Effect of a Mandatory Prescription Drug Monitoring Program on Patient-initiated Phone Calls After Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the effect of a statewide, government-mandated prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) on patient-initiated phone calls after lumbar and cervical spinal surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Prior studies have examined the most common reasons for a postoperative phone calls, most of which pertain to pain or prescription medications. However, no studies have investigated the effects of mandatory opioid prescription reporting on these calls. METHODS: Patients who underwent lumbar decompression, lumbar fusion, or posterior cervical fusion were retrospectively identified. Patients were sorted into 1 of 2 cohorts based on their procedure date's relation to the initiation of the state's PDMP: "pre-PDMP" and "post-PDMP." All clinical and demographic data were obtained from electronic health records. Telephone communications from or on behalf of patients were retrospectively reviewed. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine independent factors associated with a postoperative phone call. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty-five patients (2689 phone calls) were included in the study. Average number of phone calls per patient increased significantly after PDMP implementation among lumbar (3.27 vs. 5.18, P<0.001), cervical (5.08 vs. 11.67, P<0.001), and all (3.59 vs. 6.30, P<0.001) procedures. Age [odds ratio (OR): 1.05 (1.01, 1.09), P=0.02], cervical procedure [OR: 4.65 (1.93, 11.21), P=0.001], and a post-PDMP date of surgery [OR: 6.35 (3.55, 11.35), P<0.001] were independently associated with an increased likelihood of a postoperative phone call. A higher percentage of calls were in reference to postoperative care (4.6% vs. 2.4%, P=0.01) and wound care (4.3% vs. 1.4%, P<0.001) in the post-PDMP cohort compared with the pre-PDMP cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-initiated telephone calls increased significantly after implementation of a mandatory statewide PDMP. Increasing age, operation involving the cervical spine, and surgery occurring after implementation of the state's PDMP were independently associated with an increased likelihood of postoperative phone call to health care providers.

The Effect of L5-S1 Degenerative Disc Disease on Outcomes of L4-L5 Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate the clinical relevance of preoperative caudal adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in patients undergoing isolated L4-5 fusion to determine a threshold of degeneration at which a primary L4-S1 fusion would be warranted. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Increased motion and biomechanical forces across the adjacent caudal segment in isolated L4-L5 fusion leads to concerns regarding the increased incidence of revision surgery because of the development of ASD. METHODS: Patients who underwent isolated L4-L5 fusion between 2014 and 2019 were reviewed. Pfirrmann grading and the disc heights of the caudal level relative to the rostral level were used to quantify preoperative adjacent degenerative disc disease. To assess the influence of preoperative caudal degenerative disc disease, preoperative disc height ratios (DHRs) were compared for patients who reported minimal, moderate, and severe Oswestry disability index (ODI) sores on postoperative assessment. For each patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), adjacent DDD was compared for those who did and did not meet MCID. An area under curve analysis was used to identify a threshold of degeneration impacting outcomes from the preoperative DHR. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were studied with an average follow-up of 2.11 years. All patients demonstrated a significant improvement in all PROMs after surgery. When categorizing patients based on the severity of postoperative ODI scores, there were no preoperative differences in the L5-S1 Pfirrmann grading or DHRs. There was a significant association between greater preoperative anterior DHR and an increased number patients who met MCID for visual analog scale back. There were no radiographic differences in preoperative L5-S1 Pfirrmann grade or DHR for ODI, visual analog scale leg, MCS-12, or PCS-12. area under curve analysis was not able to identify a preoperative DHR threshold that reflected worse MCID for any PROM. CONCLUSION: No preoperative radiographic indicators of caudal ASD were predictive of worse clinical outcomes after isolated L4-5 fusion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Reimbursement of Lumbar Decompression at an Orthopedic Specialty Hospital Versus Tertiary Referral Center.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in Medicare reimbursement for one- to three-level lumbar decompression procedures performed at a tertiary referral center versus an orthopedic specialty hospital (OSH). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar decompression surgery is one of the most commonly performed spinal procedures. Lumbar decompression also comprises the largest proportion of spinal surgery that has transitioned to the outpatient setting. METHODS: Patients who underwent a primary one- to three- level lumbar decompression were retrospectively identified. Reimbursement data for a tertiary referral center and an OSH were compiled through Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Demographic data, surgical characteristics, and time cost data were collected through chart review. Multivariate regression models were used to determine independent factors associated with total episode of care cost, operating room (OR) time, procedure time, and length of stay (LOS), and to determine independent predictors of having the decompression performed at the OSH. RESULTS: Total episode of care, facility, and non-facility payments were significantly greater at the tertiary referral center than the OSH, as were OR time for one- to three-level procedures, procedure time of all pooled levels, and LOS for one- and two-level procedures. Three-level procedure was independently associated with increased OR time, procedure time, and LOS. Age and two-level procedure were also associated with increased LOS. Procedure at the OSH was associated with decreased OR time and LOS. Charlson Comorbidity Index was a negative predictor of decompression being performed in the OSH setting. CONCLUSION: Significant financial savings to health systems can be expected when performing lumbar decompression surgery at a specialty hospital as opposed to a tertiary referral center. Patients who are appropriate candidates for surgery in an OSH can in turn expect faster perioperative times and shorter LOS.Level of Evidence: 3.