RESUMO
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Symptoms caused by spinal metastases are often difficult to distinguish from symptoms caused by non-malignant spinal disease, complicating timely diagnosis, referral and treatment. The ensuing delays may promote the risk of neurological deficits or severe mechanical instability and consequent emergency surgery, leading to poorer prognosis. Presumably, treatment delay may subsequently lead to more health-care consumption and therefore increased average costs of treatment. METHODS: All patients surgically treated for spinal metastases were included in the current study. Based on the presence of alarming symptoms and urgency of the required intervention, patients were categorized as having received timely or delayed treatment. Pre-surgical, in-hospital, aftercare and total costs were analyzed and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In total, 299 patients were included, of which 205 underwent timely and 94 delayed treatment. There was no significant difference in pre-surigcal costs (3.229,13 in the timely treated group vs. 2.528,70 in the delayed treatment group, p = 0.849). The in-hospital costs (16.738,49 vs. 13.108,81, p < 0.001) and the aftercare costs (13.950,37 vs. 3.981,93, p < 0.001) were significantly higher for delayed treatment vs. timely treatment, respectively. The total costs were 33.741,71 for delayed treatment and 20.318,52 for timely treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The total costs for timely treated patients with spinal metastases are significantly lower compared with patients receiving delayed treatment. Investing in the optimization of referral patterns may therefore reduce the overall pretreatment delay and subsequently increase patient outcome, leading to better clinical outcomes at lower costs.