Cargando…
Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches
PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the spine has been associated with favorable outcomes compared to open surgery. This study evaluated matched cohorts treated with MIS versus open posterior lumbar fusion for costs, payments, healthcare utilization and outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8214572/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34163258 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S311774 |
_version_ | 1783710092534743040 |
---|---|
author | Holy, Chantal E Corso, Katherine A Bowden, Dawn E Erb, Michael J Ruppenkamp, Jill R Coombs, Sandra Pracyk, John B |
author_facet | Holy, Chantal E Corso, Katherine A Bowden, Dawn E Erb, Michael J Ruppenkamp, Jill R Coombs, Sandra Pracyk, John B |
author_sort | Holy, Chantal E |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the spine has been associated with favorable outcomes compared to open surgery. This study evaluated matched cohorts treated with MIS versus open posterior lumbar fusion for costs, payments, healthcare utilization and outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study used the Premier Healthcare and IBM(®) MarketScan(®) Commercial and Medicare Databases. Patients with posterior lumbar fusion from 2015 to 2018 were identified and categorized as “Open” or “MIS”. Cohorts were matched on patient and provider characteristics. Perioperative complications, hospital costs, healthcare utilization and post-operative outcomes and payments to providers were analyzed. Statistical significance was evaluated using T-tests and chi-square tests. RESULTS: After matching, 2,388 Open and 796 MIS from PHD, and 415 Open and 83 MIS from MarketScan were included. Statistically significant differences between MIS versus Open were found for index hospital costs, $29,181 (SD: $14,363) versus $27,616 (SD: $13,822), p=0.01; length of stay, 2.94 (SD: 2.10) versus 3.15 (SD: 2.03) days, p=0.01; perioperative urinary tract infection, 1.01% and 2.09% (p=0.05); and 30-day risk of hematoma/hemorrhage, 19.28% versus 8.43%, p=0.02. There were observed, but statistically non-significant differences in additional perioperative or post-operative complications, home discharge, 90-day all-cause and spine-related readmission, and 90-day post-operative payments. CONCLUSION: Compared to Open, patients that underwent MIS had statistically significant lower length of stay, lower perioperative UTI, greater hospital costs, and higher 30-day risk of hematoma/hemorrhage. The differences observed in post-operative complications and payments and readmissions warrant further investigation in larger matched cohorts. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8214572 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82145722021-06-22 Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches Holy, Chantal E Corso, Katherine A Bowden, Dawn E Erb, Michael J Ruppenkamp, Jill R Coombs, Sandra Pracyk, John B Med Devices (Auckl) Original Research PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the spine has been associated with favorable outcomes compared to open surgery. This study evaluated matched cohorts treated with MIS versus open posterior lumbar fusion for costs, payments, healthcare utilization and outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study used the Premier Healthcare and IBM(®) MarketScan(®) Commercial and Medicare Databases. Patients with posterior lumbar fusion from 2015 to 2018 were identified and categorized as “Open” or “MIS”. Cohorts were matched on patient and provider characteristics. Perioperative complications, hospital costs, healthcare utilization and post-operative outcomes and payments to providers were analyzed. Statistical significance was evaluated using T-tests and chi-square tests. RESULTS: After matching, 2,388 Open and 796 MIS from PHD, and 415 Open and 83 MIS from MarketScan were included. Statistically significant differences between MIS versus Open were found for index hospital costs, $29,181 (SD: $14,363) versus $27,616 (SD: $13,822), p=0.01; length of stay, 2.94 (SD: 2.10) versus 3.15 (SD: 2.03) days, p=0.01; perioperative urinary tract infection, 1.01% and 2.09% (p=0.05); and 30-day risk of hematoma/hemorrhage, 19.28% versus 8.43%, p=0.02. There were observed, but statistically non-significant differences in additional perioperative or post-operative complications, home discharge, 90-day all-cause and spine-related readmission, and 90-day post-operative payments. CONCLUSION: Compared to Open, patients that underwent MIS had statistically significant lower length of stay, lower perioperative UTI, greater hospital costs, and higher 30-day risk of hematoma/hemorrhage. The differences observed in post-operative complications and payments and readmissions warrant further investigation in larger matched cohorts. Dove 2021-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8214572/ /pubmed/34163258 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S311774 Text en © 2021 Holy et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Holy, Chantal E Corso, Katherine A Bowden, Dawn E Erb, Michael J Ruppenkamp, Jill R Coombs, Sandra Pracyk, John B Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches |
title | Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches |
title_full | Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches |
title_short | Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches |
title_sort | evaluation of cost, payments, healthcare utilization, and perioperative and post-operative outcomes of patients treated with posterior lumbar spinal surgery using open versus minimally invasive surgical approaches |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8214572/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34163258 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S311774 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT holychantale evaluationofcostpaymentshealthcareutilizationandperioperativeandpostoperativeoutcomesofpatientstreatedwithposteriorlumbarspinalsurgeryusingopenversusminimallyinvasivesurgicalapproaches AT corsokatherinea evaluationofcostpaymentshealthcareutilizationandperioperativeandpostoperativeoutcomesofpatientstreatedwithposteriorlumbarspinalsurgeryusingopenversusminimallyinvasivesurgicalapproaches AT bowdendawne evaluationofcostpaymentshealthcareutilizationandperioperativeandpostoperativeoutcomesofpatientstreatedwithposteriorlumbarspinalsurgeryusingopenversusminimallyinvasivesurgicalapproaches AT erbmichaelj evaluationofcostpaymentshealthcareutilizationandperioperativeandpostoperativeoutcomesofpatientstreatedwithposteriorlumbarspinalsurgeryusingopenversusminimallyinvasivesurgicalapproaches AT ruppenkampjillr evaluationofcostpaymentshealthcareutilizationandperioperativeandpostoperativeoutcomesofpatientstreatedwithposteriorlumbarspinalsurgeryusingopenversusminimallyinvasivesurgicalapproaches AT coombssandra evaluationofcostpaymentshealthcareutilizationandperioperativeandpostoperativeoutcomesofpatientstreatedwithposteriorlumbarspinalsurgeryusingopenversusminimallyinvasivesurgicalapproaches AT pracykjohnb evaluationofcostpaymentshealthcareutilizationandperioperativeandpostoperativeoutcomesofpatientstreatedwithposteriorlumbarspinalsurgeryusingopenversusminimallyinvasivesurgicalapproaches |