Readmission and Resource Utilization in Patients From Socioeconomically Distressed Communities Following Lumbar Fusion

Impact of Limited Access to Surgical Care in Medically Underserved Communities

Summary/BackgroundMedically underserved communities and ethnic minorities constitute a significant portion of the vulnerable population within the United States. Recent changes in the health care structure, rising inflation with a decline in median household income, and the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have disproportionately impacted communities of low socioeconomic status. Healthcare providers and federal organizations must be aware of how these factors influence access to surgical care to tailor treatment, interventions, and policies better to meet the needs of these populations.MethodWe systematically reviewed 19 articles to identify key factors influencing barriers to health care for minority populations and how the dynamic changes in healthcare structures can further exacerbate this divide.DiscussionMedically underserved populations face significant barriers to health care due to socioeconomic factors like income, housing instability, and lack of insurance. These areas often have shortages of primary care providers, access to healthy foods, and high-value health care that may lead to unfavorable outcomes. Poor access and utilization of health services can also affect hospital systems, leading to decreased funding and increased hospital closures. Despite federal intervention and policy changes, the need for further support for rural healthcare institutions and underserved populations remains, requiring financial assistance, resource allocation improvements, and incentives for healthcare providers and investors.ConclusionHealthcare systems can work towards bridging the gap in access to surgical services by implementing targeted outreach programs and ensuring equitable resource distribution. Additionally, fostering partnerships with community organizations can enhance awareness and address specific barriers these populations face.

Community-level Socioeconomic Status Is a Poor Predictor of Outcomes Following Lumbar and Cervical Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare 3 socioeconomic status (SES) indexes and evaluate associations with outcomes after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or lumbar fusion.

BACKGROUND DATA

Socioeconomic disparities affect patients' baseline health and clinical outcomes following spine surgery. It is still unclear whether community-level indexes are accurate surrogates for patients' socioeconomic status (SES) and whether they are predictive of postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing ACDF (N=1189) or lumbar fusion (N=1136) from 2014 to 2020 at an urban tertiary medical center were retrospectively identified. Patient characteristics, patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), and surgical outcomes (90-day readmissions, complications, and nonhome discharge) were collected from the electronic medical record. SES was extracted from 3 indexes (Area Deprivation Index, Social Vulnerability Index, and Distressed Communities Index). Patients were classified into SES quartiles for bivariate and multivariate regression analysis. We utilized Youden's index to construct receiver operating characteristic curves for all surgical outcomes using indexes as continuous variables.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, lumbar fusion patients in the poorest ADI community exhibited the greatest ODI ( P =0.001) and in the poorest DCI and SVI communities exhibited worse VAS back ( P <0.001 and 0.002, respectively). Preoperatively, ACDF patients in the lowest DCI community had significantly worse MCS-12, VAS neck, and NDI, and in the poorest ADI community had worse MCS-12 and NDI. There were no differences in the magnitude of improvement for any PROM. All indexes performed poorly at predicting surgical outcomes (AUC: 0.467-0.636, all P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Community-wide SES indexes are not accurate proxies for individual SES. While patients from poorer communities present with worse symptoms, community-level SES is not associated with overall outcomes following spine fusion. Patient-specific factors should be employed when attempting to stratify patients based on SES given the inherent limitations present with these indexes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Higher socioeconomic status is associated with greater rates of surgical resource utilization prior to spine fusion surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Previous research has demonstrated an association between socioeconomic status (SES) and patient health, specifically noting that patients of lower SES have poor health outcomes. Understanding how social factors, including socioeconomic status (SES), relate to disparities in health outcomes is critical to closing gaps in equitable care to patients. While several studies have examined the effect of SES on postoperative spine outcomes, there is limited spine literature evaluating SES in the context of barriers to spine care.

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this study was to determine if socioeconomic status is associated with resource utilization prior to spine surgery consultation. As part of a subanalysis, this paper also explores the effect of other social factors on previsit resource utilization.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Adult patients who underwent elective cervical or lumbar spinal fusion between 2020 and 2021.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Previsit resource utilization including 1) epidural steroid injection, 2) opioid use, 3) physical therapy, 4) prior spine surgeon, and 5) prior spine surgery.

METHODS

Each patient was assigned a "distressed score" using the Distressed Communities Index (DCI) and a socioeconomic status (SES) score using the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) based on their zip code. Patient charts were manually reviewed to collect data regarding previsit resource utilization. The cohort was analyzed based on DCI quintile and SVI quartile. Additional analyses were conducted based on marital status and race.

RESULTS

Our study included 996 patients in the final analysis. Based on DCI, patients from prosperous communities were more likely to have previously visited a spine surgeon (13.2% (prosperous) vs 7.58% vs 6.92% vs 9.09% vs 3.70% (distressed), p=.015) and to have had prior spine surgery (11.1% (prosperous) vs 9.57% vs 9.09% vs 2.52% vs 6.36% (distressed), p=.015). Similarly, when evaluated based on SES SVI, patients who lived in a low-risk community were more likely to have previously visited a spine surgeon (13.0% low-risk vs 7.26% low-medium risk vs 16.9% medium-high risk vs 10.6% high risk, p=.049) and to have had prior spine surgery (13.0% low-risk vs 7.26% vs 16.9% vs 10.6% high risk, p=.030). When evaluated based on marital status, there was no difference in any resource utilization. Non-Black and non-White patients were more likely to have tried physical therapy compared to their black and white counterparts (76.9% (other) vs 60.9% (Black) vs 54.3% (White), p=.026).

CONCLUSION

This study examined the relationship between socioeconomic status and resource utilization and found a positive correlation between higher social standing and access to spine surgery and spine surgeons. These findings demonstrate a propensity for earlier evaluation of spine-related conditions among patients from prosperous communities compared to patients from less prosperous communities.

The Effect of Community-Level Socioeconomic Status on Surgical Outcomes Following Revision Lumbar Fusion

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of community-level socioeconomic status (SES) on surgical outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following revision lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent revision lumbar fusion surgery from 2011-2021 were grouped by Distressed Community Index (DCI) into Prosperous, Comfortable, Mid-tier, and At-Risk/Distressed cohorts. Demographics, surgical information, and PROMs were compared based on DCI community status. Outcome measures were collected preoperatively, 3 months postoperatively, and 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Eight hundred fifty three patients were included in the final cohort. There was no difference in terms of surgical approach or utilization of a staged procedure between the patient groups. Readmission (P = 0.752) and reoperation rates (P = 0.467) were similar across all community groups. Furthermore, for patients who required reoperation, the incision and drainage or revision surgery rate in each cohort was not statistically different (P = 0.902). Prosperous community patients reported significantly lower Visual Analog Scale Back pain preoperatively in comparison to patients from other DCI communities. All groups experienced a similar degree of postoperative improvement in Visual Analog Scale Back scores (P = 0.271). There were no other differences in preoperative or postoperative PROMs analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are socioeconomic differences based on DCI, community-level SES was not predictive of worse surgical outcomes following revision lumbar fusion. Patients from the most distressed communities were able to achieve similar improvement after revision surgery. This should encourage spine surgeons to feel comfortable discussing an indicated revision lumbar procedure with patients, and not view SES as a barrier to successful outcomes.

Socioeconomic Status Impacts Length of Stay and Nonhome Discharge Disposition After Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To examine how community-level economic disadvantage impacts short-term outcomes following posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The effects of socioeconomic factors, measured by the Distress Community Index (DCI), on postoperative outcomes after PCDF are underexplored. By understanding the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on PCDF outcomes, disparities in care can be addressed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of 554 patients who underwent PCDF for cervical spondylotic myelopathy between 2017 and 2022. SES was assessed using DCI obtained from patient zip codes. Patients were stratified into quintiles from Prosperous to Distressed based on DCI. Bivariate analyses and multivariate regressions were performed to evaluate the associations between social determinants of health and surgical outcomes, including length of stay, home discharge, complications, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Patients living in at-risk/distressed communities were more likely to be Black (53.3%). Patients living in at-risk/distressed communities had the longest hospitalization (6.24 d vs. prosperous: 3.92, P =0.006). Significantly less at-risk/distressed patients were discharged home without additional services (37.3% vs. mid-tier: 52.5% vs. comfortable: 53.4% vs. prosperous: 56.4%, P <0.001). On multivariate analysis, residing in an at-risk/distressed community was independently associated with nonhome discharge [odds ratio (OR): 2.28, P =0.007] and longer length of stay (E:1.54, P =0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged communities experience longer hospitalizations and are more likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility following PCDF. Social and economic barriers should be addressed as part of presurgical counseling and planning in elective spine surgery to mitigate these disparities and improve the quality and value of health care delivery, regardless of socioeconomic status.

Preoperative Oswestry Disability Index Should not be Utilized to Determine Surgical Eligibility for Patients Requiring Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spine Disease

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) thresholds might affect minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement following lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

As payers invest in alternative payment models, some are suggesting threshold cutoffs of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) in reimbursement approvals for orthopedic procedures. The feasibility of this has not been investigated in spine surgery.

MATERIALS/METHODS

We included all adult patients undergoing one to three-level primary lumbar fusion at a single urban tertiary academic center from 2014 to 2020. ODI was collected preoperatively and one year postoperatively. We implemented theoretical threshold cutoffs at increments of 10. MCID was set at 14.3. The percent of patients meeting MCID were determined among patients "approved" or "denied" at each threshold. At each threshold, the positive predictive value (PPV) for MCID attainment was calculated.

RESULTS

A total 1368 patients were included and 62.4% (N=364) achieved MCID. As the ODI thresholds increased, a greater percent of patients in each group reached the MCID. At the lowest ODI threshold, 6.58% (N=90) of patients would be denied, rising to 20.2%, 39.5%, 58.4%, 79.9%, and 91.4% at ODI thresholds of 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70, respectively. The PPV increased from 0.072 among patients with ODI>20 to 0.919 at ODI>70. The number of patients denied a clinical improvement in the denied category per patient achieving the MCID increased at each threshold (ODI>20: 1.96; ODI>30: 2.40; ODI>40: 2.75; ODI>50: 3.03; ODI>60: 3.54; ODI>70: 3.75).

CONCLUSION

Patients with poorer preoperative ODI are significantly more likely to achieve MCID following lumbar spine fusion at all ODI thresholds. Setting a preoperative ODI threshold for surgical eligibility will restrict access to patients who may benefit from spine fusion despite ODI>20 demonstrating the lowest predictive value for MCID achievement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

The Socioeconomic Distressed Communities Index Predicts 90-Day Mortality Among Intracranial Tumor Patients

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic status (SES) is a major determinant of quality of life and outcomes. However, SES remains difficult to measure comprehensively. Distress communities index (DCI), a composite of 7 socioeconomic factors, has been increasingly recognized for its correlation with poor outcomes. As a result, the objective of the present study is to determine the predictive value of the DCI on outcomes following intracranial tumor surgery.

METHODS

A single institution, retrospective review was conducted to identify adult intracranial tumor patients undergoing resection (2016-2021). Patient ZIP codes were matched to DCI and stratified by DCI quartiles (low:0-24.9, low-intermediate:25-49.9, intermediate-high:50-74.9, high:75-100). Univariate followed by multivariate regressions assessed the effects of DCI on postoperative outcomes. Receiver operating curves were generated for significant outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2389 patients were included: 1015 patients (42.5%) resided in low distress communities, 689 (28.8%) in low-intermediate distress communities, 445 (18.6%) in intermediate-high distress communities, and 240 (10.0%) in high distress communities. On multivariate analysis, risk of fracture (adjusted odds ratio = 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.26-2.05, P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio = 1.58, 95% confidence interval 1.21-2.06, P < 0.001) increased with increasing DCI quartile. Good predictive accuracy was observed for both models, with receiver operating curves of 0.746 (95% CI 0.720-0.766) for fracture and 0.743 (95% CI 0.714-0.772) for 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Intracranial tumor patients from distressed communities are at increased risk for adverse events and death in the postoperative period. DCI may be a useful, holistic measure of SES that can help risk stratifying patients and should be considered when building healthcare pathways.

The Impact of Socioeconomic Status on the Presence of Advance Care Planning Documents in Patients With Acute Cervical Spinal Cord Injury

INTRODUCTION

Patients presenting with spinal cord injury (SCI) often times have notable deficits or polytrauma and may require urgent decision making for early management. However, their presentation may affect decision-making ability. Although advance care planning (ACP) may help guide spine surgeons as to patient preferences, the rate at which they are available and disparities in ACP completion are still not understood. The objective of this study was to evaluate disparities in the completion of ACP among patients with acute SCI.

METHODS

All patients presenting with cervical SCI to the emergency department at an urban, tertiary level I trauma center from 2010 to 2021 were identified from a prospective database of all consults evaluated by the spine service. Each patient's medical record was reviewed to assess for the presence of ACP documents such as living will, power of attorney, or advance directive. Community-level socioeconomic status was assessed using the Distressed Communities Index. Bivariable and multivariable analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We identified 424 patients: 104 (24.5%) of whom had ACP. Patients with ACP were older (64.8 versus 56.5 years, P = 0.001), more likely White (78.8% versus 71.9%, P = 0.057), and present with ASIA Impairment Scale grade A SCI (21.2% versus 12.8%, P = 0.054), although the latter two did not reach statistical significance. On multivariable logistic regression, patients residing in at-risk communities were significantly less likely to have ACP documents compared with those in prosperous communities (odds ratio [OR]: 0.29, P = 0.03). Although patients living in distressed communities were less likely to complete ACP compared with those in prosperous communities (OR 0.50, P = 0.066), this did not meet statistical significance. Female patients were also less likely to have ACP (OR: 0.43, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Female patients and those from at-risk communities are markedly less likely to complete ACP. Attention to possible disparities during admission and ACP discussions may help ensure that patients of all backgrounds have treatment goals documented.

In-hospital mortality trends after surgery for traumatic thoracolumbar injury: A national inpatient sample database study

Introduction

Given the increasing incidence of traumatic thoracolumbar injuries in recent years, studies have sought to investigate potential risk factors for outcomes in these patients.

Research question

The aim of this study was to investigate trends and risk factors for in-hospital mortality after fusion for traumatic thoracolumbar injury.

Materials and methods

Patients undergoing thoracolumbar fusion after traumatic injury were queried from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2012 to 2017. Analysis was performed to identify risk factors for inpatient mortality after surgery.

Results

Patients in 2017 were on average older (51.0 vs. 48.5, P = 0.004), had more admitting diagnoses (15.5 vs. 10.7, p < 0.001), were less likely to be White (75.8% vs. 81.2%, p = 0.006), were from a ZIP code with a higher median income quartile (Quartile 1: 31.4% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.011), and were more likely to have Medicare as a primary payer (22.9% vs. 30.1%, p < 0.001). Bivariate analysis of demographics and surgical characteristics demonstrated that patients in the in-hospital mortality group (n = 90) were older (70.2 vs. 49.6, p < 0.001), more likely to be male (74.4% vs. 62.8%, p = 0.031), had a great number of admitted diagnoses (21.3 vs. 12.7, p < 0.001), and were more likely to be insured by Medicare (70.0% vs. 27.0%, p < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis found age (OR 1.06, p < 0.001) and Black race (OR 3.71, p = 0.007) were independently associated with in-hospital mortality.

Conclusion

Our study of nationwide, traumatic thoracolumbar fusion procedures from 2012 to 2017 in the NIS database found older, black patients were at increased risk for in-hospital mortality after surgery.