 bone anchorage. In others, it is safe to stop at C7.

The association between patient rating of their spine surgeon and quality of postoperative outcome.

OBJECTIVE: The Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey was developed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as a result of their value-based purchasing initiative. It allows patients to rate their experience with their provider in the outpatient setting. This presents a unique situation in healthcare in which the patient experience drives the marketplace, and since its creation, providers have sought to improve patient satisfaction. Within the spine surgery setting, however, the question remains whether improved patient satisfaction correlates with improved outcomes. METHODS: All patients who had undergone lumbar spine surgery between 2009 and 2017 and who completed a CG-CAHPS survey after their procedure were studied. Demographic and surgical characteristics were then obtained. The primary outcomes of this study include patient-reported health outcomes measures such as the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health (PROMIS-GH) surveys for both mental health (PROMIS-GH-MH) and physical health (PROMIS-GH-PH), and the visual analog scale for back pain (VAS-BP). A multivariable linear regression analysis was used to assess whether patient satisfaction with their provider was associated with changes in each health status measure after adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: The study population included 647 patients who had undergone lumbar spine surgery. Of these, 564 (87%) indicated that they were satisfied with the care they received. Demographic and surgical characteristics were largely similar between the two groups. Multivariable linear regression demonstrated that patient satisfaction with their provider was not a significant predictor of change in two of the three patient-reported outcomes (PROMIS-GH-MH and PROMIS-GH-PH) assessed at 1 year. However, top-box patient satisfaction with their provider was a significant predictor of improvement in VAS-BP scores at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The authors found that after adjusting for patient-level covariates such as age, diagnosis of disc displacement, self-reported mental health, self-reported overall health, and preoperative patient-reported outcome measure status, a significant association was observed between top-box overall provider rating and 1-year improvement in VAS-BP, but no such association was observed for PROMIS-GH-PH and PROMIS-GH-MH. This suggests that pain-related outcome measures may serve as better predictors of patients' satisfaction with their spine surgeons. Furthermore, this suggests that the current method by which patient satisfaction is being assessed and publicly reported may not necessarily correlate with validated measures that are used within the spine surgery setting to assess surgical efficacy.

The Association Between Physicians' Communication and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: Determine the association between satisfaction with physician communication and patient-reported outcomes in the inpatient spine surgery setting. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys measure the patient experience of care and influence reimbursement for hospital systems and providers in the United States. It is not known whether patient satisfaction with physician communication is associated with better outcomes after spine surgery. Therefore, we evaluated the association between patient satisfaction with physician communication on the HCAHPS survey and improvements in validated patient-reported outcomes measures in a spine surgery population. METHODS: HCAHPS responses were obtained for patients undergoing elective cervical or lumbar spine surgery from 2013 to 2015. Patient-reported health status measures were the primary outcomes, including EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ-5D), Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), and Visual Analog Scores for Back and Neck Pain (VAS-BP/NP). The association between satisfaction with communication and preoperative to 1 year postoperative changes in each health status measure was evaluated utilizing multivariable linear regression models. RESULTS: Our study included 648 patients, of which, 479 (74.4%) created our satisfied cohort. Demographically, our two cohorts were similar with regards to preoperative clinical measures; however, the satisfied cohort had a higher self-rating of their mental health (P < 0.01), and overall health (P < 0.01). After adjusting for clinically relevant confounders, our results demonstrated no significant association between satisfaction with physician communication and improvement in EQ-5D (P = 0.312), PDQ (P = 0.498), or VAS pain scores (P = 0.592). CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction with physician communication was not associated with 1-year postoperative improvement in EQ-5D, PDQ, and VAS-Pain after spine surgery. These findings do not diminish the importance of effective communication between doctor and patient, but instead suggest that within the spine surgery setting, using only patient experience data may not accurately reflect the true quality of care received during their inpatient stay. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Exploring perioperative complications of anterior lumber interbody fusion in patients with a history of prior abdominal surgery: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) exposes the anterior aspect of the spine through a retroperitoneal approach. Access to the anterior spine requires mobilization of intra-abdominal viscera/vasculature, which can become complicated as scarring and/or adhesions develop from prior abdominal surgical interventions, increasing risk of intraoperative complications. The literature suggests that "significant prior abdominal surgery" is a relative contraindication of ALIF surgery; however, there is no consensus within the literature as to what defines "major/significant" abdominal surgeries. Additionally, the association between the number of prior abdominal surgeries and perioperative complications in ALIF surgery has not been explored within the literature. PURPOSE: This study seeks to explore the association between perioperative complications of ALIF surgery and the type (major and/or minor) and number of prior abdominal surgeries. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was performed to examine perioperative complications in ALIF patients with or without prior history of abdominal surgery. PATIENT SAMPLE: All consecutive patients undergoing ALIF with or without a history of prior abdominal surgery from 2008 to 2018 at a single tertiary center were evaluated. Patients under the age of 18, patients with spinal malignancy, or patients who had ALIF above L3 were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative complications included intraoperative complications during ALIF surgery and postoperative complications within 90 days of ALIF surgery. Intraoperative complications include vascular injury, ureter injury, retroperitoneal hematoma, etc. Postoperative complications include urinary tract infection, revision of abdominal scar, ileus, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, etc. Other outcome measures include readmission within 90 days, length of ALIF surgery, and length of hospital stay. METHODS: Electronic medical records of 660 patients who underwent ALIF between 2008 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, Charleston Comorbidity Index (CCI), level of fusion, past abdominal surgical history, use of access surgeon during exposure, intraoperative, and postoperative complications were collected. Predictors of intraoperative and postoperative complications were analyzed using simple and multivariable logistic regression. Statistical analysis was performed using JMP 14.0 (SAS, Cary, NC, USA) software. RESULTS: After controlling for age, length of ALIF, gender, multilevel ALIF, and the use of an access surgeon, there was no significant association between the type of prior abdominal surgery (major and/or minor) and intraoperative complications on multivariable logistic regression analysis (Minor: odds ratio [OR]=1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-4.86 & Major: OR=1.99; 95% CI: 0.80-4.91). On multivariable logistic regression, the odds of developing an intraoperative complication increases by 52% for each additional prior abdominal surgery after adjusting for age, length of ALIF, gender, multilevel ALIF, and the use of an access surgeon (OR=1.52, 95% CI: 1.10-2.11). Iliac vein laceration was the most common intraoperative complication (n=27, 4%). Neither the type (major and/or minor) nor the number of prior abdominal surgeries were significant predictors of postoperative complications (Minor: OR=1.29; 95% CI: .72-2.31, Major: OR=1.24; 95% CI: 0.77-2.00, & Number: OR=1.03; 95% CI: .84-1.26). CONCLUSION: With each additional prior abdominal surgery, accumulation of scarring and adhesions can likely obscure anatomical landmarks and increase the risk of developing an intraoperative complication. Therefore, the number of prior abdominal surgeries should be taken into consideration during planning and operative exposure of the anterior spine via a retroperitoneal approach.

The Impact of Preoperative Depression on Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey Results in a Cervical Spine Surgery Setting.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the association between preoperative depression and patient experience in a cervical spine surgery population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey is used to measure patient experience and its scores directly influence reimbursement in the United States. Although it is well-established in the literature that untreated depression is associated with worse patient-reported outcomes in cervical spine surgery, no previous studies have analyzed the association between depression and patient satisfaction for these patients. METHODS: HCAHPS survey responses from patients undergoing cervical spine surgery between 2013 and 2015 were collected at a tertiary care center. HCHAPS survey responses were linked to demographic data as well as patient-reported quality of life (QOL) metrics including Patient Health Questionnaire, EuroQol 5 Dimensions index, and Visual Analog Scale for neck pain for each patient. Preoperative PHQ-9 scores of ≥10 (moderate to severe depression) was used to define preoperative depression. Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed to investigate the association of preoperative depression and top-box scores on several dimensions on the HCAHPS survey. RESULTS: In our 145-patient cohort, depressed patients were on average younger, had higher preoperative neck pain scores, and had a lower health-related QOL. Depressed patients were less likely to report satisfaction with questions related to doctor respect (P = 0.020) and doctors listening (P = 0.030). After adjusting for covariates, multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that patients with preoperative depression had lower odds of feeling respected by their physicians (odds ratio = 0.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.87, P = 0.035). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing cervical spine surgery, preoperative depression was found to have a negative association with patient perceptions of doctor communication as measured by the HCAHPS survey. These results highlight depression as a risk factor for worse patient experience communicating with their spine surgeon. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Impact of length of stay on HCAHPS scores following lumbar spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys, completed by patients following an inpatient stay, are utilized to assess patient satisfaction and quality of the patient experience. HCAHPS results directly impact hospital and provider reimbursements. While recent work has demonstrated that pre- and postoperative factors can affect HCAHPS results following lumbar spine surgery, little is known about how these results are influenced by hospital length of stay (LOS). Here, the authors examined HCAHPS results in patients with LOSs greater or less than expected following lumbar spine surgery to determine whether LOS influences survey scores after these procedures. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of HCAHPS surveys, patient demographics, and outcomes following lumbar spine surgery at a single institution. A total of 391 patients who had undergone lumbar spine surgery and had completed an HCAHPS survey in the period between 2013 and 2015 were included in this analysis. Patients were divided into those with a hospital LOS equal to or less than the expected (LTE-LOS) and those with a hospital LOS longer than expected (GTE-LOS). Expected LOS was based on the University HealthSystem Consortium benchmarks. Nineteen questions from the HCAHPS survey were examined in relation to patient LOS. The primary outcome measure was a comparison of "top-box" ("9-10" or "always or usually") versus "low-box" ("1-8" and "somewhat or never") scores on the HCAHPS questions. Secondary outcomes of interest were whether the comorbid conditions of cancer, chronic renal failure, diabetes, coronary artery disease, hypertension, stroke, or depression occurred differently with respect to LOS. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test for the 2 × 2 contingency tables and the chi-square test for categorical variables. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-seven patients had an LTE-LOS, whereas 134 patients had a GTE-LOS. The only statistically significant difference in preoperative characteristics between the patient groups was hypertension, which correlated to a shorter LOS. A GTE-LOS was associated with a decreased likelihood of a top-box score for the HCAHPS survey items on doctor listening and pain control. CONCLUSIONS: Here, the authors report a decreased likelihood of top-box responses for some HCAHPS questions following lumbar spine surgery if LOS is prolonged. This study highlights the need to further examine the factors impacting LOS, identify patients at risk for long hospital stays, and improve mechanisms to increase the quality and efficiency of care delivered to this patient population.

Risk factors for 90-day reoperation and readmission after lumbar surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for 90-day readmission and reoperation after elective surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective consecutive cohort analysis of patients undergoing posterior lumbar decompression with or without fusion for LSS with claudication from January 2014 through December 2015. RESULTS: Data were collected on 1592 consecutive patients. The mean age at surgery was 67.4 ± 10.1 years and 45% of patients were female. The 90-day reoperation rate was 4.7%, and 69.3% of the reoperations occurred within the first 30 days. The 90-day readmission rate was 7.2%. Multivariable analysis showed that postoperative development of a surgical site infection (SSI; odds ratio [OR] 14.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.86­25.18), acute kidney injury (AKI; OR 6.76, 95% CI 2.39­19.57), and urinary tract infection (UTI; OR 3.96, 95% CI 2.43­6.37), as well as a history of congestive heart failure (CHF; OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.69­5.28), were significant risk factors for readmission within 90 days. Male sex (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38­0.92) was associated with decreased odds for readmission. With regards to reoperation, development of SSI (OR 25.06, 95% CI 13.54­46.51), sepsis (OR 7.63, 95% CI 1.52­40.59), UTI (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.31­4.76), and increased length of stay (LOS; OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.17­1.33) were found to be significant risk factors. A subsequent analysis found that morbid obesity (OR 6.99), history of coronary artery disease (OR 2.263), increased duration of surgery (OR 1.004), and LOS (OR 1.07) were significant risk factors for developing an SSI. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study found rates of 4.7% and 7.2% for reoperation and readmission, respectively, within 90 days: 30.7% of the reoperations and 44.7% of the readmissions occurred beyond the first 30 days. A diagnosis of SSI, AKI, UTI, and history of CHF were significant factors for readmission, while male sex was associated with decreased odds for readmission. A diagnosis of SSI, sepsis, UTI, and increased LOS were found to be significant predictors for reoperation. Understanding 90-day complication rates is imperative because there has been increased discussion and healthcare policy extending the global postoperative window to 90 days. Current literature supports a readmission rate of 3%­9% after spine surgery. However, this literature either is limited to a 30-day window or does not stratify between different types of spine surgeries. ABBREVIATIONS: AKI = acute kidney injury; BPH = benign prostate hyperplasia; CAD = coronary artery disease; CHF = congestive heart failure; CI = confidence interval; CMS = Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; DM = diabetes mellitus; EBL = estimated blood loss; LOS = length of stay; LSS = lumbar spinal stenosis; OR = odds ratio; POUR = postoperative urinary retention; SSI = surgical site infection; UTI = urinary tract infection.

Patient-reported Allergies are Associated With Preoperative Psychological Distress and Less Satisfying Patient Experience in a Lumbar Spine Surgery Population.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The main objectives of this study were: (1) to determine whether patient-reported allergies (PRAs) are associated with patient satisfaction scores, and (2) to clarify the association between PRAs and preoperative anxiety and depression in a lumbar spine surgery population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey is currently used to measure the patient experience and there is concern that psychosocial factors are unaccounted for. Interestingly, PRAs have been linked to concurrent mood and other psychiatric disorders, as well as poor clinical outcomes in the orthopedic surgery setting. METHODS: HCAHPS survey data, patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and preoperative health status were obtained for each patient. Allergies were categorized as medical (ie, medications) and environmental (ie, food, animals). Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine whether the number of medical and environmental PRAs are associated with HCAHPS scores. In addition, multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the association between PRAs and psychological distress. RESULTS: In 421 patients included, PRAs were associated with lower HCAHPS scores under several dimensions of the patient experience of care, including: nursing communication, pain management, communication about medicines, and transition of care. Medical PRAs was an independent predictor of low satisfaction with communication about a medication's side effects [odds ratio (OR), 0.88; P=0.03] and understanding the purpose for new medications (OR, 0.90; P=0.03). Environmental PRAs was an independent predictor of low satisfaction with both communication about a medication's side effects (OR, 0.68; P=0.03), and pain control (OR, 0.67; P=0.01). Moreover, having a PRA (OR, 1.64; P=0.04) was associated with EuroQol-5 Dimensions anxiety/depression and having an environmental PRA (OR, 2.13; P=0.03) was associated with depression. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential utility of PRAs to help identify patients with psychological distress who are at risk for a poor experience of lumbar spine surgery.