Social Determinants of Health Needs and Health-related Quality of Life Among Surgical Patients: A Retrospective Analysis of 8512 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess associations between social determinants of health (SDOH) needs and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among surgical patients. BACKGROUND: Despite the profound impact of SDOH on health outcomes, studies examining the effect of SDOH needs on HRQOL among surgical patients are limited. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using responses from the SDOH needs assessment and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Systems Global Health instrument of adults seen in surgical clinics at a single institution. Patient characteristics including socioeconomic status (insurance type, education level, and employment status) were extracted. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of global health scores. RESULTS: A total of 8512 surgical patients (mean age: 55.6±15.8 years) were included. 25.2% of patients reported one or more SDOH needs. The likelihood of reporting at least one SDOH need varied by patient characteristics and socioeconomic status variables. In fully adjusted regression models, food insecurity [odds ratio (OR), 1.53; 95% CI, 1.38-1.70 and OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.22-1.81, respectively], housing instability (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.12-1.43 and OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.13-1.70, respectively) lack of transportation (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.27-1.68 and OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.00-1.57, respectively), and unmet medication needs (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.13-1.52 and OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.28-2.03, respectively) were independent predictors of poor physical and mental health. CONCLUSIONS: SDOH needs are independent predictors of poor patient-reported physical and mental health among surgical patients. Assessing and addressing SDOH needs should be prioritized in health care settings and by policymakers to improve HRQOL.

Patterns in Physician Burnout in a Stable-Linked Cohort.

Importance: Physician burnout is widely reported to be an increasing problem in the US. Although prior analyses suggest physician burnout is rising nationally, these analyses have substantial limitations, including different physicians joining and leaving clinical practice. Objective: To examine the prevalence of burnout among physicians in a large multispecialty group over a 5-year period. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study was conducted in 2017, 2019, and 2021 and involved physician faculty members of the Massachusetts General Physicians Organization. Participants represented different clinical specialties and a full range of career stages. The online survey instrument had 4 domains: physician career and compensation satisfaction, physician well-being, administrative workload on physicians, and leadership and diversity. Exposure: Time. Main Outcomes and Measures: Physician burnout, which was assessed with the Maslach Burnout Inventory. A binary burnout measure was used, which defined burnout as a high score in 2 of the 3 burnout subscales: Exhaustion, Cynicism, and Reduced Personal Efficacy. Results: A total of 1373 physicians (72.9% of the original 2017 cohort) participated in all 3 surveys. The cohort included 690 (50.3%) male, 921 (67.1%) White, and 1189 (86.6%) non-Hispanic individuals. The response rates were 93.0% in 2017, 93.0% in 2019, and 92.0% in 2021. Concerning years of experience, the cohort was relatively well distributed, with the highest number and proportion of physicians (478 [34.8%]) reporting between 11 and 20 years of experience. Within this group, burnout declined from 44.4% (610 physicians) in 2017 to 41.9% (575) in 2019 (P = .18) before increasing to 50.4% (692) in 2021 (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this survey study suggest that the physician burnout rate in the US is increasing. This pattern represents a potential threat to the ability of the US health care system to care for patients and needs urgent solutions.

Electronic Health Record Order Entry-Based Interventions in Response to a Global Iodinated Contrast Media Shortage: Impact on Contrast-Enhanced CT Utilization.

BACKGROUND. Radiology informatics systems and clinical decision support tools in the electronic health record (EHR) can be leveraged to help impact ordering patterns in response to the ongoing global iodinated contrast media shortage. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to assess the impact of EHR order entry-based interventions, implemented as part of a health system's response to the global contrast media shortage, on contrast-enhanced CT utilization. METHODS. This retrospective study included 79,259 patients who underwent CT at a large multisite health system between April 1, 2022, and July 3, 2022. Two EHR-based interventions were implemented as part of the health system's response to the global contrast media shortage. A first EHR-based intervention on May 10, 2022, entailed creating an alert that appeared in a sidebar after any contrast-enhanced body CT orders, indicating the present shortage and recommending alternate imaging modalities. A second EHR-based intervention on May 16, 2022, required referrers to enter detailed clinical information for all contrast-enhanced body CT orders, which radiologists used when protocoling examinations. Data regarding CT orders and examinations performed were extracted from the electronic data warehouse. RESULTS. During the preintervention, first postintervention, and second postintervention periods, the mean number of patients who underwent contrast-enhanced CT per weekday was 726, 689, and 639, respectively (p for preintervention vs second postintervention periods, < .001). During the three periods, the mean number of patients who underwent CT per weekday was 1350, 1323, and 1314 (p < .001). During the three periods, the mean number of patients who underwent contrast-enhanced body CT per weekday was 561, 532, and 492 (p < .001). During the three periods, the mean number of orders for CT with IV contrast media per weekday was 154, 143, and 131 (p < .001). During the three periods, the mean number of orders for CT without IV contrast media per weekday was 196, 202, and 221 (p < .001). CONCLUSION. EHR order entry-based interventions implemented in response to the global contrast media shortage significantly reduced contrast-enhanced CT utilization in a large health system. CLINICAL IMPACT. The findings indicate the ability to rapidly achieve changes in ordering clinician behavior and subsequent clinical practice using systemwide EHR changes.

Impetus of US hospital leaders to invest in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Though hospital leaders across the USA have invested significant resources in collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), there are very limited data on the impetus for hospital leadership to establish PROM programmes. In this qualitative study, we identify the drivers and motivators of PROM collection among hospital leaders in the USA. DESIGN: Exploratory qualitative study. SETTING: Thirty-seven hospital leaders representing seven different institutions with successful PROMs programs across twenty US states. METHODS: Semistructured interviews conducted with hospital leaders. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Leaders strongly believe that collecting PROMs is the 'right thing to do' and that the culture of the institution plays an important role in enabling PROMs. The study participants often believe that their institutions deliver superior care and that PROMs can be used to demonstrate the value of their services to payors and patients. Direct financial incentives are relatively weak motivators for collection of PROMs. Most hospital leaders have reservations about using PROMs in their current state as a meaningful performance metric. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that hospital leaders feel a strong moral imperative to collect PROMs, which is also supported by the culture of their institution. Although PROMs are used in negotiations with payors, direct financial return on investment is not a strong driver for the collection of PROMs. Understanding why leaders of major healthcare institutions invest in PROMs is critical to understanding the role that PROMs play in the US healthcare system.

Linking Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form and PROMIS Physical Function.

INTRODUCTION: Linking scores on patient-reported outcome measures can enable data aggregation for research, clinical care, and quality. We aimed to link scores on the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS) and the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF). METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted from 2017 to 2020 evaluating patients with hip osteoarthritis who received routine clinical care from an orthopaedic surgeon. Our sample included 3,382 unique patients with 7,369 pairs of HOOS-PS and PROMIS PF measures completed at a single nonsurgical, preoperative, or postoperative time point. We included one randomly selected time point of scores for each patient in our linking analysis sample. We compared the accuracy of linking using four methods, including equipercentile and item response theory-based approaches. RESULTS: PROMIS PF and HOOS-PS scores were strongly correlated ( r = -0.827 for raw HOOS-PS scores and r = 0.820 for summary HOOS-PS scores). The assumptions were met for equipercentile and item response theory approaches to linking. We selected the item response theory-based Stocking-Lord approach as the optimal crosswalk and estimated item parameters for the HOOS-PS items on the PROMIS metric. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated overall robustness of the crosswalk estimates in nonsurgical, preoperative, and postoperative patients. CONCLUSION: These crosswalks can be used to convert scores between HOOS-PS and PROMIS PF metric at the group level, which can be valuable for data aggregation. Conversion of individual patient-level data is not recommended secondary to increased risk of error.

Lost in translation: A qualitative analysis of facilitators and barriers to collecting patient reported outcome measures for surgical patients with limited English proficiency.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used throughout surgical disciplines, but their use is limited in multilingual patient populations. We aimed to investigate facilitators and barriers to PROMs collection for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were performed with providers from multiple surgical disciplines across six academic medical centers until thematic saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Among 24 interviews, respondents noted either systematic exclusion of patients with LEP or significant barriers to implementation. Barriers included lack of valid and translated PROMs, lack of multi-lingual electronic medical record integration, and insufficient time and resources to accommodate patients with LEP. Facilitators to collection included institutional leadership and funding support for validating translations. CONCLUSION: These barriers may result in inadvertent but systematic exclusion of patients with LEP from outcomes datasets as well as clinical decision making. Future implementation projects should consider these themes when developing initiatives for more equitable PROMs collection and utilization.

Linking the KOOS-PS to PROMIS Physical Function in Knee Patients Evaluated for Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short-form and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function are widely used patient-reported outcome measures in orthopaedic practice and research. It would be helpful for clinicians and researchers to compare scores obtained on one instrument with those collected on another. To achieve this goal, this study conducted a linking analysis and computed a crosswalk table between these two scales. DATA: The data of this study were collected as part of the clinical care of total knee arthroplasty patients in a large urban and suburban health system. The sample was a mix of responses from nonsurgical (no surgery performed), preoperative (before surgical intervention), and postoperative (after surgical intervention) groups. METHODS: This study applied five linking methods: the item response theory (IRT)-based linking methods including fixed-parameter calibration, separate-parameter calibration with Stocking-Lord constants, and calibrated projection; and the equipercentile methods with log-linear smoothing and nonsmoothing approaches. Before conducting the linking analysis, we checked the linking assumptions including the similar content of the two scales, the unidimensionality of the combined scales, and the population invariance. The results of the five linking methods were evaluated by mean difference, SD, root-mean-squared deviation, intraclass correlation coefficient of the observed T scores and the crosswalk-derived T scores. RESULTS: The linking assumptions were all met. T scores generated from the Stocking-Lord crosswalk had the smallest mean difference (= -0.03) and relatively small SD (= 4.91) and root-mean-squared deviation (= 4.91) among the five linking methods. We validated this crosswalk in a larger sample with the nonsurgical, preoperative, and postoperative groups and in an external sample. DISCUSSION: This study provides clinicians and researchers a practical tool (ie, a crosswalk table) to link scores from two popular physical function measures. Given the diversity of patient-reported outcome measures in use for knee conditions, these crosswalk tables would accelerate clinical and research interpretation of aggregating functional outcomes among the patients evaluated for knee surgery each year.

The Surgeon's Perceived Value of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs): An Exploratory Qualitative Study of 5 Different Surgical Subspecialties.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the surgeon's perceived value of PROMs in 5 different surgical subspecialties. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PROMs are validated questionnaires that assess the symptoms, function, and quality of life from the patient's perspective. Despite the increasing support for use of PROMs in the literature, there is limited uptake amongst surgeons. Furthermore, there is insufficient understanding of the surgeons' perceived value of PROMs. The aim of this study is to understand how surgeons perceive value in PROMs. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study to understand the perceived value of PROMs from the perspective of surgeons in various subspecialties. Per convenience sampling, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 surgeons from 5 subspecialties across 3 academic medical centers. The surgical subspecialties included bariatric surgery, breast oncologic surgery, orthopedic surgery, plastic and reconstructive surgery, and rhinology. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and evaluated with thematic analysis. RESULTS: Surgeons endorsed that PROMs can be used to enhance clinical management, counsel patients in the preoperative and postoperative settings, and elicit sensitive information from patients that otherwise may go undetected. Obstacles to PROMs use include failure to generate actionable data, implementation obstacles, and inappropriate use of PROMs as a performance metric, with concerns regarding inadequate risk adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing an effective PROMs program requires an understanding of the surgeon's perspective of PROMs. Despite obstacles, different subspecialty surgeons find PROMs to be valuable in different settings, depending on the specialty and clinical context.

Primary care physician's (PCP) perceived value of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical practice: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can promote patient engagement, shared-decision making and improve the overall experience of care. However, PRO integration in the primary care clinical setting is limited. Exploring the perspectives of primary care physicians (PCPs) on PROs is key to understanding how they are being used in the clinical setting. We sought to elucidate this clinical perspective at one of the largest US health systems that has integrated a wide range of PROs into routine primary care. METHODS: Mixed methods study with both anonymous online surveys and in-person qualitative semistructured interviews conducted with PCPs to understand their clinical perspectives on the applications of the existing PROs. PCPs from the 19 affiliated clinics were prompted to complete the survey. Interviewed PCPs were selected via a combination of random and purposive selection from the PCP directory. RESULTS: Of 172 PCPs, 117 (68%) completed the online survey and 28 completed semistructured interviews. Most PCPs (77%) reviewed PRO responses with their patients. PCPs endorsed that PROs improve clinic efficiency and clinical management. However, PCPs have heterogeneous perspectives on the relevance of PROs in clinical practice, likely due to variations in clinic practice. For specific PRO instruments, PCPs reported anxiety and depression screening PROs to be most helpful. PCPs felt that PROs assisted with completing screening questions that are required by regulatory bodies. Barriers to using PROs include poor user-interface for both clinicians and patients and inadequate training. CONCLUSIONS: Most PCPs regularly use PRO data though there are mixed opinions about their clinical relevance. An adaptable, user-friendly PRO system has the potential to have meaningful clinical applications in primary care.

Initial findings from a prospective, large scale patient reported outcomes program in patients with gynecologic malignancy.

INTRODUCTION: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are associated with improved overall survival in patients with metastatic malignancy; however, routine collection of PROMs is nascent. Little is known about PROs in women with gynecologic malignancy outside of a trial setting, limiting our understanding of how routine populations experience treatment, disease and morbidity. The goal of this study was to prospectively collect and describe disease-specific PROs in a non-trial population of women with gynecologic malignancy. METHODS: PROMs were assigned electronically to all patients presenting for care in our gynecologic oncology clinic. Patients received a general oncology questionnaire (EORTC QLQ C30) a disease specific questionnaire (FACT V, EORTC EN24, EORTC OV28, EORTC Cx 24), and questionnaires assessing support at home. Responses were mapped to relevant clinical variables. Descriptive statistics were performed, and comparisons made with parametric and nonparametric analyses. The association between support at home and perioperative complications was assessed via logistic regression. RESULTS: In the study period, 3239 unique patients were evaluated at new patient visits, post-operative visits, chemotherapy visits and surveillance visits with a PROMs completion rate of 78.1% (n = 2530 women with 4402 completions). There was no difference in completion rates based on age or self-identified race. The EORTC QLQ C-30 questionnaire was able to adequately discern differences between disease sites. Overall, scores were lower than those obtained in trial populations. PROMs responses were not associated with perioperative complications. CONCLUSION: Systematic collection of PROMs is feasible and tech-enabled workflows result in high collection rates. Quality of life scores in our clinic population were lower than published data, indicating caution should be used when extrapolating quality of life data from clinical trials to counseling and decision making around routine patient populations.

Digital disparities: lessons learned from a patient reported outcomes program during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The collection of patient reported outcomes (PROs) allows us to incorporate the patient's voice into their care in a quantifiable, validated manner. Large-scale collection of PROs is facilitated by the electronic health record and its portal, though, historically, patients have eschewed the portal and completed patient-reported outcome measures in the clinic via tablet. Furthermore, access and use of the portal is associated with known racial inequities. Our institution oversees the largest clinical PRO program in the world, and has a long history of racially equitable PRO completion rates via tablet. However, when the COVID-19 pandemic forced us to remove tablets from clinics and rely exclusively on portal use for PRO completion, profound racial disparities resulted immediately. Our experience quantifiably demonstrates the magnitude of inequity that the portal, in its current configuration, generates and serves as a cautionary tale to other health care systems and electronic health records.

Lymph node assessment at the time of hysterectomy has limited clinical utility for patients with pre-cancerous endometrial lesions.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the proportion of patients with a pre-invasive endometrial lesion who meet Mayo criteria for lymph node dissection on final pathology to determine if the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with pre-invasive lesions would be warranted. METHODS: All women who underwent hysterectomy for a pre-invasive endometrial lesion (atypical hyperplasia or endometrial intra-epithelial neoplasia) between 2009 and 2019 were included for analysis. Relevant statistical tests were utilized to test the associations between patient, operative, and pathologic characteristics. RESULTS: 141 patients met inclusion criteria. 51 patients (36%) had a final diagnosis of cancer, the majority (96%) of which were Stage IA grade 1 endometrioid carcinomas. Seven patients (5%) met Mayo criteria on final pathology (one grade 3, seven size >2 cm, one >50% myoinvasive). Three of these seven patients had lymph nodes assessed of which 0% had metastases. Six of these patients had frozen section performed, and 2 met (33%) Mayo criteria intraoperatively. Of the seven patients in the overall cohort that had lymph node sampling, six had a final diagnosis of cancer and none had positive lymph nodes. Of the 51 patients with cancer, only 10 had cancer diagnosed using frozen section, and only two met intra-operative Mayo criteria. Age > 55 was predictive of meeting Mayo criteria on final pathology (p = 0.007). No patients experienced a cancer recurrence across a median follow up of 24.3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Atypical hyperplasia and endometrial intra-epithelial neoplasia portend low risk disease and universal nodal assessment is of limited value.

Can the Knee Outcome and Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS) Function Subscale Be Linked to the PROMIS Physical Function to Crosswalk Equivalent Scores?

BACKGROUND: An increased focus on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has led to a proliferation of these measures in orthopaedic surgery. Mandating a single PROM in clinical and research orthopaedics is not feasible given the breadth of data already collected with older measures and the emergence of psychometrically superior measures. Creating crosswalk tables for scores between measures allows providers to maintain control of measure choice. Furthermore, crosswalk tables permit providers to compare scores collected with older outcome measures with newly collected ones. Given the widespread use of the newer Patient-reported Outcome Measure Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF) and the established Knee Outcome and Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS), it would be clinically useful to link these two measures. QUESTION/PURPOSE: Can the KOOS Function in Activities of Daily Living (ADL) subscale be robustly linked to the PROMIS PF to create a crosswalk table of equivalent scores that accurately reflects a patient's reported physical function level on both scales? METHODS: We sought to establish a common standardized metric for collected responses to the PROMIS PF and the KOOS ADL to develop equations for converting a PROMIS PF score to a score for the KOOS-ADL subscale and vice versa. To do this, we performed a retrospective, observational study at two academic medical centers and two community hospitals in an urban and suburban healthcare system. Patients 18 years and older who underwent TKA were identified. Between January 2017 and July 2020, we treated 8165 patients with a TKA, 93% of whom had a diagnosis of primary osteoarthritis. Of those, we considered patients who had completed a full KOOS and PROMIS PF 10a on the same date as potentially eligible. Twenty-one percent (1708 of 8165) of patients were excluded because no PROMs were collected at any point, and another 67% (5454 of 8165) were excluded because they completed only one of the required PROMs, leaving 12% (1003 of 8165) for analysis here. PROMs were collected each time they visited the health system before and after their TKAs. Physical function was measured by the PROMIS PF version 1.0 SF 10a and KOOS ADL scale. Analyses to accurately create a crosswalk of equivalent scores between the measures were performed using the equipercentile linking method with both unsmoothed and log linear smoothed score distributions. RESULTS: Crosswalks were created, and adequate validation results supported their validity; we also created tables to allow clinicians and clinician scientists to convert individual patients' scores easily. The mean difference between the observed PROMIS PF scores and the scores converted by the crosswalk from the KOOS-ADL scores was -0.08 ± 4.82. A sensitivity analysis was conducted, confirming the effectiveness of these crosswalks to link the scores of two measures from patients both before and after surgery. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS PF 10a can be robustly linked to the KOOS ADL measure. The developed crosswalk table can be used to convert PROMIS PF scores from KOOS ADL and vice versa. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The creation of a crosswalk table between the KOOS Function in ADL subscale and PROMIS PF allows clinicians and researchers to easily convert scores between the measures, thus permitting greater choice in PROM selection while preserving comparability between patient cohorts and PROM data collected from older outcome measures. Creating a crosswalk, or concordance table, between the two scales will facilitate this comparison, especially when pooling data for meta-analyses.

Cohort study of impact on length of stay of individual enhanced recovery after surgery protocol components.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to explore which enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) bundle items were most associated with decreased length of stay after surgery, most likely associated with decreased length of stay after surgery. DESIGN: A cohort study. SETTING: Large tertiary academic medical centre. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 1318 women undergoing hysterectomy as part of our ERAS pathway between 1 February 2018 and 30 January 2020 and a matched historical cohort of all hysterectomies performed at our institution between 3 October 2016 and 30 January 2018 (n=1063). INTERVENTION: The addition of ERAS to perioperative care.This is a cohort study of all patients undergoing hysterectomy at an academic medical centre after ERAS implementation on 1 February 2018. Compliance and outcomes after ERAS roll out were monitored and managed by a centralised team. Descriptive statistics, multivariate regression, interrupted time series analysis were used as indicated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Impact of ERAS process measure adherence on length of stay. RESULTS: After initiation of ERAS pathway, 1318 women underwent hysterectomy. There were more open surgeries after ERAS implementation, but cohorts were otherwise balanced. The impact of process measure adherence on length of stay varied based on surgical approach (minimally invasive vs open). For open surgery, compliance with intraoperative antiemetics (-30%, 95% CI -18% to 40%) and decreased postoperative fluid administration (-12%, 95% CI -1% to 21%) were significantly associated with reduced length of stay. For minimally invasive surgery, ambulation within 8 hours of surgery was associated with reduced length of stay (-53%, 95% CI -55% to 52%). CONCLUSIONS: While adherence to overall ERAS protocols decreases length of stay, the specific components of the bundle most significantly impacting this outcome remain elusive. Our data identify early ambulation, use of antiemetics and decreasing postoperative fluid administration to be associated with decreased length of stay.

Surgeon-level variance in achieving clinical improvement after lumbar decompression: the importance of adequate risk adjustment.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores are increasingly utilized in clinical care. However, it is unclear if PROMIS can discriminate surgeon performance on an individual level. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine surgeon-level variance in rates of achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID) after lumbar decompression. PATIENT SAMPLE: This is a prospective, observational cohort study performed across a healthcare enterprise (two academic medical centers and three community centers). Patients 18 years or older undergoing one- to two-level primary decompression for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) or lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was achievement of MCID, using a distribution-based method, on paired PROMIS physical function scores. METHODS: Descriptive statistics were generated to examine the baseline characteristics of the study cohort. Bivariate analyses were used to examine the impact of surgeon-level variance on rates of MCID. Multivariable analyses were used to examine the risk-adjusted impact of surgeon-level variance on rates of MCID. RESULTS: Overall, 636 patients treated by nine surgeons were included. The median patient age was 58 [interquartile range (IQR): 46-70] and 62.3% (n=396) were female. Among all patients, 56.9% (n=362) underwent surgery for LDH. The overall rate of achieving MCID was 75.8% (n=482). Of the surgeons, the median years in practice were 12 (range 4-31) and 55.6% (n=5) were in academic practice settings. On bivariate analysis, patients treated by one of the surgeons had lower rates of achieving MICD (odds ratio=0.37, 95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.91, p=.03). However, on multivariable analysis adjusting for operative indication (LDH vs. LSS), body mass index, number of comorbidities, percent unemployment in patient zip code, and preoperative PROMIS physical function scores, all surgeons were equally likely to obtain MCID. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, variance in PROMIS scores after primary lumbar decompression is influenced by patient-related factors and not by individual surgeon. Adequate risk adjustment is needed if ascertaining clinical improvement on an individual surgeon basis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.