A Longitudinal Evaluation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Its Effects on Spinal Decompressions With or Without Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: The objectives were to (1) compare the safety of spine surgery before and after the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and (2) determine whether patients with a history of COVID-19 were at increased risk of adverse events. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: The COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on several health care services. In spine surgery, elective cases were canceled and patients received delayed care due to the uncertainty of disease transmission and surgical outcomes. As new coronavirus variants arise, health care systems require guidance on how to provide optimal patient care to all those in need of our services. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing spine surgery between January 1, 2019 and June 30, 2021 was performed. Patients were split into pre-COVID or post-COVID cohorts based on local government guidelines. Inpatient complications, 90-day readmission, and 90-day mortality were compared between groups. Secondary analysis included multiple logistic regression to determine independent predictors of each outcome. RESULTS: A total of 2976 patients were included for analysis with 1701 patients designated as pre-COVID and 1275 as post-COVID. The pre-COVID cohort had fewer patients undergoing revision surgery (16.8% vs 21.9%, P < 0.001) and a lower home discharge rate (84.5% vs 88.2%, P = 0.008). Inpatient complication (9.9% vs 9.2%, P = 0.562), inpatient mortality (0.1% vs 0.2%, P = 0.193), 90-day readmission (3.4% vs 3.2%, P = 0.828), and 90-day mortality rates (0.8% vs 0.8%, P = 0.902) were similar between groups. Patients with positive COVID-19 tests before surgery had similar complication rates (7.7% vs 6.1%, P = 1.000) as those without a positive test documented. CONCLUSIONS: After the emergence of COVID-19, patients undergoing spine surgery had a greater number of medical comorbidities, but similar rates of inpatient complications, readmission, and mortality. Prior COVID-19 infection was not associated with an increased risk of postsurgical complications or mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Effect of Clinical and Radiographic Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Classification on Patient-reported Outcomes and Spinopelvic Parameters for Patients With Single-level L4-L5 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis After Lumbar Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether preoperative clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis (CARDS) classification is associated with differences in patient-reported outcomes and spinopelvic parameters after posterior decompression and fusion for L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). SUMMARY: The CARDS classification for lumbar DS, an alternative to the Meyerding system, considers additional radiographic findings such as disc space collapse and segmental kyphosis and stratifies DS into 4 radiographically distinct classes. Although CARDS has been shown to be a reliable and reproducible method for classifying DS, very few studies have assessed whether the CARDS types represent distinct clinical entities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients with L4-L5 DS who underwent posterior lumbar decompression and fusion. Changes in spinopelvic alignment and patient-reported outcomes measures, including recovery ratios and percentage of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference, were compared among patients in each CARDS classification 1-year postoperatively using analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis H with Dunn post hoc analysis. Multiple linear regression determined whether CARDS groups significantly predicted patient-reported outcomes measures, lumbar lordosis (LL), and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL) while controlling for demographic and surgical characteristics. RESULTS: Preoperative type B spondylolisthesis predicted decreased improvement in "physical component and mental component score of the short form-12" compared with type A spondylolisthesis (ß-coefficient = -5.96, P = 0.031) at 1 year. Significant differences were found between CARDS groups with regards to ΔLL (A: -1.63 degrees vs B: -1.17 degrees vs C: 2.88 degrees vs D: 3.19 degrees, P = 0.010) and ΔPI-LL (A: 1.02 degrees vs B: 2.09 degrees vs C: -2.59 degrees vs D: -3.70 degrees, P = 0.012). Preoperative type C spondylolisthesis was found to predict increased LL (ß-coefficient = 4.46, P = 0.0054) and decreased PI-LL (ß-coefficient = -3.49, P = 0.025) at 1 year compared with type A spondylolisthesis. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and radiographic outcomes differed significantly by preoperative CARDS classification type for patients undergoing posterior decompression and fusion for L4-L5 DS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Trends in Short Construct Lumbar Fusions Over the Past Decade at a Single Institution.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: (1) To compare the rates of fusion techniques over the last decade; (2) to identify whether surgeon experience affects a surgeon's preferred fusion technique; (3) to evaluate differences in complications, readmissions, mortality, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) based on fusion technique. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Database studies indicate the number of lumbar fusions have been steadily increasing over the last two decades; however, insufficient granularity exists to detect if surgeons' preferences are altered based on additive surgical experience. METHODS: A retrospective review of continuously collected patients undergoing lumbar fusion at a single urban academic center was performed. Rates of lumbar fusion technique: posterolateral decompression fusion (PLDF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (ALIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (LLIF) were recorded. Inpatient complications, 90-day readmission, and inpatient mortality were compared with χ 2 test and Bonferroni correction. The Δ 1-year PROMs were compared with the analysis of variance. RESULTS: Of 3938 lumbar fusions, 1647 (41.8%) were PLDFs, 1356 (34.4%) were TLIFs, 885 (21.7%) were ALIFs, and 80 (2.0%) were lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Lumbar fusion rates increased but interbody fusion rates (2012: 57.3%; 2019: 57.6%) were stable across the study period. Surgeons with <10 years of experience performed more PLDFs and less ALIFs, whereas surgeons with >10 years' experience used ALIFs, TLIFs, and PLDFs at similar rates. Patients were more likely to be discharged home over the course of the decade (2012: 78.4%; 2019: 83.8%, P <0.001). No differences were observed between the techniques in regard to inpatient mortality ( P =0.441) or Δ (postoperative minus preoperative) PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Preferred lumbar fusion technique varies by surgeon preference, but typically remains stable over the course of a decade. The preferred fusion technique did not correlate with differences in PROMs, inpatient mortality, and patient complication rates. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 3-treatment.

MRSA Prophylaxis in Spine Surgery Decreases Postoperative Infections.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To compare infection rates before and after the implementation of a quality improvement protocol focused on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) screening and decolonization in patients undergoing lumbar fusion and/or decompression. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Prior studies have demonstrated MRSA infections comprise a sizable portion of SSIs. Additional studies are required to improve our understanding of the risks and benefits of MRSA decolonization with vancomycin prophylaxis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients who underwent spinal fusion or laminectomy before (2008-2011) and after (2013-2016) the implementation of an MRSA screening and treatment protocol. Odds ratios for MRSA, methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), and Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infection before and after screening was calculated. Multivariate analysis assessed demographic characteristics as potential independent predictors of infection. RESULTS: A total of 8425 lumbar fusion and 2558 lumbar decompression cases met inclusion criteria resulting in a total cohort of 10,983 patients. There was a significant decrease in the overall rate of infections ( P <0.001), MRSA infections ( P <0.001), and MSSA infections ( P <0.001) after protocol implementation. Although VRE infections after protocol implementation were not significantly different ( P =0.066), VRE rates as a percentage of all postoperative infections were substantially increased (0 vs. 3.36%, P =0.007). On multivariate analysis, significant predictors of the infection included younger age (OR=0.94[0.92-0.95]), shorter length of procedure (OR=1.00[0.99-1.00]), spinal fusion (OR=18.56[8.22-53.28]), higher ASA class (OR=5.49[4.08-7.44]), male sex (OR=1.61[1.18-2.20]), and history of diabetes (OR=1.58[1.08-2.29]). CONCLUSION: The implemented quality improvement protocol demonstrated that preoperative prophylactically treating MRSA colonized patients decreased the rate of overall infections, MSSA infections, and MRSA infections. In addition, younger age, male sex, diabetic status, greater ASA scores, and spinal fusions were risk factors for postoperative infection.

Single-level Lumbar Fusion Versus Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Comparison of 1-year Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Primary hip and knee arthroplasty represent two of the most successful orthopaedic surgical interventions in the past century. Similarly, lumbar fusion (LF) remains a valuable, evidence-based option to relieve pain and disability related to spinal degenerative conditions. This study evaluates the relative improvements in 1-year health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures among patients undergoing primary single-level LF, primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), and primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Patients older than 18 years who underwent primary single-level posterior LF (posterolateral decompression and fusion with or without transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, involving any single lumbar level), TKA, and THA at a single academic institution were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were collected. HRQOL measures were collected preoperatively and at 1-year postoperative time point including Short-Form 12 Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) along with subspecialty-specific outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2,563 patients were included (346 LF, 1,035 TKA, and 1,182 THA). Change in MCS-12 and PCS-12 after LF did not vary markedly by preoperative diagnosis. LF patients had a significantly lower preoperative MCS-12 (LF: 50.8, TKA: 53.9, THA: 52.9, P < 0.001), postoperative MCS-12 (LF: 52.5, TKA: 54.8, THA: 54.5, P < 0.001), postoperative PCS-12 (LF: 40.1, TKA: 44.0, THA: 43.9, P < 0.001), ΔPCS-12 (LF: 7.9, TKA: 10.8, THA: 11.9, P < 0.001), and PCS-12 recovery ratio (LF: 10.7%, TKA: 15.1%, THA 16.6%, P < 0.001) compared with TKA and THA patients. In regression analysis, both TKA and LF were found to be independently associated with a smaller ΔPCS-12 improvement (TKA: ß = -1.36, P = 0.009; LF: ß = -4.74, P < 0.001) compared with THA. TKA (ß = -1.42, P = 0.003) was also independently associated with a smaller ΔMCS-12 improvement compared with THA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing single-level LF, TKA, and THA demonstrate notable improvements in HRQOL outcomes at 1 year postoperatively compared with preoperative baseline scores. The greatest improvements were found among THA patients, followed subsequently by TKA and LF patients. Both LF and TKA were independently associated with markedly less improvement in physical disability at 1 year postoperatively compared with THA. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Recent Trends in Spine Topics on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination.

INTRODUCTION: The Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) is an important metric for orthopaedic residents and residency programs to gauge a resident's orthopaedic knowledge. Because the OITE is correlated with the likelihood of passing part I of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery, greater emphasis is being placed on the examination. However, a detailed look at the questions most likely to appear on the spine subsection of the OITE has not been done in the past decade. METHODS: Digital copies of the OITEs during the years 2017 through 2021 were obtained online through the "ResStudy" program within the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Online Learning Platform. All spine-related questions were categorized into five different categories including type of spine question (knowledge-based, diagnosis, or evaluation/management), anatomical region, imaging modality provided, subject matter, and referenced journal or textbook. The total number and likelihood of each question type to appear on the OITE were defined as mean and percentage of the total number of spine questions, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 139 spine questions were identified on the OITE during the years 2017 to 2021. The most common type of spine questions were evaluation/management (N = 65) and knowledge-based questions. We identified lumbar (N = 45), cervical (N = 42), thoracolumbar (N = 13), and thoracic (N = 12) as the most commonly tested anatomical regions. Spinal trauma (N = 26), disk disease/disk herniation (N = 16), postoperative complications (N = 15), and scoliosis/sagittal balance (N = 15) were the most commonly tested material. Spine (N = 54) was almost two times more likely to be referenced as the source for the tested material compared with other journals or textbooks. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the spine topics most likely to appear on the OITE may allow orthopaedic residents and residency programs to supplement educational objectives toward the highest yield spine topics and journals.

Instrumentation Across the Cervicothoracic Junction Does Not Improve Patient-reported Outcomes in Multilevel Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if instrumentation across the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) in elective multilevel posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCF) is associated with improved patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Fusion across the CTJ may result in lower revision rates at the expense of prolonged operative duration. However, it is unclear whether constructs crossing the CTJ affect PROMs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standard Query Language (SQL) identified patients with PROMs who underwent elective multilevel PCF (≥3 levels) at our institution. Patients were grouped based on anatomic construct: crossing the CTJ (crossed) versus not crossing the CTJ (noncrossed). Subgroup analysis compared constructs stopping at C7 or T1. Independent t tests and χ 2 tests were utilized for continuous and categorical data, respectively. Regression analysis controlled for baseline demographics. The α was set at 0.05. RESULTS: Of the 160 patients included, the crossed group (92, 57.5%) had significantly more levels fused (5.27 vs. 3.71, P <0.001), longer operative duration (196 vs. 161 min, P =0.003), greater estimated blood loss (242 vs. 160 mL, P =0.021), and a decreased revision rate (1.09% vs. 10.3%, P =0.011). Neither crossing the CTJ (vs. noncrossed) nor constructs spanning C3-T1 (vs. C3-C7) were independent predictors of ∆PROMs (change in preoperative minus postoperative patient-reported outcomes) on regression analysis. However, C3-C7 constructs had a greater revision rate than C3-T1 constructs (15.6% vs. 1.96%, P =0.030). CONCLUSION: Crossing the CTJ in patients undergoing elective multilevel PCF was not an independent predictor of improvement in PROMs at 1 year, but they experienced lower revision rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

The Impact of Upper Cervical Spine Alignment on Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which the upper cervical spine compensates for malalignment in the subaxial cervical spine, and how changes in upper cervical spine sagittal alignment affect patient-reported outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous research has investigated the relationship between clinical outcomes and radiographic parameters in the subaxial cervical spine following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, limited research exists regarding the upper cervical spine (occiput to C2), which accounts for up to 40% of neck movement and has been hypothesized to compensate for subaxial dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing ACDF for cervical radiculopathy and/or myelopathy at a single center with minimum 1-year follow-up were included. Radiographic parameters including cervical sagittal vertical axis, C0 angle, C1 inclination angle, C2 slope, Occiput-C1 angle (Oc-C1 degrees), Oc-C2 degrees, Oc-C7 degrees, C1-C2 degrees, C1-C7 degrees, and C2-C7 degrees cervical lordosis (CL) were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively. Delta (Δ) values were calculated by subtracting preoperative values from postoperative values. Correlation analysis as well as multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine relationships between radiographic and clinical outcomes. Alpha was set at 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients were included (mean follow-up 20 mo). C2 slope significantly decreased for patients after surgery (Δ=-0.8, P =0.02), as did parameters of regional cervical lordosis (Oc-C7 degrees, C1-C7 degrees, and C2-C7 degrees; P <0.001, <0.001, and 0.01, respectively). Weak to moderate associations were observed between postoperative CL and C1 inclination ( r =-0.24, P <0.001), Oc-C1 degrees ( r =0.59, P <0.001), and C1-C2 degrees ( r =-0.23, P <0.001). Increased preoperative C1-C2 degrees and Oc-C2 degrees inversely correlated with preoperative SF-12 Mental Composite Score (MCS-12) scores ( r =-0.16, P =0.01 and r =-0.13, P =0.04). Cervical sagittal vertical axis was found to have weak but significant associations with Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical Composite Score (PCS-12) ( r =-0.13, P =0.03) and MCS-12 ( r =0.12, P =0.05). CONCLUSION: No clinically significant relationship between upper cervical and subaxial cervical alignment was detected for patients undergoing ACDF for neurological symptoms. Upper cervical spine alignment was not found to be a significant predictor of patient-reported outcomes after ACDF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Risk Factors for 30-day and 90-day Readmission After Lumbar Decompression.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To assess readmission rates and risk factors for 30-day and 90-day readmission after elective lumbar decompression at a single institution. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Hospital readmission is an undesirable aspect of interventional treatment. Studies evaluating readmissions after elective lumbar decompression typically analyze national databases, and therefore have several drawbacks inherent to their macroscopic nature that limit their clinical utility. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary one- to four-level lumbar decompression surgery were retrospectively identified. Demographic, surgical, and readmission data within "30-days" (0-30 days) and "90-days" (31-90 days) postoperatively were extracted from electronic medical records. Patients were categorized into four groups: (1) no readmission, (2) readmission during the 30-day or 90-day postoperative period, (3) complication related to surgery, and (4) Emergency Department (ED)/Observational (OBs)/Urgent (UC) care. RESULTS: A total of 2635 patients were included. Seventy-six (2.9%) were readmitted at some point within the 30- (2.3%) or 90-day (0.3%) postoperative periods. Patients in the pooled readmitted group were older (63.1 yr, P  < 0.001), had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade (31.2% with ASA of 3, P = 0.03), and more often had liver disease (8.1%, P = 0.004) or rheumatoid arthritis (12.0%, P = 0.02) than other cohorts. A greater proportion of 90-day readmissions and complications had surgical-related diagnoses or a diagnosis of recurrent disc herniation than 30-day readmissions and complications (66.7% vs. 44.5%, P = 0.04 and 33.3% vs. 5.5%, P < 0.001, respectively). Age (Odds ratio [OR]: 1.02, P = 0.01), current smoking status (OR: 2.38, P < 0.001), longer length of stay (OR: 1.14, P < 0.001), and a history of renal failure (OR: 2.59, P = 0.03) were independently associated with readmission or complication. CONCLUSION: Increased age, current smoking status, hospital length of stay, and a history of renal failure were found to be significant independent predictors of inpatient readmission or complication after lumbar decompression.

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.

Impact of the Affordable Care Act on Insurance Status of Spine Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department.

Although the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been shown to broadly affect access to care, there is little data examining the change in insurance status with regard to nonelective spinal trauma, infection, and tumor patients. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the changes in insurance status before and after implementation of the ACA in patients who present to the emergency room of a single, level 1 trauma and regional spinal cord injury center. Patient demographic and hospital course information were derived from consult notes and electronic medical record review. Spinal consults between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015, were initially included. Consults between January 1 and December 31, 2014, were subsequently removed to obtain two separate cohorts reflecting one calendar year prior to ("pre-ACA") and following ("post-ACA") the effective date of implementation of the ACA on January 1, 2014. Compared with the pre-ACA cohort, the post-ACA cohort had a significant increase in insurance coverage (95.0% versus 83.9%, P < 0.001). Post-ACA consults had a significantly shorter length of stay compared with pre-ACA consults (7.94 versus 9.19, P < 0.001). A significantly greater percentage of the post-ACA cohort appeared for clinical follow-up subsequent to their initial consultation compared to the pre-ACA cohort (49.5% versus 35.3%, P < 0.001). Spinal consultation after the implementation of the ACA was found to be a significant positive predictor of Medicaid coverage (odds ratio = 1.96 [1.05, 3.82], P = 0.04) and a significant negative predictor of uninsured status (odds ratio = 0.28 [0.16, 0.47], P < 0.001). Increase in overall insurance coverage, increase in patient follow-up after initial consultation, and decrease in hospital length of stay were all noted after the implementation of the ACA for spinal consultation patients presenting to the emergency department.

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.

Discharge Disposition and Clinical Outcomes After Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal decompression with or without fusion is one of the most commonly performed procedures in spine surgery. However, there is limited evidence on the effect of discharge environment on outcomes after surgery. The purpose of this study is to identify the effects of discharge disposition setting on clinical outcomes after spine surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent lumbar decompression, lumbar decompression and fusion, or posterior cervical decompression and fusion surgery were retrospectively identified. All clinical and demographic data were obtained from electronic health records. Surgical outcomes included wound complications, revision surgery, "30-day" readmission (0-30 d), and "90-day" readmission (31-90 d). Discharge disposition was stratified into home/self-care, acute inpatient rehabilitation, and subacute rehabilitation. Patient-reported outcome measures including VAS Back, VAS Leg, VAS Neck, VAS Arm, PCS-12 and MCS-12, ODI, and NDI were compared between patient discharge disposition settings using the Mann-Whitney U test. Pearson's chi-square analysis was used to assess for differences in wound complications, revision surgery, 30-day readmission, or 90-day readmission rates. Multivariate logistic regression incorporating age, sex, body mass index (BMI), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and discharge disposition was used to determine independent predictors of wound complications. RESULTS: A total of 637 patients were included in the study. A significant difference (P = 0.03) was found in wound complication based on discharge disposition, with subacute disposition having the highest proportion of wound complications (6.1%) and home disposition having the lowest (1.5%). There were no significant differences in the rates of revision surgery, 30-day readmission, or 90-day readmission between groups. Subacute rehabilitation (odds ratio: 3.67, P = 0.047) and CCI (odds ratio 1.49, P = 0.01) were independent predictors of wound complications. Significant improvement in PROMs was seen across all postacute discharge dispositions. Baseline (P = 0.02) and postoperative (P = 0.02) ODI were significantly higher among patients discharged to an acute facility (49.4 and 32.0, respectively) compared to home (42.2 and 20.0) or subacute (47.4 and 28.4) environments. CONCLUSION: Subacute rehabilitation disposition and CCI are independent predictors of wound complications after spinal decompression surgery. Patients undergoing spine surgery have similar readmission and revision rates and experience similar clinical improvement across all postacute discharge dispositions.

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.

Depression Identified on the Mental Component Score of the Short Form-12 Affects Health Related Quality of Life After Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to further elucidate the relationship between preoperative depression and patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) following lumbar decompression surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The impact of preoperative depression on PROMs after lumbar decompression surgery is not well established. METHODS: Patients undergoing lumbar decompression between 1 and 3 levels were retrospectively identified. Patients were split into 2 groups using a preoperative Mental Component Score (MCS)-12 threshold score of 45.6 or 35.0 to identify those with and without depressive symptoms. In addition, patients were also split based on a pre-existing diagnosis of depression in the medical chart. Absolute PROM scores, the recovery ratio and the percent of patients achieving minimum clinically important difference between groups were compared, and a multiple linear regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 184 patients were included, with 125 (67.9%) in the MCS-12 >45.6 group and 59 (32.1%) in the MCS-12 ≤45.6 group. The MCS-12 ≤45.6 and MCS<35.0 group had worse baseline Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (P<0.001 for both) and Visual Analogue Scale Leg (P=0.018 and 0.024, respectively) scores. The MCS ≤45.6 group had greater disability postoperatively in terms of SF-12 Physical Component Score (PCS-12) (39.1 vs. 43.1, P=0.015) and ODI (26.6 vs. 17.8, P=0.006). Using regression analysis, having a baseline MCS-12 scores ≤45.6 before surgical intervention was a significant predictor of worse improvement in terms of PCS-12 [ß=-4.548 (-7.567 to -1.530), P=0.003] and ODI [ß=8.234 (1.433, 15.035), P=0.010] scores than the MCS-12 >45.6 group. CONCLUSION: Although all patients showed improved in all PROMs after surgery, those with MCS-12 ≤45.6 showed less improvement in PCS-12 and ODI scores.

How Does Smoking Influence Patient-reported Outcomes in Patients After Lumbar Fusion?

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the effect of smoking on patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) after lumbar fusion surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although smoking is known to decrease fusion rates after lumbar fusion, there is less evidence regarding the influence of smoking on PROMs after surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing between 1 and 3 levels of lumbar fusion were divided into 3 groups on the basis of preoperative smoking status: never smokers (NS); current smokers (CS); and former smokers (FS). PROMs collected for analysis include the Physical Component Score (PCS-12), Mental Component Score (MCS-12), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Visual Analogue Scale back (VAS back) and leg (VAS leg) pain scores. Preoperative and postoperative PROMs were compared between groups. A multiple linear regression analysis was performed to determine whether preoperative smoking status was a predictor of change in PROM scores. RESULTS: A total of 220 (60.1%) NS, 52 (14.2%) CS, and 94 (25.7%) FS patients were included. Patients in most groups improved within each of the PROMs analyzed (P<0.05). VAS leg pain (P=0.001) was found to significantly differ between groups, with NS and FS having less disability than CS (3.6 vs. 2.0, P=0.010; and 3.6 vs. 2.4, P=0.022; respectively). Being a CS significantly predicted less improvement in ODI (P=0.035), VAS back (P=0.034), and VAS leg (P<0.001) compared with NS. In addition, NS had a significantly lower 30-day readmission rate than CS or FS (3.2% vs. 5.8% and 10.6%, respectively, P=0.029). CONCLUSION: CS exhibited worse postoperative VAS leg pain and a lower recovery ratio than never smokers. In addition, being in the CS group was a significant predictor of decreased improvement in ODI, VAS back, and VAS leg scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Are Outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Influenced by Presurgical Depression Symptoms on the Mental Component Score of the Short Form-12 Survey?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether preoperative depressive symptoms, measured by mental component score of the Short Form-12 survey (MCS-12), influence patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) following an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery for cervical degeneration. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is a paucity of literature regarding preoperative depression and PROMs following ACDF surgery for cervical degenerative disease. METHODS: Patients who underwent an ACDF for degenerative cervical pathology were identified. A score of 45.6 on the MCS-12 was used as the threshold for depression symptoms, and patients were divided into two groups based on this value: depression (MCS-12 ≤45.6) and nondepression (MCS-12 >45.6) groups. Outcomes including Neck Disability Index (NDI), physical component score of the Short Form-12 survey (PCS-12), and Visual Analogue Scale Neck (VAS Neck), and Arm (VAS Arm) pain scores were evaluated using independent sample t test, recovery ratios, percentage of patients reaching the minimum clinically important difference, and multiple linear regression - controlling for factors such as age, sex, and BMI. RESULTS: The depression group was found to have significantly worse baseline pain and disability than the nondepression group in NDI (P < 0.001), VAS Neck pain (P < 0.001), and VAS Arm pain (P < 0.001) scores. Postoperatively, both groups improved to a similar amount with surgery based on the recovery ratio analysis. The depression group continued to have worse scores than the nondepression group in NDI (P = 0.010), PCS-12 (P = 0.026), and VAS Arm pain (P = 0.001) scores. Depression was not a significant predictor of change in any PROMs based on regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Patients who presented with preoperative depression reported more pain and disability symptoms preoperatively and postoperatively; however, both groups achieved similar degrees of improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Surgical Strategies to Prevent Adjacent Segment Disease in the Cervical Spine.

The most popular approach to treating symptomatic cervical disk disease is anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Although this procedure has significant long-term clinical success, it is associated with progressive adjacent segment degeneration with an annual incidence of ∼3%. Total disk arthroplasty was designed as an alternative to fusion that could preserve segmental motion at the operative level and potentially delay or prevent adjacent-level breakdown. The etiology of adjacent segment pathology (ASP) is multifactorial, and it is likely that most cases of ASP are unavoidable. When attempting to surgically prevent ASP, it is important to consider nonfusion alternatives, be judicious in one's level selection, and attempt to restore sagittal alignment. When ASP becomes a clinical problem, it is important to have an algorithm for how best to treat it.

Descriptive Analysis of Associated Factors for Urgent Versus Nonurgent Inpatient Spine Transfers to a Tertiary Care Hospital.

Patients with spine-associated symptoms are transferred regularly to higher levels of care for operative intervention. It is unclear what factors lead to the transfer of patients with spine pathology to level I care facilities, and which transfers are indicated. All patients with isolated spinal pathology who were transferred from 2011 to 2015 were reviewed. Patients were divided into urgent transfers, defined as anyone who required operative intervention, and nonurgent transfers. Two hundred twenty-seven patients were transferred for isolated spinal pathology over 51 months; 109 (48.0%) patients required urgent intervention and 118 (52.0%) patients required nonurgent care. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of private insurance, age, sex, race, or Charlson comorbidity index. The urgent group was less likely to have a traumatic chief complaint (57.8% vs 78.0%, P = .001). More than half of all spine patients who were transferred to a tertiary care center required minimal intervention.