Global Neurosurgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study to Compare the Effectiveness of Two Training Methods in Resource-Poor Settings.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Many low- and middle-income countries are experiencing profound health care workforce shortages. Surgical subspecialists generally practice in large urban centers but are in high demand in rural areas. These subspecialists must be trained through sustainable programs to address this disparity. We quantitatively compared the relative effectiveness of 2 unique training models to advance neurosurgical skills in resource-poor settings where formally trained neurosurgeons are unavailable. METHODS: Neurosurgical procedure data were collected from 2 hospitals in Tanzania (Haydom Lutheran Hospital [HLH] and Bugando Medical Centre [BMC]), where 2 distinct training models ("Train Forward" and "Back-to-Back," respectively) were incorporated between 2005 and 2012. RESULTS: The most common procedures performed were ventriculoperitoneal shunt (BMC: 559, HLH: 72), spina bifida repair (BMC: 187, HLH: 54), craniotomy (BMC: 61, HLH: 19), bone elevation (BMC: 42, HLH: 32), and craniotomy and evacuation (BMC: 18, HLH: 34). The number of annual procedures at BMC increased from 148 in 2008 to 357 in 2012; at HLH, they increased from 18 in 2005 to 80 in 2010. Postoperative complications over time decreased or did not significantly change at both sites as the diversity of procedures increased. CONCLUSION: The Train Forward and Back-to-Back training models were associated with increased surgical volume and complexity without increased complications. However, only the Train Forward model resulted in local, autonomous training of surgical subspecialists after completion of the initial training period. Incorporating the Train Forward method into existing training programs in low- and middle-income countries may provide unique benefits over historic training practices.

Cost Transparency in Neurosurgery: A Single-Institution Analysis of Patient Out-of-Pocket Spending in 13 673 Consecutive Neurosurgery Cases.

BACKGROUND: Patient out-of-pocket (OOP) spending is an increasingly discussed topic; however, there is minimal data available on the patient financial burden of surgical procedures. OBJECTIVE: To analyze hospital and surgeon expected payment data and patient OOP spending in neurosurgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of neurosurgical patients at a tertiary-referral center from 2013 to 2016. Expected payments, reflecting negotiated costs-of-care, as well as actual patient OOP payments for hospital care and surgeon professional fees were analyzed. A 4-tiered model of patient OOP cost sharing and a multivariate model of patient expected payments were created. RESULTS: A total of 13 673 consecutive neurosurgical cases were analyzed. Patient age, insurance type, case category, severity of illness, length of stay (LOS), and elective case status were significant predictors of increased expected payments (P < .05). Craniotomy ($53 397 ± 811) and posterior spinal fusion ($48 329 ± 864) were associated with the highest expected payments. In a model of patient OOP cost sharing, nearly all neurosurgical procedures exceeded yearly OOP maximums for Healthcare Marketplace plans. Mean patient payments for hospital care and surgeon professional fees were the highest for anterior/lateral spinal fusion cases for commercially insured patients ($1662 ± 165). Mean expected payments and mean patient payments for commercially insured patients increased significantly from 2013 to 2016 (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Expected payments and patient OOP spending for commercially insured patients significantly increased from 2013 to 2016, representing increased healthcare costs and patient cost sharing in an evolving healthcare environment. Patients and providers can consider this information prior to surgery to better anticipate the individual financial burden for neurosurgical care.