Cargando…

Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches

BACKGROUND: The costs of cervical spine surgery have steadily increased. We performed a 5-year propensity scoring-matched analysis of 276 patients undergoing anterior versus posterior cervical surgery at one institution. METHODS: We performed propensity score matching on financial data from 276 pati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chan, Alvin Y., Himstead, Alexander S., Choi, Elliot H., Hsu, Zachary, Kurtz, Joshua S., Yang, Chenyi, Lee, Yu-Po, Bhatia, Nitin N., Lefteris, Chad T., Wilson, William C., Hsu, Frank P. K., Oh, Michael Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Scientific Scholar 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9345123/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35928309
http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/SNI_497_2022
_version_ 1784761363286982656
author Chan, Alvin Y.
Himstead, Alexander S.
Choi, Elliot H.
Hsu, Zachary
Kurtz, Joshua S.
Yang, Chenyi
Lee, Yu-Po
Bhatia, Nitin N.
Lefteris, Chad T.
Wilson, William C.
Hsu, Frank P. K.
Oh, Michael Y.
author_facet Chan, Alvin Y.
Himstead, Alexander S.
Choi, Elliot H.
Hsu, Zachary
Kurtz, Joshua S.
Yang, Chenyi
Lee, Yu-Po
Bhatia, Nitin N.
Lefteris, Chad T.
Wilson, William C.
Hsu, Frank P. K.
Oh, Michael Y.
author_sort Chan, Alvin Y.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The costs of cervical spine surgery have steadily increased. We performed a 5-year propensity scoring-matched analysis of 276 patients undergoing anterior versus posterior cervical surgery at one institution. METHODS: We performed propensity score matching on financial data from 276 patients undergoing 1–3 level anterior versus posterior cervical fusions for degenerative disease (2015–2019). RESULTS: We found no significant difference between anterior versus posterior approaches for hospital costs ($42,529.63 vs. $45,110.52), net revenue ($40,877.25 vs. $34,036.01), or contribution margins ($14,230.19 vs. $6,312.54). Multivariate regression analysis showed variables significantly associated with the lower contribution margins included age (β = −392.3) and length of stay (LOS; β = −1151). Removing age/LOS from the analysis, contribution margins were significantly higher for the anterior versus posterior approach ($17,824.16 vs. $6,312.54, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Anterior cervical surgery produced higher contribution margins compared to posterior approaches, most likely because posterior surgery was typically performed in older patients requiring longer LOS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9345123
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Scientific Scholar
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93451232022-08-03 Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches Chan, Alvin Y. Himstead, Alexander S. Choi, Elliot H. Hsu, Zachary Kurtz, Joshua S. Yang, Chenyi Lee, Yu-Po Bhatia, Nitin N. Lefteris, Chad T. Wilson, William C. Hsu, Frank P. K. Oh, Michael Y. Surg Neurol Int Original Article BACKGROUND: The costs of cervical spine surgery have steadily increased. We performed a 5-year propensity scoring-matched analysis of 276 patients undergoing anterior versus posterior cervical surgery at one institution. METHODS: We performed propensity score matching on financial data from 276 patients undergoing 1–3 level anterior versus posterior cervical fusions for degenerative disease (2015–2019). RESULTS: We found no significant difference between anterior versus posterior approaches for hospital costs ($42,529.63 vs. $45,110.52), net revenue ($40,877.25 vs. $34,036.01), or contribution margins ($14,230.19 vs. $6,312.54). Multivariate regression analysis showed variables significantly associated with the lower contribution margins included age (β = −392.3) and length of stay (LOS; β = −1151). Removing age/LOS from the analysis, contribution margins were significantly higher for the anterior versus posterior approach ($17,824.16 vs. $6,312.54, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Anterior cervical surgery produced higher contribution margins compared to posterior approaches, most likely because posterior surgery was typically performed in older patients requiring longer LOS. Scientific Scholar 2022-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9345123/ /pubmed/35928309 http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/SNI_497_2022 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Surgical Neurology International https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Chan, Alvin Y.
Himstead, Alexander S.
Choi, Elliot H.
Hsu, Zachary
Kurtz, Joshua S.
Yang, Chenyi
Lee, Yu-Po
Bhatia, Nitin N.
Lefteris, Chad T.
Wilson, William C.
Hsu, Frank P. K.
Oh, Michael Y.
Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches
title Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches
title_full Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches
title_fullStr Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches
title_full_unstemmed Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches
title_short Cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches
title_sort cost analysis comparison between anterior and posterior cervical spine approaches
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9345123/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35928309
http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/SNI_497_2022
work_keys_str_mv AT chanalviny costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT himsteadalexanders costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT choiellioth costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT hsuzachary costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT kurtzjoshuas costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT yangchenyi costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT leeyupo costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT bhatianitinn costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT lefterischadt costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT wilsonwilliamc costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT hsufrankpk costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches
AT ohmichaely costanalysiscomparisonbetweenanteriorandposteriorcervicalspineapproaches