Radiology Reports Do Not Accurately Portray the Severity of Cervical Neural Foraminal Stenosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: (1) To compare cervical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiology reports to a validated grading system for cervical foraminal stenosis (FS) and (2) to evaluate whether the severity of cervical neural FS on MRI correlates to motor weakness or patient-reported outcomes. BACKGROUND: Radiology reports of cervical spine MRI are often reviewed to assess the degree of neural FS. However, research looking at the association between these reports and objective MRI findings, as well as clinical symptoms, is lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified all adult patients undergoing primary 1 or 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion at a single academic center for an indication of cervical radiculopathy. Preoperative MRI was assessed for neural FS severity using the grading system described by Kim and colleagues for each level of fusion, as well as adjacent levels. Neural FS severity was recorded from diagnostic radiologist MRI reports. Motor weakness was defined as an examination grade <4/5 on the final preoperative encounter. Regression analysis was conducted to evaluate whether the degree of FS by either classification was related to patient-reported outcome measure severity. RESULTS: A total of 283 patients were included in the study, and 998 total levels were assessed. There were significant differences between the MRI grading system and the assessment by radio-logists (P< 0.001). In levels with moderate stenosis, 28.9% were classified as having no stenosis by radiology. In levels with severe stenosis, 29.7% were classified as having mild-moderate stenosis or less. Motor weakness was found similarly often in levels of moderate or severe stenosis (6.9% and 9.2%, respectively). On regression analysis, no associations were found between baseline patient-reported outcome measures and stenosis severity assessed by radiologists or MRI grading systems. CONCLUSION: Radiology reports on the severity of cervical neural FS are not consistent with a validated MRI grading system. These radiology reports underestimated the severity of neural foraminal compression and may be inappropriate when used for clinical decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Does operative level impact dysphagia severity following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion? a multicenter prospective analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective multi-center cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To explore the association between operative level and postoperative dysphagia after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Dysphagia is common following ACDF and has several risk factors including soft tissue edema. The degree of prevertebral soft tissue edema varies based upon the operative cervical level. However, the operative level has not been evaluated as a source of postoperative dysphagia. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing elective ACDF were prospectively enrolled at three academic centers. Dysphagia was assessed using the Bazaz questionnaire, Dysphagia Short Questionnaire (DSQ), and Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) preoperatively and at 2, 6, 12, and 24-weeks postoperatively. Patients were grouped based on inclusion of specific surgical levels in the fusion construct. Multivariable regression analyses were performed evaluating the independent effects of number of surgical levels and inclusion of each particular level on dysphagia symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were included. Overall, 24 (18.5%) patients had persistent postoperative dysphagia at 24 weeks and were older, female, and less likely to be drink alcohol. There was no difference in operative duration or dexamethasone administration. Patients with persistent dysphagia were significantly more likely to have C4-C5 included in the fusion construct (62.5% vs. 34.9%, P=0.024) but there were no differences based on inclusion of other levels. On multivariable regression, inclusion of C3-C4 or C6-C7 were associated with more severe EAT-10 (ß:9.56, P=0.016 and ß:8.15, P=0.040) and DSQ (ß:4.44, P=0.023 and (ß:4.27, P=0.030) at 6 weeks. At 12-weeks, C3-C4 fusion was also independently associated with more severe dysphagia (EAT-10 ß:4.74, P=0.024). CONCLUSION: The location of prevertebral soft tissue swelling may impact the duration and severity of patient-reported dysphagia outcomes at up to 24 weeks postoperatively. In particular, inclusion of C3-C4 and C4-C5 into the fusion may be associated with dysphagia severity.

Subfascial Lumbar Spine Drain Output Does Not Affect Outcomes After Incidental Durotomies in Elective Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Postoperative drains have long been regarded as a preventive measure to mitigate the risks of complications such as neurological impairment by reducing fluid accumulation following spine surgery. Our study aims to contribute to the existing body of knowledge by examining the effects of postoperative drain output on the 90-day postoperative outcomes for patients who experienced an incidental durotomy after lumbar decompression procedures, with or without fusion. METHODS: All patients aged ≥18 years with an incidental durotomy from spinal decompression with or without fusion surgery between 2017 and 2021 were retrospectively identified. The patient demographics, surgical characteristics, method of dural tear repair (DuraSeal, suture, and/or DuraGen), surgical outcomes, and drain data were collected via medical record review. Patients were grouped by readmission status and final 8-hour drain output. Those with a final 8-hour drain output of ≥40 mL were included in the high drain output (HDO) group and those with <40 mL were in the low drain output (LDO) group. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative patient demographics, surgical characteristics, method of dural tear repair, length of stay (HDO, 4.02 ± 1.90 days; vs. LDO, 4.26 ± 2.10 days; P = 0.269), hospital readmissions (HDO, 10.6%; vs. LDO, 7.96%; P = 0.744), or occurrence of reoperation during readmission (HDO, 6.06%; vs. LDO, 2.65%; P = 0.5944) between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing primary lumbar decompression with or without fusion and experiencing an incidental durotomy, no significant association was found between the drain output and 90-day patient outcomes. Adequate fascial closure and the absence of symptoms may be satisfactory criteria for standard patient discharge regardless of drain output.

Assessment of a Private Payer Bundled Payment Model for Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Although bundled payment models are well-established in Medicare-aged individuals, private insurers are now developing bundled payment plans. The role of these plans in spine surgery has not been evaluated. Our objective was to analyze the performance of a private insurance bundled payment program for lumbar decompression and microdiskectomy. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all lumbar decompressions in a private payer bundled payment model at a single institution from October 2018 to December 2020. 120-day episode of care cost data were collected and reported as net profit or loss regarding set target prices. A stepwise multivariable linear regression model was developed to measure the effect of patient and surgical factors on net surplus or deficit. RESULTS: Overall, 151 of 468 (32.2%) resulted in a deficit. Older patients (58.6 vs. 50.9 years, P < 0.001) with diabetes (25.2% vs. 13.9%, P = 0.004), hypertension (38.4% vs. 28.4%, P = 0.038), heart disease (13.9% vs. 7.57%, P = 0.030), and hyperlipidemia (51.7% vs. 35.6%, P = 0.001) were more likely to experience a loss. Surgically, decompression of more levels (1.91 vs. 1.19, P < 0.001), posterior lumbar decompression (86.8% vs. 56.5%, P < 0.001), and performing surgery at a tertiary hospital (84.8% vs. 70.3%, P < 0.001) were more likely to result in loss. All readmissions resulted in a loss (4.64% vs. 0.0%, P < 0.001). On multivariable regression, microdiskectomy (ß: $2,398, P = 0.012) and surgery in a specialty hospital (ß: $1,729, P = 0.096) or ambulatory surgery center (ß: $3,534, P = 0.055) were associated with cost savings. Increasing number of levels, longer length of stay, active smoking, and history of cancer, dementia, or congestive heart failure were all associated with degree of deficit. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperatively optimizing comorbidities and using risk stratification to identify those patients who may safely undergo surgery at a facility other than an inpatient hospital may help increase cost savings in a bundled payment model of working-age and Medicare-age individuals.

Readability of Patient Reported Outcomes in Spine Surgery and Implications for Health Literacy.

STUDY DESIGN: Observational. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the readability of commonly utilized patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: While studies have evaluated patient education materials, discharge instructions, informed consent forms in spine surgery, there is a dearth of literature on the readability of PROMs despite widespread health illiteracy. Without knowledge of PROM readability, it is unclear whether these measures are able to be understood by the average spine patient. METHODS: We analyzed all commonly utilized non-visual PROMs within the spinal literature and uploaded PROMs into an online readability calculator. The Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index were collected. A FRES >79 or SMOG <7 was considered readable by the general population per American Medical Association and Centers for Disease Control guidelines. A stricter threshold recommended in healthcare (SMOG <6 or FRES >89) was then used to further review readability. RESULTS: Seventy-seven PROMs were included. Based on FRES, the mean readability of all PROMs was 69.2±17.2 (range, 10-96.4), indicating an average 8th - 9th grade reading level. The mean readability score categorized by the SMOG Index was 8.12±2.65 (range 3.1-25.6), representing an 8th grade reading level. Compared to the reading level of the general population, 49 (63.6%) PROMs are written above the United States literacy level according to FRES. Using stricter definitions of readability, eight PROMs were considered readable, including PROMIS Pain Behavior (FRES: 96.4 & SMOG: 5.2), PROMIS Sleep Disturbance (SMOG: 5.6), Neck Pain and Disability Scale (SMOG: 4.3) and Zung Depression Scale (SMOG: 3.1). CONCLUSIONS: Most PROMs utilized in spine surgery require an average reading competency far above the average patient's comprehension. This may have meaningful impact on understanding PROM instruments and may affect the accuracy of complete surveys and the rates of incompletion.

The severity of preoperative anemia escalates risk of poor short-term outcomes after lumbar spine fusion.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how preoperative anemia severity affects 90-day outcomes of spinal fusion surgery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on adult lumbar fusion patients at a tertiary medical center. Patients were classified by World Health Organization anemia severity definitions for comparisons. Multivariate regression models were created to control for confounding variables, for all primary outcomes of transfusion requirements, non-home discharge, readmissions, complications, and length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 2582 patients were included: 2.7% with moderate-severe anemia, 11.0% with mild anemia, and 86.3% without anemia. Moderate-severe patients had the longest hospital stay (5.03 days vs 4.14 and 3.59 days, p < 0.001) and highest risk of transfusion (52.2% vs 13.0% vs 2.69%, p < 0.001), non-home discharge (39.1% vs 27.8% vs 15.4%, p < 0.001), readmission (7.25% vs 5.99% vs 3.36%, p = 0.023), and complications (13.0% vs 9.51% vs 6.20%, p = 0.012). On multivariable logistic regression, both patients with mild and moderate-severe anemia had an increased risk of transfusion (OR: 37.3, p < 0.001; OR: 5.25, p < 0.001, respectively) and non-home discharge (OR: 2.00, p = 0.021; OR: 1.71, p = 0.001, respectively) compared to patients without anemia. Anemia severity was not independently associated with complications or 90-day readmission. On multivariable linear regression, mild anemia (ß: 0.37, p = 0.001) and moderate-severe anemia (ß: 1.07, p < 0.001) were independently associated with length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate-severe preoperative anemia are at increased risk for longer length of stay, transfusions, and non-home discharge. Improved optimization of preoperative anemia may significantly reduce healthcare utilization, and surgeons should consider these risks in preoperative planning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Evaluation of Hospital Compliance With Federal Price Transparency Regulations and Variability of Negotiated Rates for Spinal Fusion.

INTRODUCTION: To improve price transparency, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) requires hospitals to post accessible pricing data for common elective procedures along with all third-party-negotiated rates. We aimed to evaluate hospital compliance with CMS regulations for both price estimators and machine-readable files for spinal fusions and to evaluate factors contributing to variability in hospital-negotiated pricing. METHODS: We reviewed the top 100 orthopaedic hospitals ranked by US News & World Report to assess compliance with CMS price transparency regulations for all spine diagnosis-related groups. We recorded gross inpatient charge, cash price, and deidentified maximum and minimum rates for the 11 spine diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). Variability was compared with geographic practice costs (GPCI), expected Medicare reimbursements, and poverty rate and median income ratio. RESULTS: Only 72% of hospitals were fully compliant in reporting spinal fusions on their price estimator, and 39% were fully compliant in reporting all mandatory rates for spinal fusions. The overall estimated cash price was $96,979 ± $56,262 and $62,595 ± $40,307 for noncervical and cervical fusion, respectively. Cash prices at top 50 hospitals were higher for both noncervical and cervical fusions ( P = 0.0461 and P = 0.0341, respectively). The average minimum negotiated rates ranged from 0.88 to 1.15 times the expected Medicare reimbursement, while maximum and cash prices were 3.41 to 3.90 and 2.53 to 4.08 times greater than Medicare reimbursement. GPCI demonstrated little to no correlation with DRG pricing. However, minimum negotiated rates and cash prices demonstrated weak positive correlations with the median income ratio and weak negative correlations with the poverty rate. DISCUSSION: Most US hospitals are not fully compliant with CMS price transparency regulations for spinal fusions despite increased overall utilization of price estimators and machine-readable files. Although higher ranked hospitals charged more for spinal fusions, DRG prices remain widely variable with little to no correlation with practice cost or socioeconomic parameters.

A Financial Analysis of Procedural Revenue in Outpatient Spine Clinic: An Analysis of 36,312 Patient Appointments and Subsequent Surgeries at a Single Major Academic Institution.

OBJECTIVE: The economic pressures widely discussed in health care have a large impact on spine practices. This current study is the first to look at characteristics associated with revenues from an outpatient spine clinic. METHODS: All clinic visits to spine providers were identified at a single academic institution spanning the dates June 1, 2014, to June 1, 2018. All payment information was calculated using Medicare reimbursement values for Current Procedural Terminology codes. Relevant clinical, surgical, and cost structure data was collected for each patient. RESULTS: On average, providers had 21.9 average appointments over the course of 7.6 hours per clinic day. The average ratio of new to follow-up patients was 39.3%, with an average new patient to surgery conversion rate of 15.0%. The adjusted average total procedural revenue per new patient, controlled for scheduled appointment length and actual appointment length, was $686.02. The adjusted average procedural revenue per surgery was $3444.64 and average procedural revenue per hour in spine clinic was $552.40. With a 1% and 5% increase in new patient visits, total procedural revenue increases 2.7% and 13.5%, respectively. With a 1% and 5% increase in conversion rate, total procedural revenue increases 6.7% and 33.3%, respectively. With a decrease in new patient appointment length from 30 minutes to 25 minutes, the opportunity for 1.7 new patient appointments per day was created resulting in a net increase in procedural revenue per clinic day of $837.57. CONCLUSIONS: Incremental changes in practice structure can significantly affect procedural revenue. Significant heterogeneity also exists among spine providers.

Validation of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computerized adaptive tests in cervical spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), which is funded by the National Institutes of Health, is a set of adaptive, responsive assessment tools that measures patient-reported health status. PROMIS measures have not been validated for surgical patients with cervical spine disorders. The objective of this project is to evaluate the validity (e.g., convergent validity, known-groups validity, responsiveness to change) of PROMIS computer adaptive tests (CATs) for pain behavior, pain interference, and physical function in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. METHODS The legacy outcome measures Neck Disability Index (NDI) and SF-12 were used as comparisons with PROMIS measures. PROMIS CATs, NDI-10, and SF-12 measures were administered prospectively to 59 consecutive tertiary hospital patients who were treated surgically for degenerative cervical spine disorders. A subscore of NDI-5 was calculated from NDI-10 by eliminating the lifting, headaches, pain intensity, reading, and driving sections and multiplying the final score by 4. Assessments were administered preoperatively (baseline) and postoperatively at 6 weeks and 3 months. Patients presenting for revision surgery, tumor, infection, or trauma were excluded. Participants completed the measures in Assessment Center, an online data collection tool accessed by using a secure login and password on a tablet computer. Subgroup analysis was also performed based on a primary diagnosis of either cervical radiculopathy or cervical myelopathy. RESULTS Convergent validity for PROMIS CATs was supported with multiple statistically significant correlations with the existing legacy measures, NDI and SF-12, at baseline. Furthermore, PROMIS CATs demonstrated known-group validity and identified clinically significant improvements in all measures after surgical intervention. In the cervical radiculopathy and myelopathic cohorts, the PROMIS measures demonstrated similar responsiveness to the SF-12 and NDI scores in the patients who self-identified as having postoperative clinical improvement. PROMIS CATs required a mean total of 3.2 minutes for PROMIS pain behavior (mean ± SD 0.9 ± 0.5 minutes), pain interference (1.2 ± 1.9 minutes), and physical function (1.1 ± 1.4 minutes) and compared favorably with 3.4 minutes for NDI and 4.1 minutes for SF-12. CONCLUSIONS This study verifies that PROMIS CATs demonstrate convergent and known-groups validity and comparable responsiveness to change as existing legacy measures. The PROMIS measures required less time for completion than legacy measures. The validity and efficiency of the PROMIS measures in surgical patients with cervical spine disorders suggest an improvement over legacy measures and an opportunity for incorporation into clinical practice.