Hospital and surgeon variation in complications and repeat surgery following incident lumbar fusion for common degenerative diagnoses

Implementation of the American- College of Physicians Guideline for Low Back Pain (IMPACt-LBP): protocol for a healthcare systems embedded multisite pragmatic cluster-randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) is a key source of medical costs and disability, impacting over 31 million Americans at any given time and resulting in US$100-US$200 billion per year in total healthcare costs. LBP is one of the leading causes of ambulatory care visits to US physicians; problematically, these visits often result in treatments such as opioids, surgery or advanced imaging that can lead to more harm than benefit. The American College of Physicians (ACP) Guideline for Low Back Pain recommends patients receive non-pharmacological interventions as a first-line treatment. Roadmaps exist for multidisciplinary collaborative care that include well-trained primary contact clinicians with specific expertise in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions, such as physical therapists and doctors of chiropractic, as first-line providers for LBP. These clinicians, sometimes referred to as primary spine practitioners (PSPs) routinely employ many of the non-pharmacological approaches recommended by the ACP guideline, including spinal manipulation and exercise. Important foundational work has demonstrated that such care is feasible and safe, and results in improved physical function, less pain, fewer opioid prescriptions and reduced utilisation of healthcare services. However, this treatment approach for LBP has yet to be widely implemented or tested in a multisite clinical trial in real-world practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Implementation of the American College of Physicians Guideline for Low Back Pain trial is a health system-embedded pragmatic cluster-randomised trial that will examine the effect of offering initial contact with a PSP compared with usual primary care for LBP. Twenty-six primary care clinics within three healthcare systems were randomised 1:1 to PSP intervention or usual primary care. Primary outcomes are pain interference and physical function using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Forms collected via patient self-report among a planned sample of 1800 participants at baseline, 1, 3 (primary end point), 6 and 12 months. A subset of participants enrolled early in the trial will also receive a 24-month assessment. An economic analysis and analysis of healthcare utilisation will be conducted as well as an evaluation of the patient, provider and policy-level barriers and facilitators to implementing the PSP model using a mixed-methods process evaluation approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study received ethics approval from Advarra, Duke University, Dartmouth Health and the University of Iowa Institutional Review Boards. Study data will be made available on completion, in compliance with National Institutes of Health data sharing policies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05626049.

Variations in surgical practice and short-term outcomes for degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spondylolisthesis: do surgeon training and experience matter?

For diverse procedures, sizable geographic variation exists in rates and outcomes of surgery, including for degenerative lumbar spine conditions. Little is known about how surgeon training and experience are associated with surgeon-level variations in spine surgery practice and short-term outcomes. This retrospective observational analysis characterized variations in surgical operations for degenerative lumbar scoliosis or spondylolisthesis, two common age-related conditions. The study setting was two large spine surgery centers in one region during 2017-19. Using data (International Classification of Diseases-10th edition and current procedural terminology codes) extracted from electronic health record systems, we characterized surgeon-level variations in practice (use of instrumented fusion - a more extensive procedure that involves device-related risks) and short-term postoperative outcomes (major in-hospital complications and readmissions). Next, we tested for associations between surgeon training (specialty and spine fellowship) and experience (career stage and operative volume) and use of instrumented fusion as well as outcomes. Eighty-nine surgeons performed 2481 eligible operations. For the study diagnoses, spine surgeons exhibited substantial variation in operative volume, use of instrumented fusion, and postoperative outcomes. Among surgeons above the median operative volume, use of instrumented fusion ranged from 0% to >90% for scoliosis and 9% to 100% for spondylolisthesis, while rates of major in-hospital complications ranged from 0% to 25% for scoliosis and from 0% to 14% for spondylolisthesis. For scoliosis, orthopedic surgeons were more likely than neurosurgeons to perform instrumented fusion for scoliosis [49% vs. 33%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.3-4.2, P-value = .006] as were fellowship-trained surgeons (49% vs. 25%, OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.6-5.8; P = .001). Fellowship-trained surgeons had lower readmission rates. Surgeons with higher operative volumes used instrumented fusion more often (OR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2, P < .05 for both diagnoses) and had lower rates of major in-hospital complications (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97; P = .006). Surgical practice can vary greatly for degenerative spine conditions, even within the same region and among colleagues at the same institution. Surgical specialty and subspecialty, in addition to recent operative volume, can be linked to variations in spine surgeons' practice patterns and outcomes. These findings reinforce the notion that residency and fellowship training may contribute to variation and present important opportunities to optimize surgical practice over the course of surgeons' careers. Future efforts to reduce unexplained variation in surgical practice could test interventions focused on graduate medical education. Graphical Abstract.

Risk factors for early reoperation in patients after posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. A propensity-matched cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Reoperation is usually associated with poor results and increased morbidity and hospital costs. However, the rates, causes, and risk factors for reoperation in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery remain controversial. This study aimed to identify the risk factors for early reoperation after posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery and to compare the clinical outcomes between patients who underwent reoperation and those who did not.

METHODS

We investigated a multicenter medical record database of 1263 patients who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery between 2012 and 2015. A total of 72 (5.7%) reoperations within two years after surgery were identified and were propensity-matched for age, sex, number of fusion segments, and surgeon's experience.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 114 patients (57 who underwent reoperation (R group) and 57 who did not (C group)). The mean age was 62.6 ± 13.4 years, with 78 men and 36 women. The mean number of fused segments was 1.2 ± 0.5. Surgical site infection was the most common cause of reoperation. There were significant differences in the incidence of diabetes mellitus (p = 0.024), preoperative ambulation status (p = 0.046), and ASA grade (p < 0.001) between the C and R groups. The recovery rate of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score was significantly lower in the R group compared to the C group (R: 50.5 ± 28.8%, C: 63.9 ± 33.7%, p = 0.024). There were significant differences in the bone fusion rate (R: 63.2%, C: 96.5%, p < 0.001) and incidence of screw loosening (R: 31.6%; C: 10.5%; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Diabetes mellitus, preoperative ambulation status, and ASA grade were significant risk factors for early reoperation following posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. The patients who underwent early reoperation had worse clinical outcomes than those who did not.

Risk Factors for Surgical Site Complications After Outpatient Lumbar Spine Surgery

Background: With the recent increase of minor lumbar spine surgeries being performed in the outpatient setting, there is a need for information on factors that contribute to post-operative complications for these surgeries. Patients and Methods: This was a prospective observational study examining risk factors for self-reported post-operative drainage in patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery. Patient surveys and the hospital's electronic medical records were used to collect data on patient demographic, patient lifestyle, and surgical variables. Univariable and multivariable analyses in addition to a random forest classifier were performed. Results: A total of 146 patients were enrolled in the study with 111 patients included in the final analysis. The average age and body mass index (BMI) of these patients was 66 and 27.8, respectively. None of the 146 patients in this study developed surgical site infection. Older age, no steroid use, no pet ownership, and spine surgery involving two or more levels were all found to be risk factors for wound drainage. Conclusions: This study evaluated lifestyle, environmental, and traditional risk factors for surgical site drainage that have not been explored cohesively related to outpatient orthopedic surgery. Consistent with the existing literature, outpatient spine surgery involving two or more levels was most strongly associated with surgical site drainage after surgery.

Evaluation of instrumentation and pedicle screw design for posterior lumbar fixation: A pre-clinical in vivo/ex vivo ovine model

Background

Stabilization procedures of the lumbar spine are routinely performed for various conditions, such as spondylolisthesis and scoliosis. Spine surgery has become even more common, with the incidence rates increasing ~30% between 2004 and 2015. Various solutions to increase the success of lumbar stabilization procedures have been proposed, ranging from the device's geometrical configuration to bone quality enhancement via grafting and, recently, through modified drilling instrumentation. Conventional (manual) instrumentation renders the excavated bony fragments ineffective, whereas the "additive" osseodensification rotary drilling compacts the bone fragments into the osteotomy walls, creating nucleating sites for regeneration.

Methods

This study aimed to compare both manual versus rotary Osseodensification (OD) instrumentation as well as two different pedicle screw thread designs in a controlled split animal model in posterior lumbar stabilization to determine the feasibility and potential advantages of each variable with respect to mechanical stability and histomorphology. A total of 164 single thread (82 per thread configuration), pedicle screws (4.5 × 35 mm) were used for the study. Each animal received eight pedicles (four per thread design) screws, which were placed in the lumbar spine of 21 adult sheep. One side of the lumbar spine underwent rotary osseodensification instrumentation, while the contralateral underwent conventional, hand, instrumentation. The animals were euthanized after 6- and 24-weeks of healing, and the vertebrae were removed for biomechanical and histomorphometric analyses. Pullout strength and histologic analysis were performed on all harvested samples.

Results

The rotary instrumentation yielded statistically (p = 0.026) greater pullout strength (1060.6 N ± 181) relative to hand instrumentation (769.3 N ± 181) at the 24-week healing time point. Histomorphometric analysis exhibited significantly higher degrees of bone to implant contact for the rotary instrumentation only at the early healing time point (6 weeks), whereas bone area fraction occupancy was statistically higher for rotary instrumentation at both healing times. The levels of soft tissue infiltration were lower for pedicle screws placed in osteotomies prepared using OD instrumentation relative to hand instrumentation, independent of healing time.

Conclusion

The rotary instrumentation yielded enhanced mechanical and histologic results relative to the conventional hand instrumentation in this lumbar spine stabilization model.

The Doctors' Effect on Patients' Physical Health Outcomes Beyond the Intervention: A Methodological Review

Background

Previous research suggests that when a treatment is delivered, patients' outcomes may vary systematically by medical practitioner.

Objective

To conduct a methodological review of studies reporting on the effect of doctors on patients' physical health outcomes and to provide recommendations on how this effect could be measured and reported in a consistent and appropriate way.

Methods

The data source was 79 included studies and randomized controlled trials from a systematic review of doctors' effects on patients' physical health. We qualitatively assessed the studies and summarized how the doctors' effect was measured and reported.

Results

The doctors' effects on patients' physical health outcomes were reported as fixed effects, identifying high and low outliers, or random effects, which estimate the variation in patient health outcomes due to the doctor after accounting for all available variables via the intra-class correlation coefficient. Multivariable multilevel regression is commonly used to adjust for patient risk, doctor experience and other demographics, and also to account for the clustering effect of hospitals in estimating both fixed and random effects.

Conclusion

This methodological review identified inconsistencies in how the doctor's effect on patients' physical health outcomes is measured and reported. For grading doctors from worst to best performances and estimating random effects, specific recommendations are given along with the specific data points to report.

Is There a Surgeons’ Effect on Patients’ Physical Health, Beyond the Intervention, That Requires Further Investigation? A Systematic Review

Objective

To find and review published papers researching surgeons’ effects on patients’ physical health. Clinical outcomes of surgery patients with similar prognoses cannot be fully explained by surgeon skill or experience. Just as there are “hospital” and “psychotherapist” effects, there may be “surgeons” effects that persist after controlling for known variables like patient health and operation riskiness.

Methods

Cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of any surgical intervention, which, after multivariate adjustment, either showed proportion of variance in patients’ physical health outcomes due to surgeons (random effects) or graded surgeons from best to worst (fixed effects). Studies with <15 surgeons or only ascribing surgeons’ effects to known variables excluded. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO were used for search until June 2020. Manual search for papers referring/referred by resulting studies. Risk of bias assessed by Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale.

Results

Included studies: 52 cohort studies and three RCTs of 52,436+ surgeons covering 102 outcomes (33 unique). Studies either graded surgeons from best to worst or calculated the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), the percentage of patients’ variation due to surgeons, in diverse ways. Sixteen studies showed exceptionally good and/or bad performers with confidence intervals wholly above or below the average performance. ICCs ranged from 0 to 47%, median 4.0%. There are no well-established reporting standards; highly heterogeneous reporting, therefore no meta-analysis.

Discussion

Interpretation: There is a surgeons' effect on patients’ physical health for many types of surgeries and outcomes, ranging from small to substantial. Surgeons with exceptional patient outcomes appear regularly even after accounting for all known confounding variables. Many existing cohort studies and RCTs could be reanalyzed for surgeons’ effects especially after methodological reporting guidelines are published.

Conclusion

In terms of patient outcomes, it can matter which surgeon is chosen. Surgeons with exceptional patient outcomes are worth studying further.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/pL-eGyAGhSk

Lumbar Decompression Versus Spinal Fusion in a Private Outpatient Setting: A Retrospective Study with Three Years of Follow-up

Objective  To compare pain, function, quality of life and adverse events of lumbar decompression and spinal fusion in patients with degenerative spinal pathologies who participated in a second opinion program for spinal surgeries with a 36-month follow-up.

Methods  The data for this retrospective cohort were withdrawn from a private healthcare system between June 2011 and January 2014. The study sample consisted of 71 patients with a lumbar spine surgical referral. The outcomes for the comparisons between lumbar decompression and spinal fusion were quality of life (evaluated through the EuroQoL 5D), pain (measured by the Numerical Rating Scale) and function (assessed through the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) measured at baseline, and at 12 and 36 months after the surgical procedures. The definitions of recovery were established by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The baseline differences between the groups were analyzed by non-paired t -test, and the differences in instrument scores between time points, by generalized mixed models. The results were presented as mean values adjusted by the models and 95% confidence intervals.

Results  Concerning the surgical techniques, 22 patients were submitted to spinal fusion and 49 patients, to lumbar decompression. As for the comparisons of the findings before and after the surgical interventions, the MCID was achieved in all outcomes regarding quality of life, pain and function at both time points when compared to baseline scores Moreover, concerning the complication rates, only lumbar decompression presented a surgical rate of 4% ( n  = 3) for recurrence of lumbar disc hernia.

Conclusion  Patients with degenerative spinal pathologies present improvements in long-term outcomes of pain, function and quality of life which are clinically significant, no matter the surgical intervention.

Is Discretionary Care Associated with Safety Among Medicare Beneficiaries Undergoing Spine Surgery?

BACKGROUND

Spine surgery and its corresponding costs have increased in recent years and are variable across geographic regions. Discretionary care is the component of spending variation that is independent of illness severity, age, and regional pricing. It is unknown whether greater discretionary care is associated with improved safety for patients undergoing spine surgery, as we would expect from value-based health care.

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of 5 spine surgery cohorts based on Medicare claims from 2013 to 2017. Patients were grouped into quintiles based on the Dartmouth Atlas End-of-Life Inpatient Care Index (EOL), reflecting regional spending variation attributed to discretionary care. Multivariable regression examined the association between discretionary care and safety measures while controlling for age, sex, race, comorbidity, and hospital features.

RESULTS

We observed a threefold to fourfold variation in 90-day episode-of-care cost across regions, depending on the cohort. Spine-specific spending was correlated with EOL quintile, confirming that spending variation is due more to discretionary care than it is to pricing, age, or illness severity. Greater spending across EOL quintiles was not associated with improved safety, and, in fact, was associated with poorer safety in some cohorts. For example, all-cause readmission was greater in the high-spending EOL quintile relative to the low-spending EOL quintile among the "fusion, except cervical" cohort (14.2% vs. 13.1%; OR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.20), the "complex fusion" cohort (28.0% vs. 25.4%; OR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.30), and the "cervical fusion" cohort (15.0% vs. 13.6%; OR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variation in spending was not explained by differences in illness severity, age, or pricing, and increased discretionary care did not enhance safety. These findings point to inefficient use of health-care resources, a potential focus of reform.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Variation in Surgeon Proficiency Scores and Association With Digit Replantation Outcomes

IMPORTANCE

Risk-adjusted variation in surgeon outcomes has been traditionally explained by surgeon volume and hospital infrastructure, yet it is unclear how a surgeon's operative proficiency directly contributes to their patients' outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the variation of surgeons' operative proficiency and investigate its association with surgical outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This case series was a retrospective analysis of all digit replantations and revascularizations at a single US university medical center between January 2000 and August 2020. Surgeons were assigned a proficiency score based on the expected procedure difficulty and outcomes from a sample of their cases. Surgeon proficiency scores were then used to determine associations with outcomes from subsequent cases. The expected difficulty of each case was calculated using a novel scoring system that applied pooled relative risks from a meta-analysis of risk factors for replantation and revascularization failure.

EXPOSURES

Digit replantation and revascularization.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Digit survival at 1-month follow up (case success) and number of complications.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients and 226 digits were treated by 11 surgeons with training in hand or microsurgery (mean [SD] age, 41.9 [15.2] years; 204 [90%] men); there were 116 replantations and 110 revascularizations. Surgeon proficiency scores ranged from 1.3 to 5.7, with a mean (SD) of 3.4 (1.4). Case success rates among surgeons varied from 20.0% to 90.5%, with a mean (SD) of 64.9%. Higher proficiency scores were associated with fewer case failures: each point increase was associated with 40% decreased odds of failure (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.94). Every 3-point increase in proficiency score was associated with 1 less complication (effect estimate, -0.29; 95% CI, -0.56 to 0.02). Surgeon proficiency score had a greater association with case failure than surgeon volume (16.7% vs 12.0%). The final model's association with case failure had an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.93.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Operative proficiency varied widely among practicing surgeons and accounted for 17% of estimative ability for success of digit replantation and revascularization. Greater surgeon proficiency was associated with better outcomes, indicating that the value of surgical care may be optimized by improving surgeon proficiency.

Administrative Data Are Unreliable for Ranking Hospital Performance Based on Serious Complications After Spine Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of administrative billing data.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the extent to which a metric of serious complications determined from administrative data can reliably profile hospital performance in spine fusion surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

While payers are increasingly focused on implementing pay-for-performance measures, quality metrics must reliably reflect true differences in performance among the hospitals profiled.

METHODS

We used State Inpatient Databases from nine states to characterize serious complications after elective cervical and thoracolumbar fusion. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to risk-adjust differences in case mix, along with variability from low case volumes. The reliability of this risk-stratified complication rate (RSCR) was assessed as the variation between hospitals that was not due to chance alone, calculated separately by fusion type and year. Finally, we estimated the proportion of hospitals that had sufficient case volumes to obtain reliable (>0.7) complication estimates.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2017 we identified 154,078 cervical and 213,133 thoracolumbar fusion surgeries. 4.2% of cervical fusion patients had a serious complication, and the median RSCR increased from 4.2% in 2010 to 5.5% in 2017. The reliability of the RSCR for cervical fusion was poor and varied substantially by year (range 0.04-0.28). Overall, 7.7% of thoracolumbar fusion patients experienced a serious complication, and the RSCR varied from 6.8% to 8.0% during the study period. Although still modest, the RSCR reliability was higher for thoracolumbar fusion (range 0.16-0.43). Depending on the study year, 0% to 4.5% of hospitals had sufficient cervical fusion case volume to report reliable (>0.7) estimates, whereas 15% to 36% of hospitals reached this threshold for thoracolumbar fusion.

CONCLUSION

A metric of serious complications was unreliable for benchmarking cervical fusion outcomes and only modestly reliable for thoracolumbar fusion. When assessed using administrative datasets, these measures appear inappropriate for high-stakes applications, such as public reporting or pay-for-performance.Level of Evidence: 3.

Osseodensification drilling vs conventional manual instrumentation technique for posterior lumbar fixation: Ex-vivo mechanical and histomorphological analysis in an ovine model

Lumbar fusion is a procedure associated with several indications, but screw failure remains a major complication, with an incidence ranging 10% to 50%. Several solutions have been proposed, ranging from more efficient screw geometry to enhance bone quality, conversely, drilling instrumentation have not been thoroughly explored. The conventional instrumentation (regular [R]) techniques render the bony spicules excavated impractical, while additive techniques (osseodensification [OD]) compact them against the osteotomy walls and predispose them as nucleating surfaces/sites for new bone. This work presents a case-controlled split model for in vivo/ex vivo comparison of R vs OD osteotomy instrumentation in posterior lumbar fixation in an ovine model to determine feasibility and potential advantages of the OD drilling technique in terms of mechanical and histomorphology outcomes. Eight pedicle screws measuring 4.5 mm × 45 mm were installed in each lumbar spine of eight adult sheep (four per side). The left side underwent R instrumentation, while the right underwent OD drilling. The animals were killed at 6- and 12-week and the vertebrae removed. Pullout strength and non-decalcified histologic analysis were performed. Significant mechanical stability differences were observed between OD and R groups at 6- (387 N vs 292 N) and 12-week (312 N vs 212 N) time points. Morphometric analysis did not detect significant differences in bone area fraction occupancy between R and OD groups, while it is to note that OD showed increased presence of bone spiculae. Mechanical pullout testing demonstrated that OD drilling provided higher degrees of implant anchoring as a function of time, whereas a significant reduction was observed for the R group.

Development of Episode-Based Cost Measures for the US Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System

Importance

The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), established as part of the Quality Payment Program, is a Medicare value-based payment program that evaluates clinicians' performance across 4 categories: quality, cost, promoting interoperability, and improvement activities. The cost category includes novel episode-based measures designed for targeted evaluation of the resource use of specific conditions. This report describes the development of episode-based cost measures and their role in the shift from volume-based to value-based purchasing.

Objectives

Episode-based cost measures focus on resource use related to the treatment of a specific condition or procedure. The measures exclude health care costs unrelated to the condition or procedure of focus. The episode-based cost measures provide a nuanced examination of resource use that can be used alongside quality metrics to identify opportunities to improve the value by capturing costs that are clinically related to the care being delivered within a given patient-clinician relationship of care delivered to patients. These measures were developed with the input of clinical committees composed of over 320 clinicians from 127 specialty societies and stakeholder organizations. The MIPS program currently evaluates clinician cost category performance based on 2 population-based cost measures (Medicare spending per beneficiary and total per capita costs) in addition to 18 episode-based cost measures. Additional episode-based cost measures are currently under development.

Conclusions and Relevance

The transition to value-based payment requires an accurate assessment of clinician effect on health care quality and cost. The use of episode-based cost measures to assess clinician influence on health care costs for high-priority conditions and procedures is an important step. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is introducing MIPS Value Pathways that will align episode-based cost measures with related quality measures to further incentivize the transition from fee-for-service to value-based care.

A randomized controlled TRIal of cognitive BEhavioral therapy for high Catastrophizing in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery: the TRIBECA study

Background

Around 20% of patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery have persistent back or leg pain despite surgery. Pain catastrophizing is the strongest psychological predictor for chronic postsurgical pain. Psychological variables are modifiable and could be target for intervention. However, randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of psychological interventions to reduce chronic pain and disability after spinal fusion in a population of patients with high preoperative pain catastrophizing scores are missing. The aim of our study is to examine whether an intervention targeting pain catastrophizing mitigates the risk of chronic postsurgical pain and disability. Our primary hypothesis is that targeted perioperative cognitive behavioral therapy decreases the risk of chronic postsurgical pain and disability after spinal fusion surgery in high catastrophizing patients.

Methods

We will perform a two-center prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled study comparing lumbar spinal fusion surgery outcome between 2 cohorts. Adult patients selected for lumbar spinal fusion with decompression surgery and a minimum score of 24 on the pain catastrophizing scale will be randomized with 1:1 allocation for either perioperative cognitive behavioral therapy (intervention group) or a perioperative education plus progressive exercise program (control group). Patients randomized to the intervention group will receive six individual sessions of cognitive behavioral therapy, two sessions before the operation and four after. Primary outcome is the Core Outcome Measures Index at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include pain, disability, depression and quality of life.

Discussion

This is the first trial that evaluates the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy as a perioperative tool to improve pain and disability after spinal fusion surgery in comparison with an educational/exercise control intervention, in patients with high levels of pain catastrophizing. If perioperative cognitive behavioral therapy proves to be effective, this might have important clinical implications, reducing the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain and improving outcome after spinal fusion surgery.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials (NCT03969602). Registered 31 May 2019,

The Effect of Including Benchmark Prevalence Data of Common Imaging Findings in Spine Image Reports on Health Care Utilization Among Adults Undergoing Spine Imaging: A Stepped-Wedge Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Lumbar spine imaging frequently reveals findings that may seem alarming but are likely unrelated to pain. Prior work has suggested that inserting data on the prevalence of imaging findings among asymptomatic individuals into spine imaging reports may reduce unnecessary subsequent interventions.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of including benchmark prevalence data in routine spinal imaging reports on subsequent spine-related health care utilization and opioid prescriptions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This stepped-wedge, pragmatic randomized clinical trial included 250 401 adult participants receiving care from 98 primary care clinics at 4 large health systems in the United States. Participants had imaging of their backs between October 2013 and September 2016 without having had spine imaging in the prior year. Data analysis was conducted from November 2018 to October 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Either standard lumbar spine imaging reports (control group) or reports containing age-appropriate prevalence data for common imaging findings in individuals without back pain (intervention group).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Health care utilization was measured in spine-related relative value units (RVUs) within 365 days of index imaging. The number of subsequent opioid prescriptions written by a primary care clinician was a secondary outcome, and prespecified subgroup analyses examined results by imaging modality.

RESULTS

We enrolled 250 401 participants (of whom 238 886 [95.4%] met eligibility for this analysis, with 137 373 [57.5%] women and 105 497 [44.2%] aged >60 years) from 3278 primary care clinicians. A total of 117 455 patients (49.2%) were randomized to the control group, and 121 431 patients (50.8%) were randomized to the intervention group. There was no significant difference in cumulative spine-related RVUs comparing intervention and control conditions through 365 days. The adjusted median (interquartile range) RVU for the control group was 3.56 (2.71-5.12) compared with 3.53 (2.68-5.08) for the intervention group (difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -2.9% to 1.5%; P = .54). Rates of subsequent RVUs did not differ between groups by specific clinical findings in the report but did differ by type of index imaging (eg, computed tomography: difference, -29.3%; 95% CI, -42.1% to -13.5%; magnetic resonance imaging: difference, -3.4%; 95% CI, -8.3% to 1.8%). We observed a small but significant decrease in the likelihood of opioid prescribing from a study clinician within 1 year of the intervention (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.00; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, inserting benchmark prevalence information in lumbar spine imaging reports did not decrease subsequent spine-related RVUs but did reduce subsequent opioid prescriptions. The intervention text is simple, inexpensive, and easily implemented.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02015455.

Surgeon-specific risk stratification model for early complications after complex adult spinal deformity surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective outcome analysis of a prospectively collected single-surgeon cases OBJECTIVES: Identify risk factors for complications in adult surgical spine deformity patients, develop a surgeon-specific risk stratification model, and predict the likelihood of 6-week postoperative complications based on prospectively collected preoperative measures. Adult spinal deformity surgery is challenging technically as well as economically. Although many risk factors are well known for spine surgery, complications after complex spine deformity surgery remain a significant problem worldwide.

METHODS

We reviewed 124 consecutive adult patients who have undergone instrumented spinal fusion with nine or more levels over a 21-month period in a single institution. We extracted data from patient medical records. Complications within the 6 weeks after surgery were identified. Univariate and logistic regression analyses (LRAs) were implemented. We generated a formula based on the LRA predictive algorithm-a numeric probabilistic likelihood statistic representing an individual patient's risk of developing a complication.

RESULTS

A total of 34 (27%) patients had complications that were categorized into either 21 (17%) medical or 17 (13.7%) surgical complications, including 3 (2.4%) proximal junctional kyphosis, 8 (6.4%) neurologic deficit, and 9 (6.5%) any wound issue. The predictive model was significant and calibrated using area under the receiver operating characteristics curve analysis. The model correctly classified 83.1% cases. Patients with a three-column osteotomy or history of deep vein thrombosis have 6 and 19 times higher overall complications, respectively, compared with patients without. Patients with a three-column osteotomy or body mass index > 30, respectively, are 24 and 11 times more likely to develop a wound complication. Patients with a three-column osteotomy have 10 times higher rates of surgical complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Complex spine deformity is often associated with complications. No single variable effectively predicts postoperative complications for such a complicated situation. However, when all risk factors are considered, patients with three-column osteotomy have a significantly higher chance to develop early complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Trends in Lumbar Fusion Procedure Rates and Associated Hospital Costs for Degenerative Spinal Diseases in the United States, 2004 to 2015

STUDY DESIGN

Analysis of National Inpatient Sample (NIS), 2004 to 2015.

OBJECTIVE

Describe recent trends in US rates of lumbar fusion procedures and associated costs, by surgical indication.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spinal fusion is appropriate for spinal deformity and instability, but evidence of effectiveness is limited for primary disc herniation and spinal stenosis without instability. It remains controversial for treatment of axial pain secondary to degenerative disc disease. There are potential non-instability, non-deformity indications for fusion surgery, including but not limited to severe foraminal stenosis and third-time disc herniation.

METHODS

Elective lumber fusion trends were reported using Poisson regression, grouped by indication as degenerative scoliosis, degenerative spondylolisthesis, spinal stenosis, disc herniation, and disc degeneration. Generalize linear regression was used to estimate trends in hospital costs, adjusted for age, sex, indication, comorbidity, and inflation.

RESULTS

Volume of elective lumbar fusion increased 62.3% (or 32.1% per 100,000 US adults), from 122,679 cases (60.4 per 100,000) in 2004 to 199,140 (79.8 per 100,000) in 2015. Increases were greatest among age 65 or older, increasing 138.7% by volume (73.2% by rate), from 98.3 per 100,000 (95% confidence interval [CI] 97.2, 99.3) in 2004 to 170.3 (95% CI 169.2, 171.5) in 2015. Although the largest increases were for spondylolisthesis (+47,390 operations, 111%) and scoliosis (+16,129 operations, 186.6%), disc degeneration, herniation, and stenosis combined to accounted for 42.3% of total elective lumbar fusions in 2015. Aggregate hospital costs increased 177% during these 12 years, exceeding $10 billion in 2015, and averaging more than $50,000 per admission.

CONCLUSION

While the prevalence of spinal pathologies is not known, the rate of elective lumbar fusion surgery in the United States increased most for spondylolisthesis and scoliosis, indications with relatively good evidence of effectiveness. The proportion of fusions coded for indications with less evidence of effectiveness has slightly decreased in the most recent years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Risk Factors for Unplanned Reoperation Within 30 Days Following Elective Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

Unplanned reoperation following lumbar spinal fusion is detrimental to patients, providers, and health systems. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors associated with unplanned reoperation following elective posterior lumbar spinal fusion and assess the reasons for reoperation.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 22 151 patients from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set between 2012 and 2015 was completed. The primary outcome measure was unplanned reoperation within 30 days. Secondary outcome measures were specific diagnoses and procedures associated with unplanned reoperation, as well as time to reoperation from initial procedure. Multiple stepwise logistic regression was employed to determine preoperative variables predictive of unplanned 30-day reoperation.

RESULTS

Patients with disseminated cancer (OR = 3.44, P = .0049), weight loss >10% in 6 months prior to surgery (OR = 3.26, P = .0276), bleeding disorders (OR = 1.92, P = .0049), American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 (OR = 1.46, P < .0001), body mass index of 35.0 to 39.9 (OR = 1.50, P = .0037), body mass index of ≥40 (OR = 1.83, P < .0001), and multilevel fusion (OR = 1.24, P = .0069) exhibited increased odds of 30-day reoperation. The most common diagnosis associated with reoperation was postoperative infection (n = 121, 21.1% of reoperations).

CONCLUSIONS

Predictors and causes of unplanned reoperation within 30 days following elective posterior lumbar spinal fusion are identifiable. In this study cohort, obesity, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, disseminated cancer, weight loss, bleeding disorders, and multilevel fusion were identified as significant risk factors for reoperation. Further research investigating risk factor modification on reoperation in elective posterior lumbar spinal fusion is warranted.

Effect of Usual Medical Care Plus Chiropractic Care vs Usual Medical Care Alone on Pain and Disability Among US Service Members With Low Back Pain: A Comparative Effectiveness Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

It is critically important to evaluate the effect of nonpharmacological treatments on low back pain and associated disability.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the addition of chiropractic care to usual medical care results in better pain relief and pain-related function when compared with usual medical care alone.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A 3-site pragmatic comparative effectiveness clinical trial using adaptive allocation was conducted from September 28, 2012, to February 13, 2016, at 2 large military medical centers in major metropolitan areas and 1 smaller hospital at a military training site. Eligible participants were active-duty US service members aged 18 to 50 years with low back pain from a musculoskeletal source.

INTERVENTIONS

The intervention period was 6 weeks. Usual medical care included self-care, medications, physical therapy, and pain clinic referral. Chiropractic care included spinal manipulative therapy in the low back and adjacent regions and additional therapeutic procedures such as rehabilitative exercise, cryotherapy, superficial heat, and other manual therapies.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Coprimary outcomes were low back pain intensity (Numerical Rating Scale; scores ranging from 0 [no low back pain] to 10 [worst possible low back pain]) and disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire; scores ranging from 0-24, with higher scores indicating greater disability) at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included perceived improvement, satisfaction (Numerical Rating Scale; scores ranging from 0 [not at all satisfied] to 10 [extremely satisfied]), and medication use. The coprimary outcomes were modeled with linear mixed-effects regression over baseline and weeks 2, 4, 6, and 12.

RESULTS

Of the 806 screened patients who were recruited through either clinician referrals or self-referrals, 750 were enrolled (250 at each site). The mean (SD) participant age was 30.9 (8.7) years, 175 participants (23.3%) were female, and 243 participants (32.4%) were nonwhite. Statistically significant site × time × group interactions were found in all models. Adjusted mean differences in scores at week 6 were statistically significant in favor of usual medical care plus chiropractic care compared with usual medical care alone overall for low back pain intensity (mean difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -1.4 to -0.7), disability (mean difference, -2.2; 95% CI, -3.1 to -1.2), and satisfaction (mean difference, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.1 to 2.8) as well as at each site. Adjusted odd ratios at week 6 were also statistically significant in favor of usual medical care plus chiropractic care overall for perceived improvement (odds ratio = 0.18; 95% CI, 0.13-0.25) and self-reported pain medication use (odds ratio = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.97). No serious related adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Chiropractic care, when added to usual medical care, resulted in moderate short-term improvements in low back pain intensity and disability in active-duty military personnel. This trial provides additional support for the inclusion of chiropractic care as a component of multidisciplinary health care for low back pain, as currently recommended in existing guidelines. However, study limitations illustrate that further research is needed to understand longer-term outcomes as well as how patient heterogeneity and intervention variations affect patient responses to chiropractic care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01692275.

Early Effects of Medicare's Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Program for Lumbar Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of Medicare claims linked to hospital participation in the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation's episode-based Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) program for lumbar fusion.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the early effects of BPCI participation for lumbar fusion on 90-day reimbursement, procedure volume, reoperation, and readmission.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Initiated on January 1, 2013, BPCI's voluntary bundle payment program provides a predetermined payment for services related to a Diagnosis-Related Group-defined "triggering event" over a defined time period. As an alternative to fee-for-service, these reforms shift the financial risk of care on to hospitals.

METHODS

We identified fee-for-service beneficiaries over age 65 undergoing a lumbar fusion in 2012 or 2013, corresponding to the years before and after BPCI initiation. Hospitals were grouped based on program participation status as nonparticipants, preparatory, or risk-bearing. Generalized estimating equation models adjusting for patient age, sex, race, comorbidity, and hospital size were used to compare changes in episode costs, procedure volume, and safety indicators based on hospital BPCI participation.

RESULTS

We included 89,605 beneficiaries undergoing lumbar fusion, including 36% seen by a preparatory hospital and 7% from a risk-bearing hospital. The mean age of the cohort was 73.4 years, with 59% women, 92% White, and 22% with a Charlson Comorbidity Index of 2 or more. Participant hospitals had greater procedure volume, bed size, and total discharges. Relative to nonparticipants, risk-bearing hospitals had a slightly increased fusion procedure volume from 2012 to 2013 (3.4% increase vs. 1.6% decrease, P = 0.119), did not reduce 90-day episode of care costs (0.4% decrease vs. 2.9% decrease, P = 0.044), increased 90-day readmission rate (+2.7% vs. -10.7%, P = 0.043), and increased repeat surgery rates (+30.6% vs. +7.1% points, P = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

These early, unintended trends suggest an imperative for continued monitoring of BPCI in lumbar fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

BMP2-modified injectable hydrogel for osteogenic differentiation of human periodontal ligament stem cells

This is the first report on the development of a covalently bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP2)-immobilized hydrogel that is suitable for osteogenic differentiation of human periodontal ligament stem cells (hPLSCs). O-propargyl-tyrosine (OpgY) was site-specifically incorporated into BMP2 to prepare BMP2-OpgY with an alkyne group. The engineered BMP2-OpgY exhibited osteogenic characteristics after in vitro osteogenic differentiation of hPLSCs, indicating the osteogenic ability of BMP2-OpgY. A methoxy polyethylene glycol-(polycaprolactone-(N₃)) block copolymer (MC-N₃) was prepared as an injectable in situ-forming hydrogel. BMP2 covalently immobilized on an MC hydrogel (MC-BMP2) was prepared quantitatively by a simple biorthogonal reaction between alkyne groups on BMP2-OpgY and azide groups on MC-N₃ via a Cu(I)-catalyzed click reaction. The hPLSCs-loaded MC-BMP2 formed a hydrogel almost immediately upon injection into animals. In vivo osteogenic differentiation of hPLSCs in the MC-BMP2 formulation was confirmed by histological staining and gene expression analyses. Histological staining of hPLSC-loaded MC-BMP2 implants showed evidence of mineralized calcium deposits, whereas hPLSC-loaded MC-Cl or BMP2-OpgY mixed with MC-Cl, implants showed no mineral deposits. Additionally, MC-BMP2 induced higher levels of osteogenic gene expression in hPLSCs than in other groups. In conclusion, BMP2-OpgY covalently immobilized on MC-BMP2 induced osteogenic differentiation of hPLSCs as a noninvasive method for bone tissue engineering.

Use of the modified frailty index to predict 30-day morbidity and mortality from spine surgery

OBJECTIVE Limited tools exist to stratify perioperative risk in patients undergoing spinal procedures. The modified frailty index (mFI) based on the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Frailty Index (CSHA-FI), constructed from standard demographic variables, has been applied to various other surgical populations for risk stratification. The authors hypothesized that it would be predictive of postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing spine surgery. METHODS The 2006-2010 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data set was accessed for patients undergoing spine surgeries based on Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Sixteen preoperative clinical NSQIP variables were matched to 11 CSHA-FI variables (changes in daily activities, gastrointestinal problems, respiratory problems, clouding or delirium, hypertension, coronary artery and peripheral vascular disease, congestive heart failure, and so on). The outcomes assessed were 30-day occurrences of adverse events. These were then summarized in groups: any infection, wound-related complication, Clavien IV complications (life-threatening, requiring ICU admission), and mortality. RESULTS A total of 18,294 patients were identified. In 8.1% of patients with an mFI of 0 there was at least one morbid complication, compared with 24.3% of patients with an mFI of ≥ 0.27 (p < 0.001). An mFI of 0 was associated with a mortality rate of 0.1%, compared with 2.3% for an mFI of ≥ 0.27 (p < 0.001). Patients with an mFI of 0 had a 1.7% rate of surgical site infections and a 0.8% rate of Clavien IV complications, whereas patients with an mFI of ≥ 0.27 had rates of 4.1% and 7.1% for surgical site infections and Clavien IV complications, respectively (p < 0.001 for both). Multivariate analysis showed that the preoperative mFI and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of ≥ III had a significantly increased risk of leading to Clavien IV complications and death. CONCLUSIONS A higher mFI was associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality, providing an additional tool to improve perioperative risk stratification.

Characteristics of US Adults Who Have Positive and Negative Perceptions of Doctors of Chiropractic and Chiropractic Care

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare characteristics, likelihood to use, and actual use of chiropractic care for US survey respondents with positive and negative perceptions of doctors of chiropractic (DCs) and chiropractic care.

METHODS

From a 2015 nationally representative survey of 5422 adults (response rate, 29%), we used respondents' answers to identify those with positive and negative perceptions of DCs or chiropractic care. We used the χ(2) test to compare other survey responses for these groups.

RESULTS

Positive perceptions of DCs were more common than those for chiropractic care, whereas negative perceptions of chiropractic care were more common than those for DCs. Respondents with negative perceptions of DCs or chiropractic care were less likely to know whether chiropractic care was covered by their insurance, more likely to want to see a medical doctor first if they were experiencing neck or back pain, less likely to indicate that they would see a DC for neck or back pain, and less likely to have ever seen a DC as a patient, particularly in the recent past. Positive perceptions of chiropractic care and negative perceptions of DCs appear to have greater influence on DC utilization rates than their converses.

CONCLUSION

We found that US adults generally perceive DCs in a positive manner but that a relatively high proportion has negative perceptions of chiropractic care, particularly the costs and number of visits required by such care. Characteristics of respondents with positive and negative perceptions were similar, but those with positive perceptions were more likely to plan to use-and to have already received-chiropractic care.

The Regionalization of Lumbar Spine Procedures in New York State: A 10-Year Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review of an administrative database.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to determine the current extent of regionalization by mapping lumbar spine procedures according to hospital and patient zip code, as well as examine the rate of growth of lumbar spine procedures performed at high-, medium-, and low-volume institutions in New York State.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The association between hospital and spine surgeon volume and improved patient outcomes is well established. There is no study investigating the actual process of patient migration to high-volume hospitals.

METHODS

New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative data were used to identify 228,695 lumbar spine surgery patients from 2005 to 2014. The data included the patients' zip code, hospital of operation, and year of discharge. The volume of lumbar spine surgery in New York State was mapped according to patient and hospital 3-digit zip code. New York State hospitals were categorized as low, medium, and high volume and descriptive statistics were used to determine trends in changes in hospital volume.

RESULTS

Lumbar spine surgery recipients are widely distributed throughout the state. Procedures are regionalized on a select few metropolitan centers. The total number of procedures grew 2.5% over the entire 10-year-period. High-volume hospital caseload increased 50%, from 7253 procedures in 2005 to 10,915 procedures in 2014. The number of procedures at medium and low-volume hospitals decreased 30% and 13%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite any concerted effort aimed at moving orthopedic patients to high-volume hospitals, migration to high-volume centers occurred. Public interest in quality outcomes and cost, as well as financial incentives among medical centers to increase market share, potentially influence the migration of patients to high-volume centers. Further regionalization has the potential to exacerbate the current level of disparities among patient populations at low and high-volume hospitals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Lumbar Imaging With Reporting Of Epidemiology (LIRE)--Protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic imaging is often the first step in evaluating patients with back pain and likely functions as a "gateway" to a subsequent cascade of interventions. However, lumbar spine imaging frequently reveals incidental findings among normal, pain-free individuals suggesting that treatment of these "abnormalities" may not be warranted. Our prior work suggested that inserting the prevalence of imaging findings in patients without back pain into spine imaging reports may reduce subsequent interventions. We are now conducting a pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial to test the hypothesis that inserting this prevalence data into lumbar spine imaging reports for studies ordered by primary care providers will reduce subsequent spine-related interventions.

METHODS/DESIGN

We are using a stepped wedge design that sequentially randomizes 100 primary care clinics at four health systems to receive either standard lumbar spine imaging reports, or reports containing prevalence data for common imaging findings in patients without back pain. We capture all outcomes passively through the electronic medical record. Our primary outcome is spine-related intervention intensity based on Relative Value Units (RVUs) during the following year. Secondary outcomes include subsequent prescriptions for opioid analgesics and cross-sectional lumbar spine re-imaging.

DISCUSSION

If our study shows that adding prevalence data to spine imaging reports decreases subsequent back-related RVUs, this intervention could be easily generalized and applied to other kinds of testing, as well as other conditions where incidental findings may be common. Our study also serves as a model for cluster randomized trials that are minimal risk and highly pragmatic.

Clinical outcomes after treatment with disc prostheses in three lumbar segments compared to one- or two segments

BACKGROUND

Fusion surgery in the rare patients suffering from symptomatic degenerative disc disease (DDD) at three segments has been reported to produce poor results and a high frequency of complications, why patients suffering from DDD at three segments are seldom offered surgical treatment.

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcome after one- and two years, between patients that have undergone disc replacement surgery (TDR) at three segments and patients that have been treated at less segments.

METHODS

The present study is based on data recorded in the Swedish Spine Registry (SweSpine). The study group consisted of 30 patients who underwent three-segment TDR, the comparative group of 700 patients treated in one or two segments. Analyses included comparisons of preoperative data, postoperative results and improvement from baseline.

RESULTS

Our results showed no differences in outcome between groups at one- and two years postoperatively. Improvements achieved after surgery in both groups well exceeded established values for minimally clinically important difference (MCID).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that patients with a diagnosis of therapy-resistant chronic low back pain (CLBP) due to DDD in one, two or even three lumbar segments achieve similar and good results after TDR surgery.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The rare patients with severe and convincing DDD from three segments might in carefully selected cases be offered surgery, with a reasonable chance of a beneficial outcome.

Statewide Hospital Discharge Data: Collection, Use, Limitations, and Improvements

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of statewide hospital discharge databases (HDD), including their uses in health services research and limitations, and to describe Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Enhanced State Data grants to address clinical and race-ethnicity data limitations.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Almost all states have statewide HDD collected by public or private data organizations. Statewide HDD, based on the hospital claim with state variations, contain useful core variables and require minimal collection burden. AHRQ's Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project builds uniform state and national research files using statewide HDD. States, hospitals, and researchers use statewide HDD for many purposes. Illustrating researchers' use, during 2012-2014, HSR published 26 HDD-based articles on health policy, access, quality, clinical aspects of care, race-ethnicity and insurance impacts, economics, financing, and research methods. HDD have limitations affecting their use. Five AHRQ grants focused on enhancing clinical data and three grants aimed at improving race-ethnicity data.

CONCLUSION

ICD-10 implementation will significantly affect the HDD. The AHRQ grants, information technology advances, payment policy changes, and the need for outpatient information may stimulate other statewide HDD changes. To remain a mainstay of health services research, statewide HDD need to keep pace with changing user needs while minimizing collection burdens.

Use of bone morphogenetic protein among patients undergoing fusion for degenerative diagnoses in the United States, 2002 to 2012

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Use of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) as an adjunct to spinal fusion surgery proliferated after Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 2002. Major safety concerns emerged in 2008.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine whether published concerns about the safety of BMP altered clinical practice.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

The study design involved the analysis of the National Inpatient Sample from 2002 through 2012.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Adults (older than 20 years) undergoing an elective fusion operation for common degenerative diagnoses were identified using codes from the International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision, Clinical Modification.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcome measures were proportion of cervical and lumbar fusion operations, over time, that involved BMP.

METHODS

We aggregated the data into a monthly time series and reported the proportion of cervical and lumbar fusion operations, over time, that involved BMP. Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average, a regression model for time series data, was used to test whether there was a statistically significant change in the overall rate of BMP use after an FDA Public Health Notification in 2008.

RESULTS

Use of BMP in spinal fusion procedures increased rapidly until 2008, involving up to 45.2% of lumbar and 13.5% of cervical fusions. Bone morphogenetic protein use significantly decreased after the 2008 FDA Public Health Notification and revelations of financial payments to surgeons involved in the pivotal FDA-approved trials. For lumbar fusion, the average annual increase was 7.9 percentage points per year from 2002 to 2008, followed by an average annual decrease of 11.7 percentage points thereafter (p≤.001). Use of BMP in cervical fusion increased 2.0% per year until the FDA Public Health Notification, followed by a 2.8% per year decrease (p=.035).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of BMP in spinal fusion surgery declined subsequent to published safety concerns and revelations of financial conflicts of interest for investigators involved in the pivotal clinical trials.

Improving discharge data fidelity for use in large administrative databases

OBJECT

Large administrative databases have assumed a major role in population-based studies examining health care delivery. Lumbar fusion surgeries specifically have been scrutinized for rising rates coupled with ill-defined indications for fusion such as stenosis and spondylosis. Administrative databases classify cases with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). The ICD-9-CM discharge codes are not designated by surgeons, but rather are assigned by trained hospital medical coders. It is unclear how accurately they capture the surgeon's indication for fusion. The authors first sought to compare the ICD-9-CM code(s) assigned by the medical coder according to the surgeon's indication based on a review of the medical chart, and then to elucidate barriers to data fidelity.

METHODS

A retrospective review was undertaken of all lumbar fusions performed in the Department of Neurosurgery at the authors' institution between August 1, 2011, and August 31, 2013. Based on this review, the indication for fusion in each case was categorized as follows: spondylolisthesis, deformity, tumor, infection, nonpathological fracture, pseudarthrosis, adjacent-level degeneration, stenosis, degenerative disc disease, or disc herniation. These surgeon diagnoses were compared with the primary ICD-9-CM codes that were generated by the medical coders and submitted to administrative databases. A follow-up interview with the hospital's coders and coding manager was undertaken to review causes of error and suggestions for future improvement in data fidelity.

RESULTS

There were 178 lumbar fusion operations performed in the course of 170 hospital admissions. There were 44 hospitalizations in which fusion was performed for tumor, infection, or nonpathological fracture. Of these, the primary diagnosis matched the surgical indication for fusion in 98% of cases. The remaining 126 hospitalizations were for degenerative diseases, and of these, the primary ICD-9-CM diagnosis matched the surgeon's diagnosis in only 61 (48%) of 126 cases of degenerative disease. When both the primary and all secondary ICD-9-CM diagnoses were considered, the indication for fusion was identified in 100 (79%) of 126 cases. Still, in 21% of hospitalizations, the coder did not identify the surgical diagnosis, which was in fact present in the chart. There are many different causes of coding inaccuracy and data corruption. They include factors related to the quality of documentation by the physicians, coder training and experience, and ICD code ambiguity.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers, policymakers, payers, and physicians should note these limitations when reviewing studies in which hospital claims data are used. Advanced domain-specific coder training, increased attention to detail and utilization of ICD-9-CM diagnoses by the surgeon, and improved direction from the surgeon to the coder may augment data fidelity and minimize coding errors. By understanding sources of error, users of these large databases can evaluate their limitations and make more useful decisions based on them.

Validation of an administrative coding algorithm for classifying surgical indication and operative features of spine surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of medical records and administrative data.

OBJECTIVE

Validate a claims-based algorithm for classifying surgical indication and operative features in lumbar surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Administrative data are valuable to study rates, safety, outcomes, and costs in spine surgery. Previous research evaluates outcomes by procedure, not indications and operative features. One previous study validated a coding algorithm for classifying surgical indication. Few studies examined claims data for classifying patients by operative features.

METHODS

Patients undergoing lumbar decompression or fusion at a single institution in 2009 for back pain, herniated disc, stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or scoliosis were included. Sensitivity and specificity of a claims-based algorithm for indication and operative features were examined versus medical record abstraction.

RESULTS

A total of 477 patients, including 246 (52%) undergoing fusion and 231 (48%) undergoing decompression were included in this study. Sensitivity of the claims-based coding algorithm for classifying the indication for the procedure was 71.9% for degenerative disc disease, 81.9% for disc herniation, 32.7% for spinal stenosis, 90.4% for degenerative spondylolisthesis, and 93.8% for scoliosis. Specificity was 87.9% for degenerative disc, 85.6% for disc herniation, 90.7% for spinal stenosis, 95.0% for degenerative spondylolisthesis, and 97.3% for scoliosis. Sensitivity and specificity of claims data for identifying the type of procedure for fusion cases was 97.6% and 99.1%, respectively. Sensitivity of claims data for characterizing key operative features was 81.7%, 96.4%, and 53.0% for use of instrumentation, combined (anterior and posterior) surgical approach, and 3 or more disc levels fused, respectively. Specificity was 57.1% for instrumentation, 94.5% for combined approaches, and 71.9% for 3 or more disc levels fused.

CONCLUSION

Claims data accurately reflected certain diagnoses and type of procedures, but were less accurate at characterizing operative features other than the surgical approach. This study highlights both the potential and current limitations of claims-based analysis for spine surgery.

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database does not accurately reflect surgical indications for fusion

Object

The rates of lumbar spinal fusion operations have increased dramatically over the past 2 decades, and several studies based on administrative databases such as the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) have suggested that the greatest rise is in the general categories of degenerative disc disease and disc herniation, neither of which is a well-accepted indication for lumbar fusion. The administrative databases classify cases with the International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). The ICD-9-CM discharge codes are not generated by surgeons but rather are assigned by trained hospital medical coders. It is unclear how accurately they capture the surgeon's indication for fusion. The authors sought to compare the ICD-9-CM code(s) assigned by the medical coder to the surgeon's indication based on a review of the medical chart.

Methods

A retrospective review was undertaken of all lumbar fusions performed at our institution by the department of neurosurgery between 8/1/2011 and 8/31/2013. Based on the authors' review, the indication for fusion for each case was categorized as spondylolisthesis, deformity, tumor, infection, nonpathological fracture, pseudarthrosis, adjacent-level degeneration, stenosis, degenerative disc pathology, or disc herniation. These surgeon diagnoses were compared with the primary ICD-9-CM codes that were submitted to administrative databases.

Results

There were 178 lumbar fusion operations performed for 170 hospital admissions. There were 44 hospitalizations in which fusion was performed for tumor, infection, or nonpathological fracture; the remaining 126 were for degenerative diagnoses. For these degenerative cases, the primary ICD-9-CM diagnosis matched the surgeon's diagnosis in only 61 of 126 degenerative cases (48.4%). When both the primary and all secondary ICD-9-CM diagnoses were considered, the indication for fusion was identified in 100 of 126 cases (79.4%).

Conclusions

Characterizing indications for fusion based solely on primary ICD-9-CM codes extracted from large administrative databases does not accurately reflect the surgeon's indication. While these databases may accurately describe national rates of lumbar fusion surgery, the lack of fidelity in the source codes limits their role in accurately identifying indications for surgery. Studying relationships among indications, complications, and outcomes stratified solely by ICD-9-CM codes is not well founded.

Spine surgeon specialty is not a risk factor for 30-day complication rates in single-level lumbar fusion: a propensity score-matched study of 2528 patients

STUDY DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of spine surgeon specialty on 30-day complication rates in patients undergoing single-level lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Operative care of the spine is delivered by surgeons who undergo either orthopedic or neurosurgical training. It is currently unknown whether surgeon specialty has an impact on 30-day complication rates in patients undergoing single-level lumbar fusion.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was retrospectively reviewed to identify all patients who underwent single-level lumbar fusion procedures during 2006-2011. Propensity score matching analysis was employed to reduce baseline differences in patient characteristics. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the impact of spine surgeon specialty on 30-day complication rates.

RESULTS

A total of 2970 patients were included for analysis. After propensity matching, 1264 pairs of well-matched patients remained in the cohort. Overall complication rates in the unadjusted data set were 7.3% and 7.1% for the neurosurgery and orthopedic surgery cohort, respectively. Our multivariate analysis revealed that compared with the neurosurgery cohort, the orthopedic surgery cohort did not have statistically significant differences in odds ratios (OR) for development of any complication (OR, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.30; P = 0.740). Similarly, spine surgeon specialty was not a risk factor in any of the specific complications studied, including medical complications (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.77-1.60; P = 0.583), surgical complications (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.46-1.26; P = 0.287), or reoperation (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.76-1.60; P = 0.618).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis demonstrates that spine surgeon specialty is not a risk factor for any of the reported 30-day complications in patients undergoing single-level lumbar fusion. These data support the currently dichotomous paradigm of training for spine surgeons. Further research is warranted to validate this relationship in other spine procedures and for other outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

How do coverage policies influence practice patterns, safety, and cost of initial lumbar fusion surgery? A population-based comparison of workers' compensation systems

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

In response to increasing use of lumbar fusion for improving back pain, despite unclear efficacy, particularly among injured workers, some insurers have developed limited coverage policies. Washington State's workers' compensation (WC) program requires imaging confirmation of instability and limits initial fusions to a single level. In contrast, California requires coverage if a second opinion supports surgery, allows initial multilevel fusion, and provides additional reimbursement for surgical implants. There are no studies that compare population-level effects of these policy differences on utilization, costs, and safety of lumbar fusion.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare population-level data on the use of complex fusion techniques, adverse outcomes within 3 months, and costs for two states with contrasting coverage policies.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

The study design was an analysis of WC patients in California and Washington using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's State Inpatient Databases, 2008-2009.

PATIENT SAMPLE

All patients undergoing an inpatient lumbar fusion for degenerative disease (n=4,628) were included the patient sample.

OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Outcome measures included repeat lumbar spine surgery, all-cause readmission, life-threatening complications, wound problems, device complications, and costs.

METHODS

Log-binomial regressions compared 3-month complications and costs between states, adjusting for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall rate of lumbar fusion operations through WC programs was 47% higher in California than in Washington. California WC patients were more likely than those in Washington to undergo fusion for controversial indications, such as nonspecific back pain (28% versus 21%) and disc herniation (37% versus 21%), as opposed to spinal stenosis (6% versus 15%), and spondylolisthesis (25% versus 41%). A higher percentage of patients in California received circumferential procedures (26% versus 5%), fusion of three or more levels (10% versus 5%), and bone morphogenetic protein (50% versus 31%). California had higher adjusted risk for reoperation (relative risk [RR] 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.27-2.29), wound problems (RR 2.64; 95% CI, 2.62-2.65), device complications (RR 2.49; 95% CI, 2.38-2.61), and life-threatening complications (RR 1.31; 95% CI, 1.31-1.31). Hospital costs for the index procedure were greater in California ($49,430) than in Washington ($40,114).

CONCLUSIONS

Broader lumbar fusion coverage policy was associated with greater use of lumbar fusion, use of more invasive operations, more reoperations, higher rates of complications, and greater inpatient costs.

Indications for spine surgery: validation of an administrative coding algorithm to classify degenerative diagnoses

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of Medicare claims linked to a multicenter clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE

The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) provided a unique opportunity to examine the validity of a claims-based algorithm for grouping patients by surgical indication. SPORT enrolled patients for lumbar disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and degenerative spondylolisthesis. We compared the surgical indication derived from Medicare claims with that provided by SPORT surgeons, the "gold standard."

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Administrative data are frequently used to report procedure rates, surgical safety outcomes, and costs in the management of spinal surgery. However, the accuracy of using diagnosis codes to classify patients by surgical indication has not been examined.

METHODS

Medicare claims were link to beneficiaries enrolled in SPORT. The sensitivity and specificity of 3 claims-based approaches to group patients on the basis of surgical indications were examined: (1) using the first listed diagnosis; (2) using all diagnoses independently; and (3) using a diagnosis hierarchy on the basis of the support for fusion surgery.

RESULTS

Medicare claims were obtained from 376 SPORT participants, including 21 with disc herniation, 183 with spinal stenosis, and 172 with degenerative spondylolisthesis. The hierarchical coding algorithm was the most accurate approach for classifying patients by surgical indication, with sensitivities of 76.2%, 88.1%, and 84.3% for disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and degenerative spondylolisthesis cohorts, respectively. The specificity was 98.3% for disc herniation, 83.2% for spinal stenosis, and 90.7% for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Misclassifications were primarily due to codes attributing more complex pathology to the case.

CONCLUSION

Standardized approaches for using claims data to group patients accurately by surgical indications have widespread interest. We found that a hierarchical coding approach correctly classified more than 90% of spine patients into their respective SPORT cohorts. Therefore, claims data seem to be a reasonably valid approach to classifying patients by surgical indication.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Challenges in outcome measurement: clinical research perspective

Comparative effectiveness research evaluates treatments as actually delivered in routine clinical practice, shifting research focus from efficacy and internal validity to effectiveness and external validity ("generalizability"). Such research requires accurate assessments of the numbers of patients treated and the completeness of their followup, their clinical outcomes, and the setting in which their care was delivered. Choosing measures and methods for clinical outcome research to produce meaningful information that may be used to improve patient care presents a number of challenges. WHERE ARE WE NOW?: Orthopaedic surgery research has many stakeholders, including patients, providers, payers, and policy makers. A major challenge in orthopaedic surgery outcome measurement and clinical research is providing all of these users with valid information for their respective decision making. At present, no plan exists for capturing data on such a broad scale and scope. WHERE DO WE NEED TO GO?: Practical challenges include identifying and obtaining resources for widespread data collection and merging multiple data sources. Challenges of study design include sampling to obtain representative data, timing of data collection in the episode of care, and minimizing missing data and study dropout. HOW DO WE GET THERE?: Resource limitations may be addressed by repurposing existing clinical resources and capitalizing on technologic advances to increase efficiencies. Increasing use of rigorous, well-designed observational research designs can provide information that may be unattainable in clinical trials. Such study designs should incorporate methods to minimize missing data, to sample multiple providers, facilities, and patients, and to include evaluation of potential confounding variables to minimize bias and allow generalization to broad populations.