Comparative safety of tramadol and other opioids following total hip and knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Tramadol is increasingly used to treat acute postoperative pain among older adults following total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). However, tramadol has a complex pharmacology and may be no safer than full opioid agonists. We compared the safety of tramadol, oxycodone, and hydrocodone among opioid-naïve older adults following elective THA/TKA. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries ≥ 65 years with elective THA/TKA between January 1, 2010 and September 30, 2015, 12 months of continuous Parts A and B enrollment, 6 months of continuous Part D enrollment, and no opioid use in the 6 months prior to THA/TKA. Participants initiated single-opioid therapy with tramadol, oxycodone, or hydrocodone within 7 days of discharge from THA/TKA hospitalization, regardless of concurrently administered nonopioid analgesics. Outcomes of interest included all-cause hospitalizations or emergency department visits (serious adverse events (SAEs)) and a composite of 10 surgical- and opioid-related SAEs within 90-days of THA/TKA. The intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) hazard ratios (HRs) for tramadol versus other opioids were estimated using inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted pooled logistic regression models. RESULTS: The study population included 2,697 tramadol, 11,407 oxycodone, and 14,665 hydrocodone initiators. Compared to oxycodone, tramadol increased the rate of all-cause SAEs in ITT analyses only (ITT HR 1.19, 95%CLs, 1.02, 1.41; PP HR 1.05, 95%CLs, 0.86, 1.29). Rates of composite SAEs were not significant across comparisons. Compared to hydrocodone, tramadol increased the rate of all-cause SAEs in the ITT and PP analyses (ITT HR 1.40, 95%CLs, 1.10, 1.76; PP HR 1.34, 95%CLs, 1.03, 1.75), but rates of composite SAEs were not significant across comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative tramadol was associated with increased rates of all-cause SAEs, but not composite SAEs, compared to oxycodone and hydrocodone. Tramadol does not appear to have a superior safety profile and should not be preferentially prescribed to opioid-naïve older adults following THA/TKA.

Filling the gaps in the COVID-19 pandemic response: medical personnel in the US military health system.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented public health emergency that heavily affected the healthcare workforce. Although the Military Health System (MHS) has robust capabilities and was able to deploy medical staff to support civilian hospitals during the crisis, it too was adversely impacted by personnel issues. We aimed to identify and address gaps in understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare personnel in the MHS. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured key informant interviews with 28 MHS stakeholders, including policymakers, program managers, and healthcare providers. We recruited respondents using purposive and snowball sampling until we reached thematic saturation. Interviews were conducted virtually from December 2022 to March 2023 and coded by deductive thematic analysis using NVivo. RESULTS: Burnout and mental health concerns across the workforce increased during the pandemic, although some felt military culture facilitated resilience. Reduction in personnel was noted and slow hiring processes and noncompetitive wages hindered hiring, contributing to staffing shortages. Initial disruptions occurred in training and skills readiness, although these issues were reduced over time. Concerns remain about newer trainees' preparedness and teaching staff's availability in the MHS. CONCLUSION: This study uniquely assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic response on the MHS healthcare workforce through in-depth key informant interviews. Multi-pronged strategies are needed to promote personnel well-being in complex healthcare systems like the MHS.

Do Hounsfield Units From Intraoperative CT Scans Correlate With Preoperative Values?

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in forecasting postoperative complications using bone density metrics. Vertebral Hounsfield unit measurements obtained from CT scans performed for surgical planning or other purposes, known as opportunistic CTs, have shown promise for their ease of measurement and the ability to target density measurement to a particular region of interest. Concomitant with the rising interest in prognostic bone density measurement use has been the increasing adoption of intraoperative advanced imaging techniques. Despite the interest in both outcome prognostication and intraoperative advanced imaging, there is little information regarding the use of CT-based intraoperative imaging as a means to measure bone density. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can vertebral Hounsfield units be reliably measured by physician reviewers from CT scans obtained intraoperatively? (2) Do Hounsfield units measured from intraoperative studies correlate with values measured from preoperative CT scans? METHODS: To be eligible for this retrospective study, patients had to have been treated with the use of an intraoperative CT scan for instrumented spinal fusion for either degenerative conditions or traumatic injuries between January 2015 and December 2022. Importantly, patients without a preoperative CT scan of the fused levels within 180 days before surgery or who were indicated for surgery because of infection, metastatic disease, or who were having revision surgery after prior instrumentation were excluded from the query. Of the 285 patients meeting these inclusion criteria, 53% (151) were initially excluded for the following reasons: 36% (102) had intraoperative CT scans obtained after placement of instrumentation, 16% (47) had undergone intraoperative CT scans but the studies were not accessible for Hounsfield unit measurement, and 0.7% (2) had prior kyphoplasty wherein the cement prevented Hounsfield unit measurement. Finally, an additional 19% (53) of patients were excluded because the preoperative CT and intraoperative CT were obtained at different peak voltages, which can influence Hounsfield unit measurement. This yielded a final population of 81 patients from whom 276 preoperative and 276 intraoperative vertebral Hounsfield unit measurements were taken. Hounsfield unit data were abstracted from the same vertebra(e) from both preoperative and intraoperative studies by two physician reviewers (one PGY3 and one PGY5 orthopaedic surgery resident, both pursuing spine surgery fellowships). For a small, representative subset of patients, measurements were taken by both reviewers. The feasibility and reliability of Hounsfield unit measurement were then assessed with interrater reliability of values measured from the same vertebra by the two different reviewers. To compare Hounsfield unit values from intraoperative CT scans with preoperative CT studies, an intraclass correlation using a two-way random effects, absolute agreement testing technique was employed. Because the data were formatted as multiple measurements from the same vertebra at different times, a repeated measures correlation was used to assess the relationship between preoperative and intraoperative Hounsfield unit values. Finally, a linear mixed model with patients handled as a random effect was used to control for different patient and clinical factors (age, BMI, use of bone density modifying agents, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] classification, smoking status, and total Charlson comorbidity index [CCI] score). RESULTS: We found that Hounsfield units can be reliably measured from intraoperative CT scans by human raters with good concordance. Hounsfield unit measurements of 31 vertebrae from a representative sample of 10 patients, measured by both reviewers, demonstrated a correlation value of 0.82 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.91), indicating good correlation. With regard to the relationship between preoperative and intraoperative measurements of the same vertebra, repeated measures correlation testing demonstrated no correlation between preoperative and intraoperative measurements (r = 0.01 [95% CI -0.13 to 0.15]; p = 0.84). When controlling for patient and clinical factors, we continued to observe no relationship between preoperative and intraoperative Hounsfield unit measurements. CONCLUSION: As intraoperative CT and measurement of vertebral Hounsfield units both become increasingly popular, it would be a natural extension for spine surgeons to try to extract Hounsfield unit data from intraoperative CTs. However, we found that although it is feasible to measure Hounsfield data from intraoperative CT scans, the obtained values do not have any predictable relationship with values obtained from preoperative studies, and thus, these values should not be used interchangeably. With this knowledge, future studies should explore the prognostic value of intraoperative Hounsfield unit measurements as a distinct entity from preoperative measurements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

The response of the Military Health System (MHS) to the COVID-19 pandemic: a summary of findings from MHS reviews.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused major disruptions to the US Military Health System (MHS). In this study, we evaluated the MHS response to the pandemic to understand the impact of the pandemic response in a large, national, integrated healthcare system providing care for ~ 9 million beneficiaries. METHODS: We performed a narrative literature review of 16 internal Department of Defense (DoD) reports, including reviews mandated by the US Congress in response to the pandemic. We categorized the findings using the Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy (DOTMLPF-P) framework developed by the DoD to assess system efficiency and effectiveness. RESULTS: The majority of the findings were in the policy, organization, and personnel categories. Key findings showed that the MHS structure to address surge situations was beneficial during the pandemic response, and the rapid growth of telehealth created the potential impact for improved access to routine and specialized care. However, organizational transition contributed to miscommunication and uneven implementation of policies; disruptions affected clinical training, upskilling, and the supply chain; and staffing shortages contributed to burnout among healthcare workers. CONCLUSION: Given its highly integrated, vertical structure, the MHS was in a better position than many civilian healthcare networks to respond efficiently to the pandemic. However, similar to the US civilian sector, the MHS also experienced delays in care, staffing and materiel challenges, and a rapid switch to telehealth. Lessons regarding the importance of communication and preparation for future public health emergency responses are relevant to civilian healthcare systems responding to COVID-19 and other similar public health crises.

Supporting the nation in crisis: the military health system's role in enhancing public health capacity through public-private partnerships.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused significant global disruptions to the healthcare system, which was forced to make rapid changes in healthcare delivery. The pandemic necessitated closer collaboration between the US civilian healthcare sector and the military health system (MHS), resulting in new and strengthened partnerships that can ultimately benefit public health and healthcare for the nation. In this study, we sought to understand the full range of partnerships in which the MHS engaged with the civilian sector during the COVID-19 pandemic and to elicit lessons for the future. METHODS: We conducted key informant interviews with MHS policymakers and advisers, program managers and providers who were affiliated with the MHS from March 2020 through December 2022. Key themes were derived using thematic analysis and open coding methods. RESULTS: We conducted 28 interviews between December 2022 and March 2023. During the pandemic, the MHS collaborated with federal and local healthcare authorities and private sector entities through endeavours such as Operation Warp Speed. Lessons and recommendations for future pandemics were also identified, including investment in biosurveillance systems and integration of behavioural and social sciences. CONCLUSIONS: The MHS rapidly established and fostered key partnerships with the public and private sectors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic experience showed that while the MHS is a useful resource for the nation, it also benefits from partnering with a variety of organizations, agencies and private companies. Continuing to develop these partnerships will be crucial for coordinated, effective responses to future pandemics.

Updates in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease.

The number of cancer diagnoses continues to increase each year in the United States, and given the propensity for bone metastases from solid organ malignancies, orthopaedic spine surgeons will inevitably encounter patients with metastatic spine disease and need to have a framework for approaching the evaluation and treatment of these complex patients. Many patients seeking care for spinal metastases already have a history of disseminated malignancy, but metastatic spine disease itself will be the presenting symptom of cancer in approximately 20% of patients. Because the first presentation of cancer may be to a spine surgeon, an appropriate strategy for the initial evaluation of a patient with a new spinal lesion is critical to establish the diagnosis of metastatic disease before undergoing treatment. Once the diagnosis of metastatic spine disease is confirmed, decisions regarding treatment should be made in coordination with a multidisciplinary team including radiation oncology and medical oncology. Spinal metastases are most often treated with radiation therapy. Direct circumferential decompression of the spinal cord with postoperative radiation therapy is considered for high-grade epidural spinal cord compression to preserve neurologic function. Mechanical spinal instability is another potential indication for surgery. When considering surgery, the patient's medical fitness, systemic burden of cancer, and overall prognosis all must be accounted for, and the importance of multidisciplinary evaluation and shared decision making cannot be overstated.

Filling the Gaps in the Pandemic Response: Impact of COVID-19 on Telehealth in the Military Health System.

Introduction: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth use became widespread, allowing for continued health care while minimizing COVID-19 transmission risk for patients and providers. This rapid scale-up highlighted shortcomings of the current telehealth infrastructure in many health systems. We aimed to identify and address gaps in the United States Military Health System (MHS) response to the COVID-19 pandemic related to the implementation and utilization of telehealth. Methods: We conducted semistructured key informant interviews of MHS stakeholders, including policymakers, program managers, and health care providers. We recruited respondents using purposive and snowball sampling until we reached thematic saturation. Interviews were conducted virtually from December 2022 to March 2023 and coded by deductive thematic analysis using NVivo. Results: We interviewed 28 key informants. Several themes emerged from the interviews and were categorized into four defined areas of obstacles to the effective utilization of telehealth: administrative, technical, organizational, and quality issues. While respondents had positive perceptions of telehealth, issues such as billing, licensure portability, network connectivity and technology, and ability to monitor health outcomes represent major barriers in the current system, preventing the potential for further expansion. Conclusions: While the shift to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated robust potential within the MHS, it highlighted shortcomings that impair the utility and expansion of telehealth on a level comparable to that of other large health systems. Future focus should be directed toward generating and implementing actionable recommendations that target these identified challenges in the MHS.

Long-term Mental Health Trajectories of Injured Military Servicemembers: Comparing Combat to Noncombat Related Injuries.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to quantify the impact of injury characteristics and setting on the development of mental health conditions, comparing combat to noncombat injury mechanisms. BACKGROUND: Due to advances in combat casualty care, military service-members are surviving traumatic injuries at substantial rates. The nature and setting of traumatic injury may influence the development of subsequent mental health disorders more than clinical injury characteristics. METHODS: TRICARE claims data was used to identify servicemembers injured in combat between 2007 and 2011. Controls were servicemembers injured in a noncombat setting matched by age, sex, and injury severity. The rate of development, and time to diagnosis [in days (d)], of 3 common mental health conditions (post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and anxiety) among combat-injured servicemembers were compared to controls. Risk factors for developing a new mental health condition after traumatic injury were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression that controlled for confounders. RESULTS: There were 3979 combat-injured servicemember and 3979 matched controls. The majority of combat injured servicemembers (n = 2524, 63%) were diagnosed with a new mental health condition during the course of follow-up, compared to 36% (n = 1415) of controls ( P < 0.001). In the adjusted model, those with combat-related injury were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with a new mental health condition [odds ratio (OR): 3.18, [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.88-3.50]]. Junior (OR: 3.33, 95%CI: 2.66-4.17) and senior enlisted (OR: 2.56, 95%CI: 2.07-3.17) servicemem-bers were also at significantly greater risk. CONCLUSIONS: We found significantly higher rates of new mental health conditions among servicemembers injured in combat compared to service-members sustaining injuries in noncombat settings. This indicates that injury mechanism and environment are important drivers of mental health sequelae after trauma.

The Hidden Costs of War: Healthcare Utilization Among Individuals Sustaining Combat-related Trauma (2007-2018).

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate long-term healthcare requirements of American military servicemembers with combat-related injuries. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: US military conflicts since 2001 have produced the most combat casualties since Vietnam. Long-term consequences on healthcare utilization and associated costs remain unknown. METHODS: We identified servicemembers who were treated for combat-related injuries between 2007 and 2011. Controls consisted of active-duty servicemembers injured in the civilian sector, without any history of combat-related trauma, matched (1:1) on year of injury, biologic sex injury severity, and age at time of injury. Surveillance was performed through 2018. Total annual healthcare expenditures were evaluated overall and then as expenditures in the first year after injury and for subsequent years. Negative binomial regression was used to identify the adjusted influence of combat injury on healthcare costs. RESULTS: The combat-injured cohort consisted of 3981 individuals and we identified 3979 controls. Total healthcare utilization during the follow-up period resulted in median costs of $142,214 (IQR $61,428, $323,060) per combat-injured servicemember as compared to $50,741 (IQR $26,669, $104,134) among controls. Median expenditures, adjusted for duration of follow-up, for the combat-injured were $45,211 (IQR $18,698, $105,437). In adjusted analysis, overall costs were 30% higher (1.30; 95% confidence interval: 1.23, 1.37) for combat-injured personnel. CONCLUSION: This investigation represents the longest continuous observation of healthcare utilization among individuals after combat injury and the first to assess costs. Expenditures were 30% higher for individuals injured as a result of combat-related trauma when compared to those injured in the civilian sector.

CT-guided Pulsed Radiofrequency Combined with Steroid Injection for Sciatica from Herniated Disk: A Randomized Trial.

Background Evidence regarding effective nonsurgical management of sciatica remains limited. Purpose To determine a difference in effectiveness between combined pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) treatment versus TFESI alone for sciatic pain due to lumbar disk herniation. Materials and Methods This prospective multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted between February 2017 and September 2019 in participants with sciatica due to lumbar disk herniation lasting 12 weeks or longer that was not responsive to conservative treatment. Study participants were randomly assigned to undergo one CT-guided treatment with combined PRF and TFESI (n = 174) or TFESI alone (n = 177). The primary outcome was leg pain severity, as assessed with the numeric rating scale (NRS) (range, 0-10) at weeks 1 and 52 after treatment. Secondary outcomes included Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score (range, 0-24) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (range, 0-100). Outcomes were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle via linear regression. Results Mean age of the 351 participants (223 men) was 55 years ± 16 (SD). At baseline, NRS was 8.1 ± 1.1 in the PRF and TFESI group and 7.9 ± 1.1 in the TFESI group. NRS was 3.2 ± 0.2 in the PRF and TFESI group and 5.4 ± 0.2 in the TFESI group (average treatment effect, 2.3; 95% CI: 1.9, 2.8; P < .001) at week 1 and 1.0 ± 0.2 and 3.9 ± 0.2 (average treatment effect, 3.0; 95% CI: 2.4, 3.5; P < .001), respectively, at week 52. At week 52, the average treatment effect was 11.0 (95% CI: 6.4, 15.6; P < .001) for ODI and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.6, 4.3; P < .001) for RMDQ, favoring the combined PRF and TFSEI group. Adverse events were reported in 6% (10 of 167) of participants in the PRF and TFESI group and in 3% (six of 176) of participants in the TFESI group (eight participants did not complete follow-up questionnaires). No severe adverse events occurred. Conclusion In the treatment of sciatica caused by lumbar disk herniation, pulsed radiofrequency combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection is more effective for pain relief and disability improvement than steroid injection alone. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Jennings in this issue.

Opioid prescribing and use in the Military Health System: a framework synthesis, FY2016-FY2021.

BACKGROUND: Opioid misuse is a nationwide issue and is of particular concern with regard to military readiness. The 2017 National Defense Authorization Act charges the Military Health System with greater oversight of opioid use and mitigation of misuse. METHODS: We synthesized published articles using secondary analysis of TRICARE claims data, a nationally representative database of 9.6 million beneficiaries. We screened 106 articles for inclusion and identified 17 studies for data abstraction. Framework analysis was conducted, which assessed prescribing practices, patient use, and optimum length of opioid prescriptions after surgery, trauma, and common procedures, as well as factors leading to sustained prescription opioid use. RESULTS: Across the studies, sustained prescription opioid use after surgery was low overall, with <1% of opioid-naïve patients still receiving opioids more than 1 year after spinal surgery or trauma. In opioid-exposed patients who had undergone spine surgery, sustained use was slightly lower than 10%. Higher rates of sustained use were associated with more severe trauma and depression, as well as with prior use and initial opioid prescriptions for low back pain or other undefined conditions. Black patients were more likely to discontinue opioid use than were White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing practices are well correlated with degree of injury or intensity of intervention. Sustained prescription opioid use beyond 1 year is rare and is associated with diagnoses for which opioids are not the standard of care. More efficient coding, increased attention to clinical practice guidelines, and use of tools to predict risk of sustained prescription opioid use are recommended.

Does the Stopping Opioids After Surgery Score Perform Well Among Racial and Socioeconomic Subgroups?

BACKGROUND: The Stopping Opioids After Surgery (SOS) score is a validated tool that was developed to determine the risk of sustained opioid use after surgical interventions, including orthopaedic procedures. Despite prior investigations validating the SOS score in diverse contexts, its performance across racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic subgroups has not been assessed. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In a large, urban, academic health network, did the performance of the SOS score differ depending on (1) race and ethnicity or (2) socioeconomic status? METHODS: This retrospective investigation was conducted using data from an internal, longitudinally maintained registry of a large, urban, academic health system in the Northeastern United States. Between January 1, 2018, and March 31, 2022, we treated 26,732 adult patients via rotator cuff repair, lumbar discectomy, lumbar fusion, TKA, THA, ankle or distal radius open reduction and internal fixation, or ACL reconstruction. We excluded 1% of patients (274 of 26,732) because of missing length of stay information, 0.06% (15) for missing discharge information, 1% (310) for missing medication information related to loss to follow-up, and 0.07% (19) who died during their hospital stay. Based on these inclusion and exclusion criteria, 26,114 adult patients were left for analysis. The median age in our cohort was 63 years (IQR 52 to 71), and most patients were women (52% [13,462 of 26,114]). Most patients self-reported their race and ethnicity as non-Hispanic White (78% [20,408 of 26,114]), but the cohort also included non-Hispanic Black (4% [939]), non-Hispanic Asian (2% [638]), and Hispanic (1% [365]) patients. Five percent (1295) of patients were of low socioeconomic status, defined by prior SOS score investigations as patients with Medicaid insurance. Components of the SOS score and the observed frequency of sustained postoperative opioid prescriptions were abstracted. The performance of the SOS score was compared across racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic subgroups using the c-statistic, which measures the capacity of the model to differentiate between patients with and without sustained opioid use. This measure should be interpreted on a scale between 0 and 1, where 0 represents a model that perfectly predicts the wrong classification, 0.5 represents performance no better than chance, and 1.0 represents perfect discrimination. Scores less than 0.7 are generally considered poor. The baseline performance of the SOS score in past investigations has ranged from 0.76 to 0.80. RESULTS: The c-statistic for non-Hispanic White patients was 0.79 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.81), which fell within the range of past investigations. The SOS score performed worse for Hispanic patients (c-statistic 0.66 [95% CI 0.52 to 0.79]; p < 0.001), where it tended to overestimate patients' risks of sustained opioid use. The SOS score for non-Hispanic Asian patients did not perform worse than in the White patient population (c-statistic 0.79 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.90]; p = 0.65). Similarly, the degree of overlapping CIs suggests that the SOS score did not perform worse in the non-Hispanic Black population (c-statistic 0.75 [95% CI 0.69 to 0.81]; p = 0.003). There was no difference in score performance among socioeconomic groups (c-statistic 0.79 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.83] for socioeconomically disadvantaged patients; 0.78 [95% CI 0.77 to 0.80] for patients who were not socioeconomically disadvantaged; p = 0.92). CONCLUSION: The SOS score performed adequately for non-Hispanic White patients but performed worse for Hispanic patients, where the 95% CI nearly included an area under the curve value of 0.5, suggesting that the tool is no better than chance at predicting sustained opioid use for Hispanic patients. In the Hispanic population, it commonly overestimated the risk of opioid dependence. Its performance did not differ among patients of different sociodemographic backgrounds. Future studies might seek to contextualize why the SOS score overestimates expected opioid prescriptions for Hispanic patients and how the utility performs among more specific Hispanic subgroups. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The SOS score is a valuable tool in ongoing efforts to combat the opioid epidemic; however, disparities exist in terms of its clinical applicability. Based on this analysis, the SOS score should not be used for Hispanic patients. Additionally, we provide a framework for how other predictive models should be tested in various lesser-represented populations before implementation.

Do Community-level Disadvantages Account for Racial Disparities in the Safety of Spine Surgery? A Large Database Study Based on Medicare Claims.

BACKGROUND: Racial health disparities across orthopaedic surgery subspecialties, including spine surgery, are well established. However, the underlying causes of these disparities, particularly relating to social determinants of health, are not fully understood. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is there a racial difference in 90-day mortality, readmission, and complication rates ("safety outcomes") among Medicare beneficiaries after spine surgery? (2) To what degree does the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), a community-level marker of social determinants of health, account for racial disparities in safety outcomes? METHODS: To examine racial differences in 90-day mortality, readmission, and complications after spine surgery, we retrospectively identified all 419,533 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 or older who underwent inpatient spine surgery from 2015 to 2019; we excluded 181,588 patients with endstage renal disease or Social Security disability insurance entitlements, who were on Medicare HMO, or who had missing SVI data. Because of the nearly universal coverage of those age 65 or older, Medicare data offer a large cohort that is broadly generalizable, provides improved precision for relatively rare safety outcomes, and is free of confounding from differential insurance access across races. The Master Beneficiary Summary File includes enrollees' self-reported race based on a restrictive list of mutually exclusive options. Even though this does not fully capture the entirety of racial diversity, it is self-reported by patients. Identification of spine surgery was based on five Diagnosis Related Groups labeled "cervical fusion," "fusion, except cervical," "anterior-posterior combined fusion," "complex fusion," and "back or neck, except fusion." Although heterogeneous, these cohorts do not reflect inherently different biology that would lead us to expect differences in safety outcomes by race. We report specific types of complications that did and did not involve readmission. Although complications vary in severity, we report them as composite measures while being cognizant of the inherent limitations of making inferences based on aggregate measures. The SVI was chosen as the mediating variable because it aggregates important social determinants of health and has been shown to be a marker of high risk of poor public health response to external stressors. Patients were categorized into three groups based on a ranking of the four SVI themes: socioeconomic status, household composition, minority status and language, and housing and transportation. We report the "average race effects" among Black patients compared with White patients using nearest-neighbor Mahalanobis matching by age, gender, comorbidities, and spine surgery type. Mahalanobis matching provided the best balance among propensity-type matching methods. Before matching, Black patients in Medicare undergoing spine surgery were disproportionately younger with more comorbidities and were less likely to undergo cervical fusion. To estimate the contribution of the SVI on racial disparities in safety outcomes, we report the average race effect between models with and without the addition of the four SVI themes. RESULTS: After matching on age, gender, comorbidities, and spine surgery type, Black patients were on average more likely than White patients to be readmitted (difference of 1.5% [95% CI 0.9% to 2.1%]; p < 0.001) and have complications with (difference of 1.2% [95% CI 0.5% to 1.9%]; p = 0.002) or without readmission (difference of 3.6% [95% CI 2.9% to 4.3%]; p < 0.001). Adding the SVI to the model attenuated these differences, explaining 17% to 49% of the racial differences in safety, depending on the outcome. An observed higher rate of 90-day mortality among Black patients was explained entirely by matching using non-SVI patient demographics (difference of 0.00% [95% CI -0.3% to 0.3%]; p = 0.99). However, even after adjusting for the SVI, Black patients had more readmissions and complications. CONCLUSION: Social disadvantage explains up to nearly 50% of the disparities in safety outcomes between Black and White Medicare patients after spine surgery. This argument highlights an important contribution of socioeconomic circumstances and societal barriers to achieving equal outcomes. But even after accounting for the SVI, there remained persistently unequal safety outcomes among Black patients compared with White patients, suggesting that other unmeasured factors contribute to the disparities. This is consistent with evidence documenting Black patients' disadvantages within a system of seemingly equal access and resources. Research on racial health disparities in orthopaedics should account for the SVI to avoid suggesting that race causes any observed differences in complications among patients when other factors related to social deprivation are more likely to be determinative. Focused social policies aiming to rectify structural disadvantages faced by disadvantaged communities may lead to a meaningful reduction in racial health disparities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Leveraging web-based prediction calculators to set patient expectations for elective spine surgery: a qualitative study to inform implementation.

BACKGROUND: Prediction calculators can help set outcomes expectations following orthopaedic surgery, however effective implementation strategies for these tools are unknown. This study evaluated provider and patient perspectives on clinical implementation of web-based prediction calculators developed using national prospective spine surgery registry data from the Quality Outcomes Database. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews in two health systems, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) and Duke University Health System (DUHS) of orthopedic and neurosurgery health care providers (VUMC: n = 19; DUHS: n = 6), health care administrators (VUMC: n = 9; DUHS: n = 9), and patients undergoing elective spine surgery (VUMC: n = 16). Qualitative template analysis was used to analyze interview data, with a focus on end-user perspectives regarding clinical implementation of web-based prediction tools. RESULTS: Health care providers, administrators and patients overwhelmingly supported the use of the calculators to help set realistic expectations for surgical outcomes. Some clinicians had questions about the validity and applicability of the calculators in their patient population. A consensus was that the calculators needed seamless integration into clinical workflows, but there was little agreement on best methods for selecting which patients to complete the calculators, timing, and mode of completion. Many interviewees expressed concerns that calculator results could influence payers, or expose risk of liability. Few patients expressed concerns over additional survey burden if they understood that the information would directly inform their care. CONCLUSIONS: Interviewees had a largely positive opinion of the calculators, believing they could aid in discussions about expectations for pain and functional recovery after spine surgery. No single implementation strategy is likely to be successful, and strategies vary, even within the same healthcare system. Patients should be well-informed of how responses will be used to deliver better care, and concerns over how the calculators could impact payment and liability should be addressed prior to use. Future research is necessary to determine whether use of calculators improves management and outcomes for people seeking a surgical consult for spine pain.

Development of a machine learning algorithm to identify surgical candidates for hip and knee arthroplasty without in-person evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Arthroplasty care delivery is facing a growing supply-demand mismatch. To meet future demand for joint arthroplasty, systems will need to identify potential surgical candidates prior to evaluation by orthopaedic surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review was conducted at two academic medical centers and three community hospitals from March 1 to July 31, 2020 to identify new patient telemedicine encounters (without prior in-person evaluation) for consideration of hip or knee arthroplasty. The primary outcome was surgical indication for joint replacement. Five machine learning algorithms were developed to predict likelihood of surgical indication and assessed by discrimination, calibration, overall performance, and decision curve analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 158 patients underwent new patient telemedicine evaluation for consideration of THA, TKA, or UKA and 65.2% (n = 103) were indicated for operative intervention prior to in-person evaluation. The median age was 65 (interquartile range 59-70) and 60.8% were women. Variables found to be associated with operative intervention were radiographic degree of arthritis, prior trial of intra-articular injection, trial of physical therapy, opioid use, and tobacco use. In the independent testing set (n = 46) not used for algorithm development, the stochastic gradient boosting algorithm achieved the best performance with AUC 0.83, calibration intercept 0.13, calibration slope 1.03, Brier score 0.15 relative to a null model Brier score of 0.23, and higher net benefit than the default alternatives on decision curve analysis. CONCLUSION: We developed a machine learning algorithm to identify potential surgical candidates for joint arthroplasty in the setting of osteoarthritis without an in-person evaluation or physical examination. If externally validated, this algorithm could be deployed by various stakeholders, including patients, providers, and health systems, to direct appropriate next steps in patients with osteoarthritis and improve efficiency in identifying surgical candidates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Learning From England's Best Practice Tariff: Process Measure Pay-for-Performance Can Improve Hip Fracture Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate England's Best Practice Tariff (BPT) and consider potential implications for Medicare patients should the US adopt a similar plan. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Since the beginning of the Affordable Care Act, Medicare has renewed efforts to improve the outcomes of older adults through introduction of an expanding set of alternative-payment models. Among trauma patients, recommended arrangements met with mixed success given concerns about the heterogeneous nature of trauma patients and resulting outcome variation. A novel approach taken for hip fractures in England could offer a viable alternative. METHODS: Linear regression, interrupted time-series, difference-in-difference, and counterfactual models of 2000 to 2016 Medicare (US), HES-APC (England) death certificate-linked claims (≥65 years) were used to: track US hip fracture trends, look at changes in English hip fracture trends before-and-after BPT implementation, compare changes in US-versus-English mortality, and estimate total/theoretical lives saved. RESULTS: A total of 806,036 English and 3,221,109 US hospitalizations were included. After BPT implementation, England's 30-day mortality decreased by 2.6 percentage-points (95%CI: 1.7-3.5) from a baseline of 9.9% (relative reduction 26.3%). 90- and 365-day mortality decreased by 5.6 and 5.4 percentage-points. 30/90/365-day readmissions also declined with a concurrent shortening of hospital length-of-stay. From 2000 to 2016, US outcomes were stagnant (P > 0.05), resulting in an inversion of the countries' mortality and >38,000 potential annual US lives saved. CONCLUSIONS: Process measure pay-for-performance led to significant improvements in English hip fracture outcomes. As efforts to improve US older adult health continue to increase, there are important lessons to be learned from a successful initiative like the BPT.

Does Operative Management of Epidural Abscesses Increase Healthcare Expenditures up to 1 Year After Treatment?

BACKGROUND: The incidence of spinal epidural abscesses is increasing. What is more, they are associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Advances in diagnostic imaging and antibiotic therapies have made earlier diagnosis and nonoperative management feasible in appropriately selected patients. Nonoperative treatment also has the advantage of lower immediate healthcare charges; however, it is unknown whether initial nonoperative care leads to higher healthcare charges long term. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does operative intervention generate higher charges than nonoperative treatment over the course of 1 year after the initial treatment of spinal epidural abscesses? (2) Does the treatment of spinal epidural abscesses in people who actively use intravenous drugs generate higher charges than management in people who do not? METHODS: This retrospective comparative study at two tertiary academic centers compared adult patients with spinal epidural abscesses treated operatively and nonoperatively from January 2016 through December 2017. Ninety-five patients were identified, with four excluded for lack of billing data and one excluded for concomitant intracranial abscess. Indications for operative management included new or progressive motor deficit, lack of response to nonoperative treatment including persistent or progressive systemic illness, or initial sepsis requiring urgent source control. Of the included patients, 52% (47 of 90) received operative treatment with no differences in age, gender, BMI, and Charlson comorbidity index between groups, nor any difference in 30-day all-cause readmission rate, 1-year reoperation rate, or 2-year mortality. Furthermore, 29% (26 of 90) of patients actively used intravenous drugs and were younger, with a lower BMI and lower Charlson comorbidity index, with no differences in 30-day all-cause readmission rate, 1-year reoperation rate, or 2-year mortality. Cumulative charges at the index hospital discharge and 90 days and 1 year after discharge were compared based on operative or nonoperative management and secondarily by intravenous drug use status. Medical records, laboratory results, and hospital billing data were reviewed for data extraction. Demographic factors including age, gender, region of abscess, intravenous drug use, and comorbidities were extracted, along with clinical factors such as symptoms and ambulatory function at presentation, spinal instability, intensive care unit admission, and complications. The primary outcome was charges associated with care at the index hospital discharge and 90 days and 1 year after discharge. All covariates extracted were included in this analysis using negative binomial regression that accounted for confounders and the nonparametric nature of charge data. Results are presented as an incidence rate ratio with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: After adjusting for demographic and clinical variables such as age, gender, BMI, ambulatory status, presence of mechanical instability, and intensive care unit admission among others, we found higher charges for the group treated with surgery compared with those treated nonoperatively at the index admission (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.62 [95% CI 1.35 to 1.94]; p < 0.001) and at 1 year (IRR 1.36 [95% CI 1.10 to 1.68]; p = 0.004). Adjusted analysis also showed that active intravenous drug use was also associated with higher charges at the index admission (IRR 1.57 [95% CI 1.16 to 2.14]; p = 0.004) but no difference at 1 year (IRR 1.11 [95% CI 0.79 to 1.57]; p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary teams caring for patients with spinal epidural abscesses should understand that the decreased charges associated with selecting nonoperative management during the index admission persist at 1 year with no difference in 30-day readmission rates, 1-year reoperation rates, or 2-year mortality. On the other hand, patients with active intravenous drug use have higher index admission charges that do not persist at 1 year, with no difference in 30-day readmission rates, 1-year reoperation rates, or 2-year mortality. These results suggest possible economic benefit to nonoperative management of epidural abscesses without increases in readmission or mortality rates, further tipping the scale in an evolving framework of clinical decision-making. Future studies should investigate if these economic implications are mirrored on the patient-facing side to determine whether any financial burden is shifted onto patients and their families in nonoperative management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Lateral interbody release for fused vertebrae via transpsoas approach in adult spinal deformity surgery: a preliminary report of radiographic and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Lateral interbody release (LIR) via a transpsoas lateral approach is a surgical strategy to address degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) patients with anterior autofusion of vertebral segments. This study aimed to characterize the clinical and radiographic outcomes of this lumbar reconstruction strategy using LIR to achieve anterior column correction. METHODS: Data for 21 fused vertebrae in 17 consecutive patients who underwent LIR between January 2014 and March 2020 were reviewed. Demographic and intraoperative data were recorded. Radiographic parameters were assessed preoperatively and at final follow-up, including segmental lordotic angle (SLA), segmental coronal angle (SCA), bone union rate, pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt, sacral slope, PI-LL mismatch, sagittal vertical axis, Cobb angle, and deviation of the C7 plumb line from the central sacral vertical line. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) scores for low back and leg pain, and the short form 36 health survey questionnaire (SF-36) postoperatively and at final follow-up. Complications were also assessed. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 70.3 ± 4.8 years and all patients were female. Average follow-up period was 28.4 ± 15.3 months. Average procedural time to perform LIR was 21.3 ± 9.7 min and was not significantly different from traditional lateral interbody fusion at other levels. Blood loss per single segment during LIR was 38.7 ± 53.2 mL. Fusion rate was 100.0% in this cohort. SLA improved significantly from - 7.6 ± 9.2 degrees preoperatively to 7.0 ± 8.8 degrees at final observation and SCA improved significantly from 19.1 ± 7.8 degrees preoperatively to 8.7 ± 5.9 degrees at final observation (P < 0.0001, and < 0.0001, respectively). All spinopelvic and coronal parameters, as well as ODI and VAS, improved significantly. Incidence of peri- and postoperative complications such as iliopsoas muscle weakness and leg numbness in patients who underwent LIR was as much as XLIF. Incidence of postoperative mechanical failure following LIR was also similar to XLIF. Reoperation rate was 11.8%. However, there were no reoperations associated with LIR segments. CONCLUSIONS: The LIR technique for anterior column realignment of fused vertebrae in the context of severe ASD may be an option of a safe and effective surgical strategy.

Telemedicine visits generate accurate surgical plans across orthopaedic subspecialties.

INTRODUCTION: The role of telemedicine is rapidly evolving across medical specialties and orthopaedics. The utility of telemedicine to identify operative candidates and determine surgical plans has yet to be demonstrated. We sought to assess whether surgical plans proposed following telemedicine visits changed after subsequent in-person interaction across orthopaedic subspecialties. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified all elective telemedicine encounters across two academic institutions from March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020. We identified patients indicated for surgery with a specific surgical plan during the virtual visit. The surgical plans delineated during the telemedicine encounter were then compared to final pre-operative plans documented following subsequent in-person evaluation. Changes in the surgical plan between telemedicine and in-person encounters were defined using a standardised schema. Regression analysis was used to evaluate factors associated with a change in surgical plan between visits across specialties, including the number of virtual examination manoeuvres performed. RESULTS: We identified 303 instances of a patient being indicated for orthopaedic surgery during a telemedicine encounter. In 11 cases (4%), the plan was changed between telemedicine and subsequent in-person encounter. No plans were changed amongst patients indicated for joint arthroplasty and foot and ankle surgery, whilst 4% of plans were changed amongst sports surgery and upper extremity/shoulder surgery. Surgical plans had the highest rate of change amongst spine surgery patients (8%). There was notable variability in the conduct of virtual examinations across subspecialties. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the capability of telemedicine to support development of accurate surgical plans for orthopaedic patients across several subspecialties. Our findings also highlight the substantial variation in the utilisation of physical examination manoeuvres conducted via telemedicine across institutions, subspecialties, and providers. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY TYPE: Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

Where Is the Value in Ambulatory Versus Inpatient Surgery?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the effect of index surgical care setting on perioperative costs and readmission rates across 4 common elective general surgery procedures. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Facility fees seem to be a driving force behind rising US healthcare costs, and inpatient-based fees are significantly higher than those associated with ambulatory services. Little is known about factors influencing where patients undergo elective surgery. METHODS: All-payer claims data from the 2014 New York and Florida Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project were used to identify 73,724 individuals undergoing an index hernia repair, primary total or partial thyroidectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, or laparoscopic appendectomy in either the inpatient or ambulatory care setting. Inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted gamma generalized linear and logistic regression was employed to compare costs and 30-day readmission between inpatient and ambulatory-based surgery, respectively. RESULTS: Approximately 87% of index surgical cases were performed in the ambulatory setting. Adjusted mean index surgical costs were significantly lower among ambulatory versus inpatient cases for all 4 procedures (P < 0.001 for all). Adjusted odds of experiencing a 30-day readmission after thyroidectomy [odds ratio (OR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53-0.93; P = 0.03], hernia repair (OR 0.28, 95% CI, 0.20-0.40; P < 0.001), and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (OR 0.37, 95% CI, 0.32-0.43; P < 0.001) were lower in the ambulatory versus inpatient setting. Readmission rates among ambulatory versus inpatient-based laparoscopic appendectomy were comparable (OR 0.63, 95% CI, 0.31-1.26; P = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory surgery offers significant costs savings and generally superior 30-day outcomes relative to inpatient-based care for appropriately selected patients across 4 common elective general surgery procedures.