Impact of Racial/Ethnic Disparities on Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Cervical Spine Surgery: QOD Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data from the cervical module of a National Spine Registry, the Quality Outcomes Database. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of race and ethnicity with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at one year after cervical spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Evidence suggests that Black individuals are 39% to 44% more likely to have postoperative complications and a prolonged length of stay after cervical spine surgery compared with Whites. The long-term recovery assessed with PROMs after cervical spine surgery among Black, Hispanic, and other non-Hispanic groups ( i.e . Asian) remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PROMs were used to assess disability (neck disability index) and neck/arm pain preoperatively and one-year postoperative. Primary outcomes were disability and pain, and not being satisfied from preoperative to 12 months after surgery. Multivariable logistic and proportional odds regression analyses were used to determine the association of racial/ethnic groups [Hispanic, non-Hispanic White (NHW), non-Hispanic Black (NHB), and non-Hispanic Asian (NHA)] with outcomes after covariate adjustment and to compute the odds of each racial/ethnic group achieving a minimal clinically important difference one-year postoperatively. RESULTS: On average, the sample of 14,429 participants had significant reductions in pain and disability, and 87% were satisfied at one-year follow-up. Hispanic and NHB patients had higher odds of not being satisfied (40% and 80%) and having worse pain outcomes (30%-70%) compared with NHW. NHB had 50% higher odds of worse disability scores compared with NHW. NHA reported similar disability and neck pain outcomes compared with NHW. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic and NHB patients had worse patient-reported outcomes one year after cervical spine surgery compared with NHW individuals, even after adjusting for potential confounders, yet there was no difference in disability and neck pain outcomes reported for NHA patients. This study highlights the need to address inherent racial/ethnic disparities in recovery trajectories following cervical spine surgery.

Effect of a Biopsychosocial Intervention or Postural Therapy on Disability and Health Care Spending Among Patients With Acute and Subacute Spine Pain: The SPINE CARE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Low back and neck pain are often self-limited, but health care spending remains high. Objective: To evaluate the effects of 2 interventions that emphasize noninvasive care for spine pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, cluster, randomized clinical trial conducted at 33 centers in the US that enrolled 2971 participants with neck or back pain of 3 months' duration or less (enrollment, June 2017 to March 2020; final follow-up, March 2021). Interventions: Participants were randomized at the clinic-level to (1) usual care (n = 992); (2) a risk-stratified, multidisciplinary intervention (the identify, coordinate, and enhance [ICE] care model that combines physical therapy, health coach counseling, and consultation from a specialist in pain medicine or rehabilitation) (n = 829); or (3) individualized postural therapy (IPT), a postural therapy approach that combines physical therapy with building self-efficacy and self-management (n = 1150). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were change in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at 3 months (range, 0 [best] to 100 [worst]; minimal clinically important difference, 6) and spine-related health care spending at 1 year. A 2-sided significance threshold of .025 was used to define statistical significance. Results: Among 2971 participants randomized (mean age, 51.7 years; 1792 women [60.3%]), 2733 (92%) finished the trial. Between baseline and 3-month follow-up, mean ODI scores changed from 31.2 to 15.4 for ICE, from 29.3 to 15.4 for IPT, and from 28.9 to 19.5 for usual care. At 3-month follow-up, absolute differences compared with usual care were -5.8 (95% CI, -7.7 to -3.9; P < .001) for ICE and -4.3 (95% CI, -5.9 to -2.6; P < .001) for IPT. Mean 12-month spending was $1448, $2528, and $1587 in the ICE, IPT, and usual care groups, respectively. Differences in spending compared with usual care were -$139 (risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.87 to 0.997]; P = .04) for ICE and $941 (risk ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.35 to 1.45]; P < .001) for IPT. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute or subacute spine pain, a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention or an individualized postural therapy intervention, each compared with usual care, resulted in small but statistically significant reductions in pain-related disability at 3 months. However, compared with usual care, the biopsychosocial intervention resulted in no significant difference in spine-related health care spending and the postural therapy intervention resulted in significantly greater spine-related health care spending at 1 year. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03083886.

Design of the Spine Pain Intervention to Enhance Care Quality And Reduce Expenditure Trial (SPINE CARE) study: Methods and lessons from a multi-site pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Low back and neck pain (together, spine pain) are among the leading causes of medical visits, lost productivity, and disability. For most people, episodes of spine pain are self-limited; nevertheless, healthcare spending for this condition is extremely high. Focusing care on individuals at high-risk of progressing from acute to chronic pain may improve efficiency. Alternatively, postural therapies, which are frequently used by patients, may prevent the overuse of high-cost interventions while delivering equivalent outcomes. METHODS: The SPINE CARE (Spine Pain Intervention to Enhance Care Quality And Reduce Expenditure) trial is a cluster-randomized multi-center pragmatic clinical trial designed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and healthcare utilization of two interventions for primary care patients with acute and subacute spine pain. The study was conducted at 33 primary care clinics in geographically distinct regions of the United States. Individuals ≥18 years presenting to primary care with neck and/or back pain of ≤3 months' duration were randomized at the clinic-level to 1) usual care, 2) a risk-stratified, multidisciplinary approach called the Identify, Coordinate, and Enhance (ICE) care model, or 3) Individualized Postural Therapy (IPT), a standardized postural therapy method of care. The trial's two primary outcomes are change in function at 3 months and spine-related spending at one year. 2971 individuals were enrolled between June 2017 and March 2020. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. DISCUSSION: The SPINE CARE trial will determine the impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare costs of two interventions for patients with spine pain presenting to primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03083886.

The association of discharge destination with 30-day rehospitalization rates among older adults receiving lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

BACKGROUND: As defined by Medicare (United States), post-acute rehabilitation services include care provided in inpatient rehabilitation units and facilities, skilled nursing facilities, long-term acute hospitals, and by home health services. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the use of rehabilitation-based post-acute services among Medicare beneficiaries who were hospitalized for lumbar spinal fusion (ICD-9-CM procedure codes 81.04-81.08) in 2012-2014, examined the case-mix for those discharged to rehabilitation- and non-rehabilitation based services, and determined the association between these categories of discharge disposition and 30-day rehospitalization. The independent effect of rehabilitation-based discharge destination on 30-day readmissions was examined with a generalized linear mixed model, first adjusting for patient characteristics and then stratified by clusters that delineated more homogenous clinical profiles. RESULTS: Among 261,558 Medicare beneficiaries with lumbar spinal fusion surgery, 50.8% were discharged to a rehabilitation-based post-acute services. Patients discharged to rehabilitation-based services were older and had more comorbidities, and had longer hospital lengths of stays. After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, patients discharged to rehabilitation-based post-acute care had increased odds of 30-day rehospitalization than those without discharge to other destinations (OR 1.36; 95%CI = 1.31, 1.40). Analysis of patients by clinical profile clusters found similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical profiles of Medicare beneficiaries who had lumbar spinal fusion surgery and were discharged to rehabilitation-based post-acute services included more comorbidities than those discharged to non-rehabilitation based settings. Controlling for these differences did not mediate the negative association between use of rehabilitation-based post-acute services and 30-day readmission.

Residency and Beyond: Subspecialization Trends Among Graduating Physiatry Residents and the Musculoskeletal Curriculum.

Previous studies and informal surveys have demonstrated a trend among graduating physiatry residents who desired to practice in an outpatient musculoskeletal (MSK)- or spine-type setting. However, there has been no updated information on the current trend among graduating residents as well as sparse information on gauging if current trainees feel prepared on graduation to treat patients with such disorders. This article describes a prospective survey of graduating chief residents during the 2013-2014 academic year in which 72% of chief residents planned to pursue a fellowship. A total of 54% of those chief residents planned to pursue a pain, sports, or spine fellowship. Seventy-five percent of the responding chief residents reported that most of the residents in their program felt that the current amount of required rotations in MSK, sports, spine, or pain medicine was adequate and 85% felt comfortable practicing in a noninterventional spine or MSK position after graduation without a fellowship. The results of this survey provide an updated perspective on the current trends among graduating residents as well as how residents perceive their MSK curriculum. These results may prove useful when evaluating MSK curriculums and shaping resident education to maximize career goals.