Practical Answers to Frequently Asked Questions in Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery for Degenerative Conditions.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical counseling enables shared decision making and optimal outcomes by improving patients' understanding about their pathologies, surgical options, and expected outcomes. Here, we aimed to provide practical answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs) from patients undergoing an anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) or cervical disk replacement (CDR) for the treatment of degenerative conditions. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary one-level or two-level ACDF or CDR for the treatment of degenerative conditions with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. Data were used to answer 10 FAQs that were generated from author's experience of commonly asked questions in clinic before ACDF or CDR. RESULTS: A total of 395 patients (181 ACDF, 214 CDR) were included. (1, 2, and 3) Will my neck/arm pain and physical function improve? Patients report notable improvement in all patient-reported outcome measures. (4) Is there a chance I will get worse? 13% (ACDF) and 5% (CDR) reported worsening. (5) Will I receive a significant amount of radiation? Patients on average received a 3.7 (ACDF) and 5.5 mGy (CDR) dose during. (6) How long will I stay in the hospital? Most patients get discharged on postoperative day one. (7) What is the likelihood that I will have a complication? 13% (8% minor and 5% major) experienced in-hospital complications (ACDF) and 5% (all minor) did (CDR). (8) Will I need another surgery? 2.2% (ACDF) and 2.3% (CDR) of patients required a revision surgery. (9 & 10) When will I be able to return to work/driving? Most patients return to working (median of 16 [ACDF] and 14 days [CDR]) and driving (median of 16 [ACDF] and 12 days [CDR]). CONCLUSIONS: The answers to the FAQs can assist surgeons in evidence-based patient counseling.

Quality of ChatGPT Responses to Frequently Asked Questions in Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery.

Background: Although demonstrating remarkable promise in other fields, the impact of artificial intelligence (including ChatGPT in hand surgery and medical practice) remains largely undetermined. In this study, we asked ChatGPT frequently asked patient-focused questions surgeons may receive in clinic from patients who have carpel tunnel syndrome (CTS) and evaluated the quality of its output. Methods: Using ChatGPT, we asked 10 frequently asked questions that hand surgeons may receive in the clinic before carpel tunnel release (CTR) surgery. Included questions were generated from the authors' own experiences regarding conservative and operative treatment of CTS. Results: Responses from the following 10 questions were included: (1) What is CTS and what are its signs and symptoms? (2) What are the nonsurgical options for CTS? (3) Should I get surgery for CTS? (4) What is a CTR and how is it preformed? (5) What are the differences between open and endoscopic CTR? (6) What are the risks associated with CTR and how frequently do they occur? (7) Does CTR cure CTS? (8) How much improvement in my symptoms can I expect after CTR? (9) How long is the recovery after CTR? (10) Can CTS recur after surgery? Conclusions: Overall, the chatbot provided accurate and comprehensive information in response to most common and nuanced questions regarding CTS and CTR surgery, all in a way that would be easily understood by many patients. Importantly, the chatbot did not provide patient-specific advice and consistently advocated for consultation with a healthcare provider.

Racial and Ethnic Minority Patients Have Increased Complication Risks When Undergoing Surgery While Not Meeting Clinical Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for performing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) have not been uniformly adopted in practice because research has suggested that they may foster inequities in surgical access, potentially disadvantaging minority sociodemographic groups. The aim of this study was to assess whether undergoing TJA without meeting clinical guidelines affects complication risk and leads to disparities in postoperative outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated the records of 11,611 adult patients who underwent primary TJA from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, at an academic hospital network. Based on self-reported race and ethnicity, 89.5% of patients were White, 3.5% were Black, 2.9% were Hispanic, 1.3% were Asian, and 2.8% were classified as other. Patients met institutional guidelines for undergoing TJA if they had a hemoglobin A1c of <8.0% and a body mass index of <40 kg/m 2 and were not currently smoking. A logistic regression model was utilized to identify factors associated with complications, and a mixed-effects model was utilized to identify factors associated with not meeting guidelines for undergoing TJA. RESULTS: During the study period, 11% (1,274) of the 11,611 adults who underwent primary TJA did not meet clinical guidelines. Compared with the group who met guidelines, the group who did not had higher proportions of Black patients (3.2% versus 6.0%; p < 0.001) and Hispanic patients (2.7% versus 4.6%; p < 0.001). An increased risk of not meeting guidelines at the time of surgery was demonstrated among Black patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.60 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22 to 2.10]; p = 0.001) and patients insured by Medicaid (OR, 1.75 [95% CI, 1.26 to 2.44]; p = 0.001) or Medicare (OR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.06 to 1.41]; p = 0.007). Patients who did not meet guidelines had a higher risk of reoperation than those who met guidelines (7.7% [98] versus 5.9% [615]; p = 0.017), including a higher risk of infection-related reoperation (3.1% [40] versus 1.4% [147]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found that patients who underwent TJA despite not meeting institutional preoperative criteria had a higher risk of postoperative complications. These patients were more likely to be from racial and ethnic minority groups, to have a lower socioeconomic status, and to have Medicare or Medicaid insurance. These findings underscore the need for surgery-related shared decision-making that is informed by evidence-based guidelines in order to reduce complication burden. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Chat Generative Pretraining Transformer Answers Patient-focused Questions in Cervical Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Review of Chat Generative Pretraining Transformer (ChatGPT) outputs to select patient-focused questions. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the quality of ChatGPT responses to cervical spine questions. BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence and its utilization to improve patient experience across medicine is seeing remarkable growth. One such usage is patient education. For the first time on a large scale, patients can ask targeted questions and receive similarly targeted answers. Although patients may use these resources to assist in decision-making, there still exists little data regarding their accuracy, especially within orthopedic surgery and more specifically spine surgery. METHODS: We compiled 9 frequently asked questions cervical spine surgeons receive in the clinic to test ChatGPT's version 3.5 ability to answer a nuanced topic. Responses were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers on a Likert Scale for the accuracy of information presented (0-5 points), appropriateness in giving a specific answer (0-3 points), and readability for a layperson (0-2 points). Readability was assessed through the Flesh-Kincaid grade level analysis for the original prompt and for a second prompt asking for rephrasing at the sixth-grade reading level. RESULTS: On average, ChatGPT's responses scored a 7.1/10. Accuracy was rated on average a 4.1/5. Appropriateness was 1.8/3. Readability was a 1.2/2. Readability was determined to be at the 13.5 grade level originally and at the 11.2 grade level after prompting. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT has the capacity to be a powerful means for patients to gain important and specific information regarding their pathologies and surgical options. These responses are limited in their accuracy, and we, in addition, noted readability is not optimal for the average patient. Despite these limitations in ChatGPT's capability to answer these nuanced questions, the technology is impressive, and surgeons should be aware patients will likely increasingly rely on it.

Impact of Metabolic Syndrome on Early Postoperative Outcomes After Cervical Disk Replacement: A Propensity-matched Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the demographics, perioperative variables, and complication rates following cervical disk replacement (CDR) among patients with and without metabolic syndrome (MetS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The prevalence of MetS-involving concurrent obesity, insulin resistance, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia-has increased in the United States over the last 2 decades. Little is known about the impact of MetS on early postoperative outcomes and complications following CDR. METHODS: The 2005-2020 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried for patients who underwent primary 1- or 2-level CDR. Patients with and without MetS were divided into 2 cohorts. MetS was defined, according to other National Surgical Quality Improvement Program studies, as concurrent diabetes mellitus, hypertension requiring medication, and body mass index ≥30 kg/m 2 . Rates of 30-day readmission, reoperation, complications, length of hospital stay, and discharge disposition were compared using χ 2 and Fisher exact tests. One to 2 propensity-matching was performed, matching for demographics, comorbidities, and number of operative levels. RESULTS: A total of 5395 patients were included for unmatched analysis. Two hundred thirty-six had MetS, and 5159 did not. The MetS cohort had greater rates of 30-day readmission (2.5% vs. 0.9%; P =0.023), morbidity (2.5% vs. 0.9%; P =0.032), nonhome discharges (3% vs. 0.6%; P =0.002), and longer hospital stays (1.35±4.04 vs. 1±1.48 days; P =0.029). After propensity-matching, 699 patients were included. All differences reported above lost significance ( P >0.05) except for 30-day morbidity (superficial wound infections), which remained higher for the MetS cohort (2.5% vs. 0.4%, P =0.02). CONCLUSIONS: We identified MetS as an independent predictor of 30-day morbidity in the form of superficial wound infections following single-level CDR. Although MetS patients experienced greater rates of 30-day readmission, nonhome discharge, and longer lengths of stay, MetS did not independently predict these outcomes after controlling for baseline differences in patient characteristics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Postoperative racial disparities following spine surgery are less pronounced in the outpatient setting.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Racial disparities in spine surgery have been thoroughly documented in the inpatient (IP) setting. However, despite an increasing proportion of procedures being performed as same-day surgeries, whether similar differences have developed in the outpatient (OP) setting remains to be elucidated. PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate racial differences in postoperative outcomes between Black and White patients following OP and IP lumbar and cervical spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent IP or OP microdiscectomy, laminectomy, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), or cervical disc replacement (CDR) between 2017 and 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES: Thirty-day rates of serious and minor adverse events, readmission, reoperation, non-home discharge, and mortality. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent IP or OP microdiscectomy, laminectomy, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), or cervical disc replacement (CDR) between 2017 and 2021 was conducted using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Disparities between Black and White patients in (1) adverse event rates, (2) readmission rates, (3) reoperation rates, (4) non-home discharge rates, (5) mortality rates, (6) operative times, and (7) hospital LOS between Black and White patients were measured and compared between IP and OP surgical settings. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for potential effects of baseline demographic and clinical differences. RESULTS: Of 81,696 total surgeries, 49,351 (60.4%) were performed as IP and 32,345 (39.6%) were performed as OP procedures. White patients accounted for a greater proportion of IP (88.2% vs. 11.8%) and OP (92.7% vs. 7.3%) procedures than Black patients. Following IP surgery, Black patients experienced greater odds of serious (OR 1.214, 95% CI 1.077-1.370, p=.002) and minor adverse events (OR 1.377, 95% CI 1.113-1.705, p=.003), readmission (OR 1.284, 95% CI 1.130-1.459, p<.001), reoperation (OR 1.194, 95% CI 1.013-1.407, p=.035), and non-home discharge (OR 2.304, 95% CI 2.101-2.528, p<.001) after baseline adjustment. Disparities were less prominent in the OP setting, as Black patients exhibited greater odds of readmission (OR 1.341, 95% CI 1.036-1.735, p=0.026) but were no more likely than White patients to experience adverse events, reoperation, individual complications, non-home discharge, or death (p>.050 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Racial inequality in postoperative complications following spine surgery is evident, however disparities in complication rates are relatively less following OP compared to IP procedures. Further work may be beneficial in elucidating the causes of these differences to better understand and mitigate overall racial disparities within the inpatient setting. These decreased differences may also provide promising indication that progress towards reducing inequality is possible as spine care transitions to the OP setting.

Differences in total shoulder arthroplasty utilization and 30-day outcomes among White, Black, and Hispanic patients: do disparities exist in the outpatient setting?

BACKGROUND: In the United States, efforts to improve efficiency and reduce healthcare costs are shifting more total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) surgeries to the outpatient setting. However, whether racial and ethnic disparities in access to high-quality outpatient TSA care exist remains to be elucidated. The purpose of this study was to assess racial/ethnic differences in relative outpatient TSA utilization and perioperative outcomes using a large national surgical database. METHODS: White, Black, and Hispanic patients who underwent TSA between 2017 and 2021 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were collected, and rates of outpatient utilization, adverse events, readmission, reoperation, nonhome discharge, and mortality within 30 days of surgery were compared between racial/ethnic groups. Race/ethnicity-specific trends in utilization of outpatient TSA were assessed, and multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for baseline demographic factors and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 21,186 patients were included, consisting of 19,135 (90.3%) White, 1093 (5.2%) Black, and 958 (4.5%) Hispanic patients and representing 17,649 (83.3%) inpatient and 3537 (16.7%) outpatient procedures. Black and Hispanic patients were generally younger and less healthy than White patients, yet incidences of complications, nonhome discharge, readmission, reoperation, and death within 30 days were similar across groups following outpatient TSA (P > .050 for all). Relative utilization of outpatient TSA increased by 28.7% among White patients, 29.5% among Black patients, and 38.6% among Hispanic patients (ptrend<0.001 for all). Hispanic patients were 64% more likely than White patients to undergo TSA as an outpatient procedure across the study period (OR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.40-1.92, P < .001), whereas odds did not differ between Black and White patients (OR: 1.04, 95% CI 0.87-1.23, P = .673). CONCLUSION: Relative utilization of outpatient TSA remains highest among Hispanic patients but has been significantly increasing across all racial and ethnic groups, now accounting for more than one-third of all TSA procedures. Considering outpatient TSA is associated with fewer complications and lower costs, increasing utilization may represent a promising avenue for reducing disparities in orthopedic shoulder surgery.

The Impact of Posterior Intervertebral Osteophytes on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: (1) To develop a reliable grading system to assess the severity of posterior intervertebral osteophytes and (2) to investigate the impact of posterior intervertebral osteophytes on clinical outcomes after L5-S1 decompression and fusion through anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and minimally-invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence regarding the clinical implications of posterior lumbar vertebral body osteophytes for ALIF and MIS-TLIF surgeries and there are no established grading systems that define the severity of these posterior lumbar intervertebral osteophytes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF or MIS-TLIF was performed. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and leg Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 2-week, 6-week, 12-week, and 6-month follow-up time points were assessed. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for ODI of 14.9 and VAS leg of 2.8 were utilized. Osteophyte grade was based on the ratio of osteophyte length to foraminal width. "High-grade" osteophytes were defined as a maximal osteophyte length >50% of the total foraminal width. RESULTS: A total of 70 consecutive patients (32 ALIF and 38 MIS-TLIF) were included in the study. There were no significant differences between the two cohorts in patient-reported outcome measures or achievement of MCID for Leg VAS or ODI preoperatively or at any follow-ups. On multivariate analysis, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with leg VAS or ODI scores at any follow-up time point. In addition, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with the achievement of MCID for leg VAS or ODI at 6 months. CONCLUSION: ALIF and MIS-TLIF are both valid options for treating degenerative spine conditions and lumbar radiculopathy, even in the presence of high-grade osteophytes that significantly occupy the intervertebral foramen. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Telemedicine in Spine Patients: Utilization and Satisfaction Remain High Even After Easing of COVID-19 Lockdown Restrictions.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the present study were to (1) define telemedicine utilization rates during and after the initial height of the COVID-19 lockdown period and (2) determine patient satisfaction with telemedicine during and after the initial height of the COVID-19 lockdown period for spine patients at an orthopedic specialty hospital. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies have shown high patient satisfaction with telemedicine during the initial height of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there exists limited data about spine telemedicine utilization and patient satisfaction after the reopening of in-person office visits and the easing of restrictions on elective surgical care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who had an in-person or telemedicine visit at an urban tertiary specialty hospital from April 1, 2020 to April 15, 2021 were identified. Rates of overall telemedicine utilization over time were delineated. Patient satisfaction with telemedicine, as assessed through a series of questionnaires, was also evaluated over time. RESULTS: Overall, 60,368 patients were identified. Of these, 19,568 patients (32.4%) had telemedicine visit. During the peak initial coronavirus lockdown period, the rate of overall telemedicine utilization, on average, was greater than 90%. After the peak period, the rate of overall telemedicine utilization on average was at ~29% of all visits per month. The percentage of patients who would have been definitely comfortable if the telemedicine visit had been in-person increased over the entire study period ( P <0.001). Despite this, patient satisfaction based on survey responses remained statistically similar throughout the study period ( P >0.05). CONCLUSION: The rate of telemedicine utilization in spine patients remains high, at ~one-third of all visits, even after the initial peak coronavirus lockdown period. In addition, patient satisfaction with telemedicine remained consistent throughout the study period, regardless of pandemic restrictions on in-person visits. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Comparison of the Safety of Inpatient Versus Outpatient Lumbar Fusion : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to synthesize the early data regarding and analyze the safety profile of outpatient lumbar fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Performing lumbar fusion in an outpatient or ambulatory setting is becoming an increasingly employed strategy to provide effective value-based care. As this is an emerging option for surgeons to employ in their practices, the data is still in its infancy. METHODS: This study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies that described outcomes of inpatient and outpatient lumbar fusion cohorts were searched from PubMed, Medline, The Cochrane Library, and Embase. Rates of individual medical and surgical complications, readmission, and reoperation were collected when applicable. Patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) were additionally collected if reported. Individual pooled comparative meta-analysis was performed for outcomes of medical complications, surgical complications, readmission, and reoperation. PROMs were reviewed and qualitatively reported. RESULTS: The search yielded 14 publications that compared outpatient and inpatient cohorts with a total of 75,627 patients. Odds of readmission demonstrated no significant difference between outpatient and inpatient cohorts [OR=0.94 (0.81-1.11)]. Revision surgery similarly was no different between the cohorts [OR=0.81 (0.57-1.15)]. Pooled medical and surgical complications demonstrated significantly decreased odds for outpatient cohorts compared with inpatient cohorts [OR=0.58 (0.34-0.50), OR=0.41 (0.50-0.68), respectively]. PROM measures were largely the same between the cohorts when reported, with few studies showing better ODI and VAS Leg outcomes among outpatient cohorts compared with inpatient cohorts. CONCLUSION: Preliminary data regarding the safety of outpatient lumbar fusion demonstrates a favorable safety profile in appropriately selected patients, with PROMs remaining comparable in this setting. There is no data in the form of prospective and randomized trials which is necessary to definitively change practice.

Gender disparities in postoperative outcomes following elective spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Several studies have described disparities between male and female patients following spine surgery, but no pooled analyses have performed a robust review characterizing differences in postoperative outcomes based on gender. The purpose of this study was to broadly assess the effects of gender on postoperative outcomes following elective spine surgery. METHODS: Between November 2022 and March 2023, PubMed, MEDLINE, ERIC, and Embase were queried using artificial intelligence-assisted software for relevant cohort studies. Cohort studies with a minimum sample of 100 patients conducted in the United States since 2010 were eligible. Studies related to trauma, tumors, infections, and spinal cord pathology were excluded. Independent extraction by multiple reviewers was performed using Nested Knowledge software. A fixed- or random-effects model was used if heterogeneity among included studies in a meta-analysis was < 50% or ≥ 50%, respectively. Risk of bias was assessed independently by multiple reviewers using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled effect sizes were calculated for readmission, nonroutine discharge (NRD), length of stay (LOS), extended LOS, reoperation, mortality, all medical complications (individual analyses for cardiovascular, deep venous thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, genitourinary, neurological, respiratory, and systemic infection complications), and wound-related complications. For each outcome, two subanalyses were performed with studies that used either center-based (single- or multi-institution) or high-volume (national or state-wide) databases. RESULTS: Across 124 included studies, male patients had an increased incidence of mortality (OR 0.54, p < 0.0001) and all medical complications (OR 0.80, p = 0.0114), specifically cardiovascular (OR 0.68, p < 0.0001) and respiratory (OR 0.76, p = 0.0008) complications. Female patients were more likely to experience a wound-related surgical complication (OR 1.16, p = 0.0183). These findings persisted in the high-volume database subanalyses. Only center-based subanalyses showed that female patients were at greater odds of experiencing an NRD (OR 1.18, p = 0.0476), longer LOS (SMD 0.23, p = 0.0036), and extended LOS (OR 1.28, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Males are more likely to experience death and medical complications, whereas females were more likely to face wound-related surgical complications. At the institution level, females more often experience NRD and longer hospital stays. These findings may better inform preoperative expectation management and provide more detailed postoperative risk assessments based on the patient's gender.

Racial Differences in Patient Satisfaction With the Hospital Experience Undergoing Primary Unilateral Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Study.

Background: Press Ganey (PG) inpatient survey is widely used to track patient satisfaction with the hospital experience. Our aim was to use the PG survey to determine if there are racial differences in overall hospital experience and perception of nurses and surgeons following hip and knee arthroplasty. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed Black and White patients from hip and knee arthroplasty registries from a single institution between July 2010 and February 2012. The overall assessment score for the hospital experience and perception of the nurse and surgeon questions from the PG inpatient survey were dichotomized as "not completely satisfied" or "completely satisfied". Multivariable logistic regression models were developed to determine the impact of race on the likelihood of being 'completely satisfied' in the hip and knee cohorts. Results: There were 2517 hip and 2114 knee patients who underwent surgery and completed the PG survey, of whom 3.9% were Black and 96.0% were White. Black patients were less likely to be completely satisfied with their hospital experience compared to White patients in the hip (odds ratio 0.62, confidence interval 0.39-1.00, P = .049) and knee (odds ratio 0.52, confidence interval 0.33-0.82, P = .005) cohorts. Black patients were also less likely to be completely satisfied with multiple aspects of care they received from the nurse and surgeon in both cohorts. Conclusions: We found that the PG Survey shows Black patients were less likely to be completely satisfied than White patients with the hospital experience, including their interactions with nurses and surgeons. More work is needed to understand this difference.

Recovery Kinetics After Cervical Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained multisurgeon registry. OBJECTIVE: To study recovery kinetics and associated factors after cervical spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Few studies have described return to activities cervical spine surgery. This is a big gap in the literature, as preoperative counseling and expectations before surgery are important. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent either anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or cervical disk replacement (CDR) were included. Data collected included preoperative patient-reported outcome measures, return to driving, return to working, and discontinuation of opioids data. A multivariable regression was conducted to identify the factors associated with return to driving by 15 days, return to working by 15 days, and discontinuing opioids by 30 days. RESULTS: Seventy ACDF patients and 70 CDR patients were included. Overall, 98.2% of ACDF patients and 98% of CDR patients returned to driving in 16 and 12 days, respectively; 85.7% of ACDF patients and 90.9% of CDR patients returned to work in 16 and 14 days; and 98.3% of ACDF patients and 98.3% of CDR patients discontinued opioids in a median of seven and six days. Though not significant, minimal (odds ratio (OR)=1.65) and moderate (OR=1.79) disability was associated with greater odds of returning to driving by 15 days. Sedentary work (OR=0.8) and preoperative narcotics (OR=0.86) were associated with decreased odds of returning to driving by 15 days. Medium (OR=0.81) and heavy (OR=0.78) intensity occupations were associated with decreased odds of returning to work by 15 days. High school education (OR=0.75), sedentary work (OR=0.79), and retired/not working (OR=0.69) were all associated with decreased odds of discontinuing opioids by 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery kinetics for ACDF and CDR are comparable. Most patients return to all activities after ACDF and CDR within 16 days. These findings serve as an important compass for preoperative counseling.

Unplanned readmissions following ambulatory spine surgery: assessing common reasons and risk factors.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Although outpatient spine surgery is becoming increasingly popular in the United States, unplanned readmission following outpatient surgery remains a significant postoperative concern. PURPOSE: This study aimed to (1) describe the incidence and timing of 30-day unplanned readmission after ambulatory lumbar and cervical spine surgery (2) evaluate the common reasons for readmission, and (3) identify factors associated with readmission in this population. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent ambulatory cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital readmission within 30 postoperative days. METHODS: Patients who underwent ambulatory cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2015 and 2020 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Reasons for and timing of unplanned readmissions were recorded. Multivariable poisson regressions were employed to determine any independent predictors of readmission. RESULTS: A total of 33,092 ambulatory cervical and 68,115 ambulatory lumbar spine surgery patients were identified. Incidences of 30-day readmission were 3.37% and 3.07% among cervical and lumbar patients, respectively. The most common surgical site-related reasons for readmission included uncontrolled pain, recurrence of disc herniation or major symptom, and postoperative hematoma/seroma. Common nonsurgical site-related reasons included gastrointestinal, neurological, and cardiovascular complications. Factors associated with readmission among cervical patients included age ≥55, BMI ≥35, functional dependence, diabetes, smoking, COPD, and steroid use, whereas factors associated with readmission following lumbar spine surgery included age ≥65, female sex, BMI ≥35, functional dependence, ASA ≥3, diabetes, smoking, COPD, and hypertension (p<.05 for all). CONCLUSION: This study highlights the common reasons and factors associated with unplanned readmission following ambulatory spine surgery. Consideration of these factors may be critical to ensuring appropriate patient selection for ambulatory spine surgery.

National Patterns in Utilization of Knee and Hip Arthroscopy: An Analysis of Racial, Ethnic, and Geographic Disparities in the United States.

Background: Racial and ethnic disparities in the field of orthopaedic surgery have been reported extensively across many subspecialties. However, these data remain relatively sparse in orthopaedic sports medicine, especially with respect to commonly performed procedures including knee and hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To assess (1) differences in utilization of knee and hip arthroscopy between White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander patients in the United States (US) and (2) how these differences vary by geographical region. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: The study sample was acquired from the 2019 National Ambulatory Surgery Sample database. Racial and ethnic differences in age-standardized utilization rates of hip and knee arthroscopy were calculated using survey weights and population estimates from US census data. Poisson regression was used to model age-standardized utilization rates for hip and knee arthroscopy while controlling for several demographic and clinical variables. Results: During the study period, rates of knee arthroscopy utilization among White patients were significantly higher than those of Black, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander patients (ie, per 100,000, White: 180.5, Black: 113.2, Hispanic: 122.2, and Asian: 58.6). Disparities were even more pronounced among patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, with White patients receiving the procedure at almost 4 to 5 times higher rates (ie, per 100,000, White: 12.6, Black: 3.2, Hispanic: 2.3, Asian or Pacific Islander: 1.8). Disparities in knee and hip arthroscopy utilization between White and non-White patients varied significantly by region, with gaps in knee arthroscopy being most pronounced in the Midwest (adjusted rate ratio, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.9-2.1]) and those in hip arthroscopy being greatest in the West (adjusted rate ratio, 5.3 [95% CI, 4.9-5.6]). Conclusion: Racial and ethnic disparities in the use of knee and hip arthroscopy were found across the US, with decreased rates among Black, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander patients compared with White patients. Disparities were most pronounced in the Midwest and South and greater for hip than knee arthroscopy, possibly demonstrating emerging inequality in a rapidly growing and evolving procedure across the country.

Improving Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Outpatient Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Driven by Increasing Utilization of Ambulatory Surgical Centers in New York State.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess trends in disparities in utilization of hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) and ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) for outpatient ACDF (OP-ACDF) between White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients from 2015 to 2018 in New York State. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Racial and ethnic disparities within the field of spine surgery have been thoroughly documented. To date, it remains unknown how these disparities have evolved in the outpatient setting alongside the rapid emergence of ASCs and whether restrictive patterns of access to these outpatient centers exist by race and ethnicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review from 2015 to 2018 using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) New York State Ambulatory Database. Differences in utilization rates for OP-ACDF were assessed and trended over time by race and ethnicity for both HOPDs and freestanding ASCs. Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association between utilization rates for OP-ACDF and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2018, Black, Hispanic, and Asian patients were less likely to undergo OP-ACDF compared with White patients in New York State. However, the magnitude of these disparities lessened over time, as Black, Hispanic, and Asian patients had greater relative increases in utilization of HOPDs and ASCs for ACDF when compared with White patients ( Ptrend <0.001). The magnitude of the increase in freestanding ASC utilization was such that minority patients had higher ACDF utilization rates in freestanding ASCs by 2018 ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of improving racial disparities in the relative utilization of outpatient ACDF in New York State. The increase in access to outpatient ACDF appeared to be driven by an increasing number of patients undergoing ACDF in freestanding ASCs in large metropolitan areas. These improving disparities are encouraging and contrast previously documented inequalities in inpatient spine surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Provider Referral Patterns and Surgical Utilization Among New Patients Seen in Spine Clinic.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to elucidate the demographics of patient referrals from different sources and identify factors that affect a patient's likelihood of undergoing surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite baseline factors for surgical consideration, such as attempting conservative management, surgeons encounter many patients who are not surgically indicated. Overreferrals, that is, a patient referred to a surgeon that does not need surgery, can result in long wait times, delayed care, worse outcomes, and resource waste. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All new patients at a single academic institution seen in the clinic by eight spine surgeons between January 1, 2018, and January 1, 2022, were analyzed. Referral types included self-referral, musculoskeletal (MSK), and non-MSK provider referral. Patient demographics included age, body mass index (BMI), zip code as a proxy for socioeconomic status, sex, insurance type, and surgical procedures undergone within 1.5 years postclinic visit. Analysis of variance and a Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare means among normally and non-normally disturbed referral groups, respectively. Multivariable logistic regressions were run to assess demographic variables associated with undergoing surgery. RESULTS: From 9356 patients, 84% (7834) were self-referred, 3% (319) were non-MSK, and 13% (1203) were MSK. A statistically significant association with ultimately undergoing surgery was observed with MSK referral type compared with non-MSK referral [odds ratio (OR)=1.37, CI: 1.04-1.82, P =0.0246]. Additional independent variables observed to be associated with patients undergoing surgery included older age (OR=1.004, CI: 1.002-1.007, P =0.0018), higher BMI (OR=1.02, CI: 1.011-1.029, P <0.0001), high-income quartile (OR=1.343, CI: 1.177-1.533, P <0.0001), and male sex (OR=1.189, CI: 1.085-1.302, P =0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: A statistically significant association with undergoing surgery was observed with a referral by an MSK provider, older age, male sex, high BMI, and a high-income quartile home zip code. Understanding these factors and patterns is critical for optimizing practice efficiency and reducing the burdens of inappropriate referrals.

Colon Cancer Disparities in Stage at Presentation and Time to Surgery for Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders: A Study with Disaggregated Ethnic Groups.

BACKGROUND: Vast differences in barriers to care exist among Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) groups and may manifest as disparities in stage at presentation and access to treatment. Thus, we characterized AANHPI patients with stage 0-IV colon cancer and examined differences in (1) stage at presentation and (2) time to surgery relative to white patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assessed all patients in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) with stage 0-IV colon cancer from 2004 to 2016 who identified as white, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Native Hawaiian, Korean, Vietnamese, Laotian, Hmong, Kampuchean, Thai, Asian Indian or Pakistani, and Pacific Islander. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs), with 95% confidence intervals (CI), of (1) patients presenting with advanced stage colon cancer and (2) patients with stage 0-III colon cancer receiving surgery at ≥ 60 days versus 30-59 days versus < 30 days postdiagnosis, adjusting for sociodemographic/clinical factors. RESULTS: Among 694,876 patients, Japanese [AOR 1.08 (95% CI 1.01-1.15), p < 0.05], Filipino [AOR 1.17 (95% CI 1.09-1.25), p < 0.001], Korean [AOR 1.09 (95% CI 1.01-1.18), p < 0.05], Laotian [AOR 1.51 (95% CI 1.17-1.95), p < 0.01], Kampuchean [AOR 1.33 (95% CI 1.04-1.70), p < 0.01], Thai [AOR 1.60 (95% CI 1.22-2.10), p = 0.001], and Pacific Islander [AOR 1.41 (95% CI 1.20-1.67), p < 0.001] patients were more likely to present with more advanced colon cancer compared with white patients. Chinese [AOR 1.27 (95% CI 1.17-1.38), p < 0.001], Japanese [AOR 1.23 (95% CI 1.10-1.37], p < 0.001], Filipino [AOR 1.36 (95% CI 1.22-1.52), p < 0.001], Korean [AOR 1.16 (95% CI 1.02-1.32), p < 0.05], and Vietnamese [AOR 1.55 (95% CI 1.36-1.77), p < 0.001] patients were more likely to experience greater time to surgery than white patients. Disparities persisted when comparing among AANHPI subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal key disparities in stage at presentation and time to surgery by race/ethnicity among AANHPI subgroups. Heterogeneity upon disaggregation underscores the importance of examining and addressing access barriers and clinical disparities.