Are Commonly Used Geographically Based Social Determinant of Health Indices in Orthopaedic Surgery Research Correlated With Each Other and With PROMIS Global-10 Physical and Mental Health Scores?

BACKGROUND: Geographically based social determinants of health (SDoH) measures are useful in research and policy aimed at addressing health disparities. In the United States, the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), Neighborhood Stress Score (NSS), and Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) are frequently used, but often without a clear reason as to why one is chosen over another. There is limited evidence about how strongly correlated these geographically based SDoH measures are with one another. Further, there is a paucity of research examining their relationship with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in orthopaedic patients. Such insights are important in order to determine whether comparisons of policies and care programs using different geographically based SDoH indices to address health disparities in orthopaedic surgery are appropriate. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Among new patients seeking care at an orthopaedic surgery clinic, (1) what is the correlation of the NSS, ADI, and SVI with one another? (2) What is the correlation of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global-10 physical and mental health scores and the NSS, ADI, and SVI? (3) Which geographically based SDoH index or indices are associated with presenting PROMIS Global-10 physical and mental health scores when accounting for common patient-level sociodemographic factors? METHODS: New adult orthopaedic patient encounters at clinic sites affiliated with a tertiary referral academic medical center between 2016 and 2021 were identified, and the ADI, NSS, and SVI were determined. Patients also completed the PROMIS Global-10 questionnaire as part of routine care. Overall, a total of 75,335 new patient visits were noted. Of these, 62% (46,966 of 75,335) of new patient visits were excluded because of missing PROMIS Global-10 physical and mental health scores. An additional 2.2% of patients (1685 of 75,335) were excluded because they were missing at least one SDoH index at the time of their visit (for example, if a patient only had a Post Office box listed, the SDoH index could not be determined). This left 35% of the eligible new patient visits (26,684 of 75,335) in our final sample. Though only 35% of possible new patient visits were included, the diversity of these individuals across numerous characteristics and the wide range of sociodemographic status-as measured by the SDoH indices-among included patients supports the generalizability of our sample. The mean age of patients in our sample was 55 ± 18 years and a slight majority were women (54% [14,366 of 26,684]). Among the sample, 16% (4381of 26,684) of patients were of non-White race. The mean PROMIS Global-10 physical and mental health scores were 43.4 ± 9.4 and 49.7 ± 10.1, respectively. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated among the three SDoH indices and between each SDoH index and PROMIS Global-10 physical and mental health scores. In addition, regression analysis was used to assess the association of each SDoH index with presenting functional and mental health, accounting for key patient characteristics. The strength of the association between each SDoH index and PROMIS Global-10 physical and mental health scores was determined using partial r-squared values. Significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: There was a poor correlation between the ADI and the NSS (ρ = 0.34; p < 0.001). There were good correlations between the ADI and SVI (ρ = 0.43; p < 0.001) and between the NSS and SVI (ρ = 0.59; p < 0.001). There was a poor correlation between the PROMIS Global-10 physical health and NSS (ρ = -0.14; p < 0.001), ADI (ρ = -0.24; p < 0.001), and SVI (ρ = -0.17; p < 0.001). There was a poor correlation between PROMIS Global-10 mental health and NSS (ρ = -0.13; p < 0.001), ADI (ρ = -0.22; p < 0.001), and SVI (ρ = -0.17; p < 0.001). When accounting for key sociodemographic factors, the ADI demonstrated the largest association with presenting physical health (regression coefficient: -0.13 [95% CI -0.14 to -0.12]; p < 0.001) and mental health (regression coefficient: -0.13 [95% CI -0.14 to -0.12]; p < 0.001), as confirmed by the partial r-squared values for each SDoH index (physical health: ADI 0.04 versus SVI 0.02 versus NSS 0.01; mental health: ADI 0.04 versus SVI 0.02 versus NSS 0.01). This finding means that as social deprivation increases, physical and mental health scores decrease, representing poorer health. For further context, an increase in ADI score by approximately 36 and 39 suggests a clinically meaningful (determined using distribution-based minimum clinically important difference estimates of one-half SD of each PROMIS score) worsening of physical and mental health, respectively. CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic surgeons, policy makers, and other stakeholders looking to address SDoH factors to help alleviate disparities in musculoskeletal care should try to avoid interchanging the ADI, SVI, and NSS. Because the ADI has the largest association between any of the geographically based SDoH indices and presenting physical and mental health, it may allow for easier clinical and policy application. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We suggest using the ADI as the geographically based SDoH index in orthopaedic surgery in the United States. Further, we caution against comparing findings in one study that use one geographically based SDoH index to another study's findings that incorporates another geographically based SDoH index. Although the general findings may be the same, the strength of association and clinical relevance could differ and have policy ramifications that are not otherwise appreciated; however, the degree to which this may be true is an area for future inquiry.

Unraveling molecular advancements in chordoma tumorigenesis and treatment response: a review of scientific discoveries and clinical implications.

Chordomas are tumors thought to originate from notochordal remnants that occur in midline structures from the cloves of the skull base to the sacrum. In adults, the most common location is the sacrum, followed by the clivus and then mobile spine, while in children a clival origin is most common. Most chordomas are slow growing. Clinical presentation of chordomas tend to occur late, with local invasion and large size often complicating surgical intervention. Radiation therapy with protons has been proven to be an effective adjuvant therapy. Unfortunately, few adjuvant systemic treatments have demonstrated significant effectiveness, and chordomas tend to recur despite intensive multimodal care. However, insight into the molecular underpinnings of chordomas may guide novel therapeutic approaches including selection for immune and molecular therapies, individualized prognostication of outcomes, and real-time noninvasive assessment of disease burden and evolution. At the genomic level, elevated levels of brachyury stemming from duplications and mutations resulting in altered transcriptional regulation may introduce druggable targets for new surgical adjuncts. Transcriptome and epigenome profiling have revealed promoter- and enhancer-dependent mechanisms of protein regulation, which may influence therapeutic response and long-term disease history. Continued scientific and clinical advancements may offer further opportunities for treatment of chordomas. Single-cell transcriptome profiling has further provided insight into the heterogeneous molecular pathways contributing to chordoma propagation. New technologies such as spatial transcriptomics and emerging biochemical analytes such as cell-free DNA have further augmented the surgeon-clinician's armamentarium by facilitating detailed characterization of intra- and intertumoral biology while also demonstrating promise for point-of-care tumor quantitation and assessment. Recent and ongoing clinical trials highlight accelerating interest to translate laboratory breakthroughs in chordoma biology and immunology into clinical care. In this review, the authors dissect the landmark studies exploring the molecular pathogenesis of chordoma. Incorporating this into an outline of ongoing clinical trials and discussion of emerging technologies, the authors aimed to summarize recent advancements in understanding chordoma pathogenesis and how neurosurgical care of chordomas may be augmented by improvements in adjunctive treatments.

Are Detailed, Patient-level Social Determinant of Health Factors Associated With Physical Function and Mental Health at Presentation Among New Patients With Orthopaedic Conditions?

BACKGROUND: It is well documented that routinely collected patient sociodemographic characteristics (such as race and insurance type) and geography-based social determinants of health (SDoH) measures (for example, the Area Deprivation Index) are associated with health disparities, including symptom severity at presentation. However, the association of patient-level SDoH factors (such as housing status) on musculoskeletal health disparities is not as well documented. Such insight might help with the development of more-targeted interventions to help address health disparities in orthopaedic surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What percentage of patients presenting for new patient visits in an orthopaedic surgery clinic who were unemployed but seeking work reported transportation issues that could limit their ability to attend a medical appointment or acquire medications, reported trouble paying for medications, and/or had no current housing? (2) Accounting for traditional sociodemographic factors and patient-level SDoH measures, what factors are associated with poorer patient-reported outcome physical health scores at presentation? (3) Accounting for traditional sociodemographic factor patient-level SDoH measures, what factors are associated with poorer patient-reported outcome mental health scores at presentation? METHODS: New patient encounters at one Level 1 trauma center clinic visit from March 2018 to December 2020 were identified. Included patients had to meet two criteria: they had completed the Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System (PROMIS) Global-10 at their new orthopaedic surgery clinic encounter as part of routine clinical care, and they had visited their primary care physician and completed a series of specific SDoH questions. The SDoH questionnaire was developed in our institution to improve data that drive interventions to address health disparities as part of our accountable care organization work. Over the study period, the SDoH questionnaire was only distributed at primary care provider visits. The SDoH questions focused on transportation, housing, employment, and ability to pay for medications. Because we do not have a way to determine how many patients had both primary care provider office visits and new orthopaedic surgery clinic visits over the study period, we were unable to determine how many patients could have been included; however, 9057 patients were evaluated in this cross-sectional study. The mean age was 61 ± 15 years, and most patients self-reported being of White race (83% [7561 of 9057]). Approximately half the patient sample had commercial insurance (46% [4167 of 9057]). To get a better sense of how this study cohort compared with the overall patient population seen at the participating center during the time in question, we reviewed all new patient clinic encounters (n = 135,223). The demographic information between the full patient sample and our study subgroup appeared similar. Using our study cohort, two multivariable linear regression models were created to determine which traditional metrics (for example, self-reported race or insurance type) and patient-specific SDoH factors (for example, lack of reliable transportation) were associated with worse physical and mental health symptoms (that is, lower PROMIS scores) at new patient encounters. The variance inflation factor was used to assess for multicollinearity. For all analyses, p values < 0.05 designated statistical significance. The concept of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was used to assess clinical importance. Regression coefficients represent the projected change in PROMIS physical or mental health symptom scores (that is, the dependent variable in our regression analyses) accounting for the other included variables. Thus, a regression coefficient for a given variable at or above a known MCID value suggests a clinical difference between those patients with and without the presence of that given characteristic. In this manuscript, regression coefficients at or above 4.2 (or at and below -4.2) for PROMIS Global Physical Health and at or above 5.1 (or at and below -5.1) for PROMIS Global Mental Health were considered clinically relevant. RESULTS: Among the included patients, 8% (685 of 9057) were unemployed but seeking work, 4% (399 of 9057) reported transportation issues that could limit their ability to attend a medical appointment or acquire medications, 4% (328 of 9057) reported trouble paying for medications, and 2% (181 of 9057) had no current housing. Lack of reliable transportation to attend doctor visits or pick up medications (ß = -4.52 [95% CI -5.45 to -3.59]; p < 0.001), trouble paying for medications (ß = -4.55 [95% CI -5.55 to -3.54]; p < 0.001), Medicaid insurance (ß = -5.81 [95% CI -6.41 to -5.20]; p < 0.001), and workers compensation insurance (ß = -5.99 [95% CI -7.65 to -4.34]; p < 0.001) were associated with clinically worse function at presentation. Trouble paying for medications (ß = -6.01 [95% CI -7.10 to -4.92]; p < 0.001), Medicaid insurance (ß = -5.35 [95% CI -6.00 to -4.69]; p < 0.001), and workers compensation (ß = -6.07 [95% CI -7.86 to -4.28]; p < 0.001) were associated with clinically worse mental health at presentation. CONCLUSION: Although transportation issues and financial hardship were found to be associated with worse presenting physical function and mental health, Medicaid and workers compensation insurance remained associated with worse presenting physical function and mental health as well even after controlling for these more detailed, patient-level SDoH factors. Because of that, interventions to decrease health disparities should focus on not only sociodemographic variables (for example, insurance type) but also tangible patient-specific SDoH characteristics. For example, this may include giving patients taxi vouchers or ride-sharing credits to attend clinic visits for patients demonstrating such a need, initiating financial assistance programs for necessary medications, and/or identifying and connecting certain patient groups with social support services early on in the care cycle. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function and Global Physical Health Subscale Strongly Correlate and Perform Similarly to the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form.

BACKGROUND: Arthroplasty surgeons use a variety of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess functional well-being, including the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Physical Function short form (KOOS-PS), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10a (PROMIS PF SF 10a), and PROMIS Global-10 Physical Health subscale. However, there is a paucity of literature assessing their concurrent validity and performance. METHODS: Between June 2016 and December 2020, patient visits at an arthroplasty clinic for knee concerns were identified. Patients who completed KOOS-PS, PROMIS PF SF 10a, and PROMIS Global-10, including its physical and mental health subscales, at the same visit were identified. Spearman rho (ρ) correlations were calculated and ceiling and floor effects identified. Overall, 5,303 patient encounters were included. RESULTS: Among physical function domains, strong correlation existed between the KOOS-PS and PROMIS PF SF 10a (ρ = 0.76, P < .001), KOOS-PS and PROMIS Global Physical Health (ρ = 0.71, P < .001), and PROMIS PF SF 10a and PROMIS Global Physical Health (ρ = 0.78, P < .001). No physical function-focused PROM had an appreciable floor effect (ie, at or more than 1%). The KOOS-PS had a small but measurable ceiling effect (n = 105 [2.0%]). CONCLUSIONS: All of the examined PROMs are acceptable to measure the functional status of patients with knee pathology, with the PROMIS Global-10 also being able to capture elements of mental health too. The PROMIS Global-10 may be of most value of the PROMs assessed, as the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services already incorporate the mental health component into new alternative payment models.

What Is the Clinical Benefit of Common Orthopaedic Procedures as Assessed by the PROMIS Versus Other Validated Outcomes Tools?

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), are increasingly used to measure healthcare value. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is a metric that helps clinicians determine whether a statistically detectable improvement in a PROM after surgical care is likely to be large enough to be important to a patient or to justify an intervention that carries risk and cost. There are two major categories of MCID calculation methods, anchor-based and distribution-based. This variability, coupled with heterogeneous surgical cohorts used for existing MCID values, limits their application to clinical care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In our study, we sought (1) to determine MCID thresholds and attainment percentages for PROMIS after common orthopaedic procedures using distribution-based methods, (2) to use anchor-based MCID values from published studies as a comparison, and (3) to compare MCID attainment percentages using PROMIS scores to other validated outcomes tools such as the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). METHODS: This was a retrospective study at two academic medical centers and three community hospitals. The inclusion criteria for this study were patients who were age 18 years or older and who underwent elective THA for osteoarthritis, TKA for osteoarthritis, one-level posterior lumbar fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis or spondylolisthesis, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis or rotator cuff arthropathy, arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, or arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. This yielded 14,003 patients. Patients undergoing revision operations or surgery for nondegenerative pathologies and patients without preoperative PROMs assessments were excluded, leaving 9925 patients who completed preoperative PROMIS assessments and 9478 who completed other preoperative validated outcomes tools (HOOS, KOOS, numerical rating scale for leg pain, numerical rating scale for back pain, and QuickDASH). Approximately 66% (6529 of 9925) of patients had postoperative PROMIS scores (Physical Function, Mental Health, Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, and Upper Extremity) and were included for analysis. PROMIS scores are population normalized with a mean score of 50 ± 10, with most scores falling between 30 to 70. Approximately 74% (7007 of 9478) of patients had postoperative historical assessment scores and were included for analysis. The proportion who reached the MCID was calculated for each procedure cohort at 6 months of follow-up using distribution-based MCID methods, which included a fraction of the SD (1/2 or 1/3 SD) and minimum detectable change (MDC) using statistical significance (such as the MDC 90 from p < 0.1). Previously published anchor-based MCID thresholds from similar procedure cohorts and analogous PROMs were used to calculate the proportion reaching MCID. RESULTS: Within a given distribution-based method, MCID thresholds for PROMIS assessments were similar across multiple procedures. The MCID threshold ranged between 3.4 and 4.5 points across all procedures using the 1/2 SD method. Except for meniscectomy (3.5 points), the anchor-based PROMIS MCID thresholds (range 4.5 to 8.1 points) were higher than the SD distribution-based MCID values (2.3 to 4.5 points). The difference in MCID thresholds based on the calculation method led to a similar trend in MCID attainment. Using THA as an example, MCID attainment using PROMIS was achieved by 76% of patients using an anchor-based threshold of 7.9 points. However, 82% of THA patients attained MCID using the MDC 95 method (6.1 points), and 88% reached MCID using the 1/2 SD method (3.9 points). Using the HOOS metric (scaled from 0 to 100), 86% of THA patients reached the anchor-based MCID threshold (17.5 points). However, 91% of THA patients attained the MCID using the MDC 90 method (12.5 points), and 93% reached MCID using the 1/2 SD method (8.4 points). In general, the proportion of patients reaching MCID was lower for PROMIS than for other validated outcomes tools; for example, with the 1/2 SD method, 72% of patients who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy reached the MCID on PROMIS Physical Function compared with 86% on KOOS. CONCLUSION: MCID calculations can provide clinical correlation for PROM scores interpretation. The PROMIS form is increasingly used because of its generalizability across diagnoses. However, we found lower proportions of MCID attainment using PROMIS scores compared with historical PROMs. By using historical proportions of attainment on common orthopaedic procedures and a spectrum of MCID calculation techniques, the PROMIS MCID benchmarks are realizable for common orthopaedic procedures. For clinical practices that routinely collect PROMIS scores in the clinical setting, these results can be used by individual surgeons to evaluate personal practice trends and by healthcare systems to quantify whether clinical care initiatives result in meaningful differences. Furthermore, these MCID thresholds can be used by researchers conducting retrospective outcomes research with PROMIS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Can We Geographically Validate a Natural Language Processing Algorithm for Automated Detection of Incidental Durotomy Across Three Independent Cohorts From Two Continents?

BACKGROUND: Incidental durotomy is an intraoperative complication in spine surgery that can lead to postoperative complications, increased length of stay, and higher healthcare costs. Natural language processing (NLP) is an artificial intelligence method that assists in understanding free-text notes that may be useful in the automated surveillance of adverse events in orthopaedic surgery. A previously developed NLP algorithm is highly accurate in the detection of incidental durotomy on internal validation and external validation in an independent cohort from the same country. External validation in a cohort with linguistic differences is required to assess the transportability of the developed algorithm, referred to geographical validation. Ideally, the performance of a prediction model, the NLP algorithm, is constant across geographic regions to ensure reproducibility and model validity. QUESTION/PURPOSE: Can we geographically validate an NLP algorithm for the automated detection of incidental durotomy across three independent cohorts from two continents? METHODS: Patients 18 years or older undergoing a primary procedure of (thoraco)lumbar spine surgery were included. In Massachusetts, between January 2000 and June 2018, 1000 patients were included from two academic and three community medical centers. In Maryland, between July 2016 and November 2018, 1279 patients were included from one academic center, and in Australia, between January 2010 and December 2019, 944 patients were included from one academic center. The authors retrospectively studied the free-text operative notes of included patients for the primary outcome that was defined as intraoperative durotomy. Incidental durotomy occurred in 9% (93 of 1000), 8% (108 of 1279), and 6% (58 of 944) of the patients, respectively, in the Massachusetts, Maryland, and Australia cohorts. No missing reports were observed. Three datasets (Massachusetts, Australian, and combined Massachusetts and Australian) were divided into training and holdout test sets in an 80:20 ratio. An extreme gradient boosting (an efficient and flexible tree-based algorithm) NLP algorithm was individually trained on each training set, and the performance of the three NLP algorithms (respectively American, Australian, and combined) was assessed by discrimination via area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC-ROC; this measures the model's ability to distinguish patients who obtained the outcomes from those who did not), calibration metrics (which plot the predicted and the observed probabilities) and Brier score (a composite of discrimination and calibration). In addition, the sensitivity (true positives, recall), specificity (true negatives), positive predictive value (also known as precision), negative predictive value, F1-score (composite of precision and recall), positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio were calculated. RESULTS: The combined NLP algorithm (the combined Massachusetts and Australian data) achieved excellent performance on independent testing data from Australia (AUC-ROC 0.97 [95% confidence interval 0.87 to 0.99]), Massachusetts (AUC-ROC 0.99 [95% CI 0.80 to 0.99]) and Maryland (AUC-ROC 0.95 [95% CI 0.93 to 0.97]). The NLP developed based on the Massachusetts cohort had excellent performance in the Maryland cohort (AUC-ROC 0.97 [95% CI 0.95 to 0.99]) but worse performance in the Australian cohort (AUC-ROC 0.74 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.77]). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the clinical utility and reproducibility of an NLP algorithm with combined datasets retaining excellent performance in individual countries relative to algorithms developed in the same country alone for detection of incidental durotomy. Further multi-institutional, international collaborations can facilitate the creation of universal NLP algorithms that improve the quality and safety of orthopaedic surgery globally. The combined NLP algorithm has been incorporated into a freely accessible web application that can be found at https://sorg-apps.shinyapps.io/nlp_incidental_durotomy/ . Clinicians and researchers can use the tool to help incorporate the model in evaluating spine registries or quality and safety departments to automate detection of incidental durotomy and optimize prevention efforts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Research productivity during orthopedic surgery residency correlates with pre-planned and protected research time: a survey of German-speaking countries.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify modifiable factors associated with research activity among residents working in orthopedic surgery and traumatology. METHODS: Residents at 796 university-affiliated hospitals in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland were invited to participate. The online survey consisted of questions that ascertained 13 modifiable and 17 non-modifiable factors associated with the residents' current research activities. Responses of 129 residents were analyzed. Univariate linear regression was used to determine the association of individual factors with the current research activity (hours per week). The impact of significant non-modifiable factors (with unadjusted p values < 0.05) was controlled for using multivariate linear regression. RESULTS: The univariate analysis demonstrated six non-modifiable factors that were significantly associated with the current research activity: a University hospital setting (p < 0.001), an A-level hospital setting (p = 0.024), Swiss residents (p = 0.0012), the completion of a dedicated research year (p = 0.007), female gender (p = 0.016), and the department's size (p = 0.048). Multivariate regression demonstrated that the number of protected research days per year (p < 0.029) and the percentage of protected days, that were known 1 week before (p < 0.001) or the day before (p < 0.001), were significantly associated with a higher research activity. CONCLUSIONS: As hypothesized, more frequent and predictable protected research days were associated with higher research activity among residents in orthopedic surgery and traumatology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Pathologic Vertebral Fractures: Diagnosis, Treatment, Complications, and Controversies Through Case-Based Learning.

Vertebral compression fractures commonly occur as sequelae to osteoporosis, malignancy, infection, or trauma. Although all compression fractures have an underlying pathology, the term pathologic vertebral compression fracture (pVCF) is traditionally reserved for fractures that result from primary or metastatic spine tumors. Discriminating a pVCF from osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures is important because the subsequent diagnostic workup and therapeutic plan differ substantially between the two etiologies. A carefully obtained history inquiring about high-risk symptomatology and a thorough review of the radiographic data are the cornerstone of making the correct diagnosis. If history and imaging increase the suspicion for pVCF, the subsequent workup is dependent on whether the pathologic spine fracture represents a newly discovered malignancy with spinal metastasis, known malignancy without previous metastasis, or progression of known metastatic disease. Management strategies for pVCF hinge on the neurologic and biomechanical stability of the patient along with the patient's pain and functional mobility. Surgeons should be familiar with the diagnosis and treatment of pathologic vertebral compression fractures caused by metastatic disease.

Chondrosarcoma of the Mobile Spine: An Update on Patients Treated at a Single Institution.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to report the clinical data for patients treated with mobile spine chondrosarcoma. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Chondrosarcoma of the mobile spine is a rare and challenging entity. A handful of case series have been published that report the clinical results of treatment, largely influenced by chondrosarcoma of the appendicular skeleton and pelvis. The clinical results of patients treated for chondrosarcoma of the mobile spine from our institution were published over ten years ago and this represents and update since that publication. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were adults patients treated for chondrosarcoma of the mobile spine at Massachusetts General Hospital between 2007-2020. Patients with large sacral tumors extending into the lumbar spine were excluded. Further, we excluded patients with metastatic chondrosarcoma undergoing palliative decompressions for neurologic instability or instrumented procedures for biomechanical instability. Therefore, only patients undergoing definitive surgery at the primary site of disease in the mobile spine were included. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included for review in this series. Seventeen of the 24 patients had their tumors excised with negative (R0) margins. Three of these 17 patients (18%) were dead of disease at final follow-up. There were two patients with R1 resections and five patients with R2 resections. Three of the 7 patients (43%) with positive margins were dead of disease at final follow-up. A Cox proportional hazard analysis indicated total radiation dose was a significant covariate (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01 - 1.39, P=0.03). CONCLUSION: We found higher percentages of overall survival with R0 tumor resection and lower histologic grade whereas development of metastatic disease was closely associated with local recurrence and poor survival. Despite the improvements in treatment paradigms, it is sobering that our findings largely mirror those of previous work considering patients treated between 1984 and 2006.

Limited health literacy results in lower health-related quality of life in spine patients.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Spinal conditions impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Patient education and counseling improve HRQoL, yet the effects may be limited for patients with inadequate health literacy (HL). Despite the established relationship between HRQoL and HL in other fields, research in the orthopedic spine population is lacking. PURPOSE: To investigate if limited HL results in lower HRQoL and to evaluate factors are associated with HRQoL in patients seen at an outpatient orthopedic spine center. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective single-center cross-sectional study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients 18 years of age or older seen at a tertiary urban academic hospital- based multi-surgeon outpatient spine center. OUTCOME MEASURES: EQ-5D-5L health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaire, and the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) HL assessment tool. METHODS: Between October 2022 and February 2023, consecutive English-speaking patients over the age of 18 and new to the outpatient spine clinic were approached for participation in this cross-sectional survey study. Patients completed a sociodemographic survey, EQ-5D-5L HRQoL questionnaire, and Newest Vital Sign (NVS) HL assessment tool. The EQ-5D-5L yields two continuous outcomes: an index score ranging from below 0 to 1 and a visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) score ranging from 0 to 100. The NVS scores were divided into limited (0-3) and adequate (4-6) HL. Multivariate linear regression with purposeful selection of variables was performed to identify independent factors associated with HRQoL. RESULTS: Out of 397 eligible patients, 348 (88%) agreed to participate and were included in statistical analysis. Limited HL was independently associated with lower EQ-5D-5L index scores (B=1.07 [95% CI 1.00-1.15], p=.049. Other factors associated with lower EQ-5D-5L index scores were being obese (BMI≥30), having housing concerns, and being an active smoker. Factors associated with lower EQ-VAS scores were being underweight (BMI<18.5), obese, having housing concerns, and higher updated Charlson comorbidity index (uCCI) scores. Being married was associated with higher EQ-VAS scores. CONCLUSIONS: Limited HL is associated with lower EQ-5D-5L index scores in spine patients, indicating lower HRQoL. To effectively apply HL-related interventions in this population, a better understanding of the complex interactions between patient characteristics, social determinants of health, and HRQoL outcomes is required. Further research should focus on interventions to improve HRQoL in patients with limited HL and how to accurately identify these patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II prognostic.

Pedicled omental flaps for complex wound reconstruction following surgery for primary spine tumors of the mobile spine and sacrum.

OBJECTIVE: Surgery for primary tumors of the mobile spine and sacrum often requires complex reconstruction techniques to cover soft-tissue defects and to treat wound and CSF-related complications. The anatomical, vascular, and immunoregulatory characteristics of the omentum make it an excellent local substrate for the management of radiation soft-tissue injury, infection, and extensive wound defects. This study describes the authors' experience in complex wound reconstruction using pedicled omental flaps to cover defects in surgery for mobile spine and sacral primary tumors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on 34 patients who underwent pedicled omental flap reconstruction after en bloc resection of primary sacral and mobile spine tumors between 2010 and 2020. The study focused on assessing the indications for omental flap usage, including soft-tissue coverage, protection against postoperative radiation therapy, infection management, vascular supply for bone grafts, and dural defect and CSF leak repair. Patient demographic characteristics, tumor characteristics, surgical outcomes, and follow-up data were analyzed to determine the procedure's efficacy and complication rates. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2020, 34 patients underwent pedicled omental flap reconstruction after en bloc resection of sacral (24 of 34 [71%]) and mobile spine (10 of 34 [29%]) primary tumors, mostly chordomas. The patient cohort included 21 men and 13 women with a median (range) age of 60 (32-89) years. The most common indication for omental flap was soft-tissue coverage (20 of 34 [59%]). Other indications included protecting abdominopelvic organs for postoperative radiation therapy (6 of 34 [18%]), treating infections (5 of 34 [15%]), providing vascular supply for free fibular bone graft (1 of 34 [3%]), and repairing large dural defects and CSF leak (2 of 34 [6%]). The median (range) follow-up was 24 (0-132) months, during which 71% (24 of 34) of patients did not require additional surgery for wound-related complications. At last follow-up, 59% (20 of 34) had stable disease and 32% (11 of 34) had recurrence, had progression of disease, or had been discharged to hospice after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The pedicled omentum is an effective local tissue graft that can be used for complex wound reconstruction and management of high-risk closures in primary spine tumors. This technique may have a lower rate of complications than other approaches and may influence surgical planning and flap selection in challenging cases.

Post-operative Patient Portal Messaging is Associated With Return to the Emergency Department After Lumbar Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: To explore the association between patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery who message their care team via an electronic patient portal (EPP) post-operatively and emergency department (ED) visits within 90 days of surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Secure patient messaging through electronic patient portals has grown over recent years. Despite its frequent utilization by patients to engage with their care team, its association with clinical outcomes remains unknown in spine surgery. METHODS: This study was approved by our Institutional Review Board. Inclusion criteria were adults who underwent single-stage lumbar spine surgery between January 2016-June 2023. Patients with incomplete information, multi-stage surgeries, and those who died within 90 days of surgery were excluded. Patient sociodemographic, surgical, hospital readmission, and patient-provider engagement data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 13,135 patients were included. A total of 1,711 patients (13%) had a post-operative ED visit, and 4,791 patients (36%) used the patient portal to send a message after surgery. Sending a post-operative patient message after undergoing lumbar spine surgery was associated with an increased likelihood of having an ED visit that does not lead to readmission (1.29 (1.10-1.53), P = 0.002). Patients with high school degrees were more likely to have an ED visit without readmission (1.33 (1.08-1.65), P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Patients at a higher risk of presenting to the ED post-operatively should be identified and may benefit from additional counseling and access to the care team virtually to limit unnecessary healthcare utilization. Focusing on patients who reach out via EPP messaging post-operatively may be a good target patient group to address first. Future research is needed to investigate the possible health literacy and other socioeconomic barriers affecting these patients so that appropriate, more cost-effective resources can be utilized to avoid clinically unnecessary and costly ED visits.

Machine learning-based detection of sarcopenic obesity and association with adverse outcomes in patients undergoing surgical treatment for spinal metastases.

OBJECTIVE: The distributions and proportions of lean and fat tissues may help better assess the prognosis and outcomes of patients with spinal metastases. Specifically, in obese patients, sarcopenia may be easily overlooked as a poor prognostic indicator. The role of this body phenotype, sarcopenic obesity (SO), has not been adequately studied among patients undergoing surgical treatment for spinal metastases. To this end, here the authors investigated the role of SO as a potential prognostic factor in patients undergoing surgical treatment for spinal metastases. METHODS: The authors identified patients who underwent surgical treatment for spinal metastases between 2010 and 2020. A validated deep learning approach evaluated sarcopenia and adiposity on routine preoperative CT images. Based on composition analyses, patients were classified with SO or nonsarcopenic obesity. After nearest-neighbor propensity matching that accounted for confounders, the authors compared the rates and odds of postoperative complications, length of stay, 30-day readmission, and all-cause mortality at 90 days and 1 year between the SO and nonsarcopenic obesity groups. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients with obesity underwent surgical treatment for spinal metastases during the study period. Of these, 37 patients had nonsarcopenic obesity and 25 had SO. After propensity matching, 50 records were evaluated that were equally composed of patients with nonsarcopenic obesity and SO (25 patients each). Patients with SO were noted to have increased odds of nonhome discharge (OR 6.0, 95% CI 1.69-21.26), 30-day readmission (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.01-10.62), and 90-day (OR 4.85, 95% CI 1.29-18.26) and 1-year (OR 3.78, 95% CI 1.17-12.19) mortality, as well as increased time to mortality after surgery (12.60 ± 19.84 months vs 37.16 ± 35.19 months, p = 0.002; standardized mean difference 0.86). No significant differences were noted in terms of length of stay or postoperative complications when comparing the two groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The SO phenotype was associated with increased odds of nonhome discharge, readmission, and postoperative mortality. This study suggests that SO may be an important prognostic factor to consider when developing care plans for patients with spinal metastases.

Assessing the variation and drivers of cost in 1-level lumbar fusion: a time-driven activity-based costing analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: As value-based health care arrangements gain traction in spine care, understanding the true cost of care becomes critical. Historically, inaccurate cost proxies have been used, including negotiated reimbursement rates or list prices. However, time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) allows for a more accurate cost assessment, including a better understanding of the primary drivers of cost in 1-level lumbar fusion. PURPOSE: To determine the variation of total hospital cost, differences in characteristics between high-cost and non-high-cost patients, and to identify the primary drivers of total hospital cost in a sample of patients undergoing 1-level lumbar fusion. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective, multicenter (one academic medical center, one community-based hospital), observational study. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 383 patients undergoing elective 1-level lumbar fusion for degenerative spine conditions between November 2, 2021 and December 2, 2022. OUTCOME MEASURES: Total hospital cost of care (normalized); preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative cost of care (normalized); ratio of most to least expensive 1-level lumbar fusion. METHODS: Patients undergoing a 1-level lumbar fusion between November 2, 2021 and December 2, 2022 were identified at two hospitals (one quaternary referral academic medical center and one community-based hospital) within our health system. TDABC was used to calculate total hospital cost, which was also broken up into: pre-, intra-, and postoperative timeframes. Operating surgeon and patient characteristics were also collected and compared between high- and non-high-cost patients. The correlation of surgical time and cost was determined. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine factors associated with total hospital cost. RESULTS: The most expensive 1-level lumbar fusion was 6.8x more expensive than the least expensive 1-level lumbar fusion, with the intraoperative period accounting for 88% of total cost. On average. the implant cost accounted for 30% of the total, but across the patient sample, the implant cost accounted for a range of 6% to 44% of the total cost. High-cost patients were younger (55 years [SD: 13 years] vs.63 years [SD: 13 years], p=.0002), more likely to have commercial health insurance (24 out of 38 (63%) vs. 181 out of 345 (52%), p=.003). There was a poor correlation between time of surgery (i.e., incision to close) and total overall cost (ρ: .26, p<.0001). Increase age (RC: -0.003 [95% CI: -0.006 to -0.000007], p=.049) was associated with decreased cost. Surgery by certain surgeons was associated with decreased total cost when accounting for other factors (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: A large variation exists in the total hospital cost for patients undergoing 1-level lumbar fusion, which is primarily driven by surgeon-level decisions and preferences (e.g., implant and technology use). Also, being a "fast" surgeon intraoperatively does not mean your total cost is meaningfully lower. As efforts continue to optimize patient value through ensuring appropriate clinical outcomes while also reducing cost, spine surgeons must use this knowledge to lead, or at least be active participants in, any discussions that could impact patient care.

Evaluating and Comparing the Correlation and Performance of PROMIS and FAAM ADL in a Foot and Ankle Patient Population.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of literature assessing 2 of the commonly used static Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) forms (PROMIS Global-10 and PROMIS Physical Function Short Form 10a [PF SF 10a]) and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activities of Daily Living (FAAM ADL). METHODS: The PROMIS Global-10, PROMIS PF SF 10a, and FAAM ADL were compared among new foot and ankle patients. Spearman rho (ρ) correlations were calculated, and ceiling and floor effects were determined. RESULTS: The FAAM ADL demonstrated strong correlations with PROMIS PF SF 10a, P = .88, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-0.90, P < .001, and PROMIS Global-10 Physical Health (P = .75, 95% CI: 0.71-0.78, p < .001). The FAAM ADL and PROMIS Global-10 Mental Health demonstrated a moderate correlation (P = .41, 95% CI: 0.34-0.47, P < .001). No PROM demonstrated an appreciable floor effect. The PROMIS Global-10 Physical Health demonstrated the lowest ceiling effect (n=11 [1.6%]). CONCLUSION: Because the PROMIS Global-10 captures physical health adequately, provides mental health insight, and performs as well (if not better), we recommend the PROMIS Global-10 among the PROMs studied.Level of Evidence: Level III.

PROMIS Global Physical Health Subscale Strongly Correlates and Performs Similarly to the QuickDASH in Hand and Upper Extremity Patients.

BACKGROUND: The Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) is a validated, static hand and upper extremity patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) commonly used. However, with the growth of PROM implementation across orthopedic and plastic surgery clinics, it is beneficial to determine whether a more general PROM can be used to capture the same insights. This would ease implementation broadly. There is a paucity of literature assessing whether the QuickDASH and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global-10 are correlated and perform similarly. METHODS: Between June 2016 and December 2020, hand and upper extremity patients seeking care at clinics associated with a single quaternary academic medical center were identified. Those who completed the PROMIS Global-10 and QuickDASH as part of routine care were identified. The PROMIS Global-10 is divided into the PROMIS Global Physical Health and PROMIS Global Mental Health subscores. Spearman rho (ρ) correlations were calculated across PROMs, and ceiling and floor effects were determined. RESULTS: Across the 18 744 included patients, there was a strong correlation and strong-moderate correlation found between the QuickDASH and PROMIS Global Physical Health (ρ = 0.70, P < .001) and PROMIS Global Mental Health (ρ = 0.69, P < .001), respectively. Although small, QuickDASH demonstrates the worst floor effect (2.6%, [n = 478]), whereas PROMIS Global Mental Health demonstrated a much more notable ceiling effect (11%, [n = 2034]). CONCLUSIONS: The PROMIS Global-10 can be used to assess the functional status of patients presenting for hand and upper extremity concerns, while also capturing aspects of mental health. The PROMIS Global-10 may ease PROM implementation broadly.

Does Nasal Screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Prevent Deep Surgical Site Infections for Elective Cervical Spinal Fusion?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) testing and surgical site infection (SSI) rates in the setting of primary posterior cervical instrumented spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Preoperative MRSA screening and decolonization has demonstrated success for some orthopedic subspecialties in prevention of SSIs. Spine surgery, however, has seen varied results, potentially secondary to the anatomic and surgical heterogeneity of the patients included in prior studies. Given that prior research has demonstrated greater propensity for gram positive SSIs in the cervical spine, we sought to investigate if MRSA screening would be more impactful in the cervical spine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult patients undergoing primary instrumented posterior cervical procedures from January 2015 to December 2019 were reviewed for MRSA testing <90 days before surgery, preoperative mupirocin, perioperative antibiotics, and SSI defined as operative incision and drainage (I&D) <90 days after surgery. Logistic regression modeling used SSI as the primary outcome, MRSA screening as primary predictor, and clinical and demographic factors as covariates. RESULTS: This study included 668 patients, of whom MRSA testing was performed in 212 patients (31.7%) and 6 (2.8%) were colonized with MRSA. Twelve patients (1.8%) underwent an I&D. On adjusted analysis, preoperative MRSA testing was not associated with postoperative I&D risk. Perioperative vancomycin similarly had no association with postoperative I&D risk. Notably, 6 patients (50%) grew methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus from intraoperative cultures, with no cases of MRSA. CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between preoperative nasal MRSA screening and SSIs in primary posterior cervical instrumented procedures, nor was there any association between vancomycin or infection rate. Furthermore, there was a preponderance of gram positive infections but none caused by MRSA. Given these findings, the considerable cost and effort associated with MRSA testing in the setting of primary posterior cervical instrumentation may not be justified. Further research should investigate if higher-risk scenarios demonstrate greater utility of preoperative testing.

Impact of Health Literacy on Self-Reported Health Outcomes in Spine Patients.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to determine if health literacy level is associated with patient-reported outcomes and self-reported health status among patients presenting to an academic outpatient spine center. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patient reports are critical to assessing symptom severity and treatment success in orthopedic spine patients. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important instruments commonly used for this purpose. However, the influence of patient health literacy on PROMs has not yet been given much consideration in spine literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive English-speaking patients over the age of 18 years and new to our clinic verbally completed the Newest Vital Sign health literacy assessment tool and a sociodemographic survey, including self-reported health status. In addition, seven Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores were extracted from patient records. Regression modeling was performed with PROMs considered as dependent variables, health literacy level as the primary predictor, and all other factors (age, sex, race, ethnicity, native English speaker, highest educational degree, grade-level reading, marital status, employment status, annual household income, and type of insurance) as covariates. RESULTS: Among the 318 included patients, 33% had limited health literacy. Adjusted regression analysis demonstrated that patients with limited health literacy had worse PROM scores across all seven domains (Physical Function: P =0.028; Depression: P =0.035; Global Health-Physical: P =0.001; Global Health-Mental: P =0.007; Pain Interference: P =0.036; Pain Intensity: P =0.002; Anxiety: P =0.047). In addition, patients with limited health literacy reported worse self-reported health status ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Spine patients with limited health literacy have worse baseline PROM scores confounders and report worse general health. Further investigations are necessary to elucidate if limited health literacy is a marker or the root cause of these disparities. Findings from this study urge the consideration of patient health literacy when interpreting PROMs as well as the implications for patient assessment and discussion of treatment options.

Reliability of self-reported health literacy screening in spine patients.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Limited health literacy has previously been associated with increased health care utilization, worse general health status and self-reported health, and increased mortality. Identifying and accommodating patients with limited health literacy may offer an avenue towards mitigating adverse health outcomes and reduce unnecessary health care expenditure. Due to the challenges associated with implementation of lengthy health literacy assessments, the Brief Health Literacy Screening Instrument was developed. However, to our knowledge, there are no reports on the accuracy of this screening questionnaire, with or without the inclusion of sociodemographic characteristics, when predicting limited health literacy in orthopaedic spine patients. PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability and predictive accuracy of self-reported health literacy screening questions with and without the inclusion of sociodemographic variables in orthopaedic spine patients. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients seen at a tertiary urban academic hospital-based multi-surgeon spine center OUTCOME MEASURES: Brief Health Literacy Screening Instrument (BRIEF), and the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) health literacy assessment tool. METHODS: Between December 2021 and February 2022, consecutive English-speaking patients over the age of 18 presenting as new patients to an urban, hospital-based outpatient spine clinic were approached for participation. A sociodemographic survey, the BRIEF, and the NVS Health Literacy Assessment Tool were administered verbally. Simple and multivariable logistic regression was utilized to assess the accuracy of each BRIEF question individually, and collectively, at predicting limited health literacy as defined by the NVS. Further regression analysis included sociodemographic variables (age, body mass index, race, ethnicity, highest educational degree, employment status, marital status, annual household income, insurance status, and self-reported health. RESULTS: A total of 262 patients [mean age (years), 57 ± 17] were included in this study. One hundred thirty-four (51%) were male, 223 (85%) were White, and 151 (58%) were married. Patient BRIEF scores were as follows: 23 (9%) limited, 43 (16%) marginal, and 196 (75%) adequate. NVS scores identified 87 (33%) patients with possible limited health literacy. BRIEF items collectively demonstrated fair accuracy in the prediction of limited health literacy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.82). Individually, the fourth BRIEF item ("How confident are you in filling out medical forms by yourself?") was the best predictor of limited health literacy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.60-0.73). The predictive accuracy of the BRIEF items, both individually and collectively, increased with the inclusion of sociodemographic variables within the logistic regression. Specific characteristics independently associated with limited health literacy were self-identified Black race, retired or disabled employment status, single or divorced marital status, high school education or below, and self-reported "poor" health. CONCLUSIONS: Limited health literacy has implications for patient outcomes and health care costs. Our results show that the BRIEF questionnaire is a low-cost screening tool that demonstrates fair predictability in determining limited health literacy within a population of spine patients. Self-reported health literacy assessments may be more feasible in daily practice and easier to implement into clinical workflow.