Search

Summary: Background: Spinal degenerative disease represents a growing burden on our healthcare system, yet little is known about longitudinal trends in access and care. Our goal was to provide an essential portrait of surgical volume trends for degenerative spinal pathologies within Canada. Methods: The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) database was used to identify all patients receiving surgery for a degenerative spinal condition from 2006 to 2019. Trends in number of interventions, unscheduled vs scheduled hospitalizations, in-hours vs out-of-hours interventions, resource utilization and adverse events were analyzed retrospectively using linear regression models. Confidence intervals were reported in the expected count ratio scale (CR). Findings: A total of 338,629 spinal interventions and 256,360 hospitalizations between 2006 and 2019 were analyzed. The mean and SD of the annual mean age of patients was 55.5 (SD 1.6) for elective hospitalizations and 55.6 (SD 1.6) for emergent hospitalizations. The proportion of female patients was 47.8% (91,789/192,027) for elective hospitalizations and 41.4% (26,633/64,333) for emergent hospitalizations. Elective hospitalizations increased an average of 2.0% per year, with CR = 1.020 (95% CI 1.017–1.023, p

IntroductionFollowing a traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) it is critical to document the level and severity of injury. Neurological recovery occurs dynamically after injury and a baseline neurological exam offers a snapshot of the patient's impairment at that time. Understanding when this exam occurs in the recovery process is crucial for discussing prognosis and acute clinical trial enrollment. The objectives of this study were to: (1) describe the trajectory of motor recovery in persons with acute cervical SCI in the first 14 days post-injury; and (2) evaluate if the timing of the baseline neurological assessment in the first 14 days impacts the amount of motor recovery observed.MethodsData were obtained from the Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry (RHSCIR) site in Vancouver and additional neurological data was extracted from medical charts. Participants with a cervical injury (C1–T1) who had a minimum of three exams (including a baseline and discharge exam) were included. Data on the upper-extremity motor score (UEMS), total motor score (TMS) and American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) were included. A linear mixed-effect model with additional variables (AIS, level of injury, UEMS, time, time2, and TMS) was used to explore the pattern and amount of motor recovery over time.ResultsTrajectories of motor recovery in the first 14 days post-injury showed significant improvements in both TMS and UEMS for participants with AIS B, C, and D injuries, but was not different for high (C1–4) vs. low (C5–T1) cervical injuries or AIS A injuries. The timing of the baseline neurological examination significantly impacted the amount of motor recovery in participants with AIS B, C, and D injuries.DiscussionTiming of baseline neurological exams was significantly associated with the amount of motor recovery in cervical AIS B, C, and D injuries. Studies examining changes in neurological recovery should consider stratifying by severity and timing of the baseline exam to reduce bias amongst study cohorts. Future studies should validate these estimates for cervical AIS B, C, and D injuries to see if they can serve as an “adjustment factor” to control for differences in the timing of the baseline neurological exam.

Abstract The economic repercussions of waiting for lumbar disc surgery have not been well studied. The primary goal of this study was to perform a cost-consequence analysis of patients receiving early vs late surgery for symptomatic disc herniation from a societal perspective. Secondarily, we compared patient factors and patient-reported outcomes. This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the CSORN registry. A cost-consequence analysis was performed where direct and indirect costs were compared, and different outcomes were listed separately. Comparisons were made on an observational cohort of patients receiving surgery less than 60 days after consent (short wait) or 60 days or more after consent (long wait). This study included 493 patients with surgery between January 2015 and October 2021 with 272 patients (55.2%) in the short wait group and 221 patients (44.8%) classified as long wait. There was no difference in proportions of patients who returned to work at 3 and 12-months. Time from surgery to return to work was similar between both groups (34.0 vs 34.9 days, p = 0.804). Time from consent to return to work was longer in the longer wait group corresponding to an additional $11,753.10 mean indirect cost per patient. The short wait group showed increased healthcare usage at 3 months with more emergency department visits (52.6% vs 25.0%, p