Search

Spinal cord stimulation is an effective treatment for those experiencing chronic back and leg pain but requires a temporary evaluation period (SCSeval) before permanent implantation. We present real-world data from 7,000 patients who underwent SCSeval while utilizing a mobile digital health platform for education, feedback, and outcomes collection during their surgical journey. We analyzed preoperative patient demographics, characterized patient pain profiles using the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system-29 surveys, and calculated the rates of conversion from temporary to permanent spinal cord stimulation (SCS) implantation. Between August 1, 2021, and March 2, 2023, 7,000 patients (mean age 59.1, 59.6% female) underwent SCSeval procedures while utilizing a mobile application. Patients commonly experienced aching, sharp, stabbing, tingling, numb, and burning pain. Patients had tried multiple prior therapies and wanted to reduce their use of opioids and pain medications. Overall, 90.1% of the patients had a successful SCSeval, and 80.4% of those converted to permanent implant, with the highest rates among those who underwent SCSeval in a hospital setting. There was a significant improvement in all domains of pain as evaluated by pre and postoperative patient-reported outcomes measurement information system-29 surveys. This study supports the use of digital health technology as part of the SCS journey to improve the patient experience and allow for robust patient-reported outcomes collection. The overall rate of SCSeval to permanent SCS in our study of 72.4% was higher than national rates of 64%, suggesting that an app may allow clinicians to better quantify changes in chronic pain and provide more insight into choosing to implant SCS permanently. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents real-world evidence from a digital health platform for therapy education and outcomes collection from patients undergoing spinal cord stimulation evaluation procedures. Such tools could allow for better pain characterization and allow for more nuanced tracking of patient outcomes among those with chronic pain., (Copyright © 2023 United States Association for the Study of Pain, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Chronic refractory low back pain (CRLBP) is a diagnosis characterized by chronic low back pain in patients who are poor candidates for surgery and fail conservative management. High-frequency spinal cord stimulation (HF-SCS) is a new advance in neuromodulation that may be effective in treating these patients. However, the cost burden of this therapy is yet undetermined., Materials and Methods: IBM MarketScan® (IBM, Armonk, NY) data bases were used to retrospectively identify patients with HF-SCS implantation between 2016 and 2019 in the United States. Those with low back pain diagnosis without history of surgery were included in the cohort. Cost data, including inpatient and outpatient service, medication, and out-of-pocket costs, were collected at six months before HF-SCS implantation and one, three, and six months after implantation. The explant rate within six months was evaluated., Results: A total of 119 patients met the inclusion criteria. Most patients were female (73.1%) and owned commercial insurance (83.2%). Common comorbidities included inflammatory arthritis (22.7%), depression (26.1%), hypertension (44.5%), and obesity (26.1%). In the six months before HF-SCS implantation, patients incurred median total costs of $15,766 (first quartile [Q1]: $8,847; third quartile [Q3]: $24,947), whereas the postimplant median total cost excluding device acquisition was $398 (Q1: $145, Q3: $1,272) at one month, $2,569 (Q1: $823, Q3: $5,266) at three months, and $5,840 (Q1: $2,160; Q3: $14,607) at six months. The average reduction in total cost was $6,914 (95% CI: $588, $12,458, p < 0.001). The median total acquisition cost was $43,586 (Q1: $29,506, Q3: $69,426), with most coming from outpatient services. Of 88 patients with six-month continuous enrollment, two (2.3%) had device explant., Conclusions: We present an analysis using large claims data bases of the cost of HF-SCS for treating CRLBP and show that it may be associated with a significant decrease in total health care costs, offsetting device acquisition costs in 27 months. As advances in neuromodulation expand therapy options for patients, it will be important to understand their financial implications., (Copyright © 2022 International Neuromodulation Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This analysis evaluated if spinal cord stimulation (SCS) at 10 kHz plus conventional medical management (CMM) is cost-effective compared with CMM alone for the treatment of nonsurgical refractory back pain (NSRBP)., Methods: NSRBP subjects were randomized 1:1 into the 10-kHz SCS (n = 83) or CMM (n = 76) group. Outcomes assessed at 6 months included EQ-5D 5-level (EQ-5D-5L), medication usage, and healthcare utilization (HCU). There was an optional crossover at 6 months and follow-up to 12 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated with cost including all HCU and medications except for the initial device and implant procedure, and cost-effectiveness was analyzed based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of < $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year., Results: Treatment with 10-kHz SCS resulted in a significant improvement in quality of life (QOL) over CMM (EQ-5D-5L index score change of 0.201 vs -0.042, p < 0.001) at a lower cost, based on reduced frequency of HCU resulting in an ICER of -$4964 at 12 months. The ICER was -$8620 comparing the 6 months on CMM with postcrossover on 10-kHz SCS., Conclusions: Treatment with 10-kHz SCS provides higher QOL at a lower average cost per patient compared with CMM. Assuming an average reimbursement for device and procedure, 10-kHz SCS therapy is predicted to be cost-effective for the treatment of NSRBP compared with CMM within 2.1 years.

Background: Opioid misuse in the USA is an epidemic. Utilization of neuromodulation for refractory chronic pain may reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality, and associated economic costs., Objective: To assess the impact of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on opioid dose reduction., Methods: The IBM MarketScan® database was retrospectively queried for all US patients with a chronic pain diagnosis undergoing SCS between 2010 and 2015. Opioid usage before and after the procedure was quantified as morphine milligram equivalents (MME)., Results: A total of 8497 adult patients undergoing SCS were included. Within 1 yr of the procedure, 60.4% had some reduction in their opioid use, 34.2% moved to a clinically important lower dosage group, and 17.0% weaned off opioids entirely. The proportion of patients who completely weaned off opioids increased with decreasing preprocedure dose, ranging from 5.1% in the >90 MME group to 34.2% in the ≤20 MME group. The following variables were associated with reduced odds of weaning off opioids post procedure: long-term opioid use (odds ratio [OR]: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.21-0.30; P < .001), use of other pain medications (OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.65-0.87; P < .001), and obesity (OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.60-0.94; P = .01)., Conclusion: Patients undergoing SCS were able to reduce opioid usage. Given the potential to reduce the risks of long-term opioid therapy, this study lays the groundwork for efforts that may ultimately push stakeholders to reduce payment and policy barriers to SCS as part of an evidence-based, patient-centered approach to nonopioid solutions for chronic pain., (Copyright © 2020 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.)

Objectives: Chronic pain (CP) affects a significant number of patients following hernia repair, ranging from 11 to 54% in the literature. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence, overall costs, and health care utilization associated with CP after hernia repair., Materials and Methods: A retrospective longitudinal study was performed using the Truven MarketScan® data base to identify patients who develop chronic neuropathic posthernia repair pain from 2001 to 2012. Patients were grouped into CP and No Chronic Pain (No CP) cohorts. Patients were excluded if they 1) were under 18 years of age; 2) had a previous pain diagnosis; 3) had CP diagnosed <90 days after the index hernia repair; 4) had less than one year of follow-up; or 5) had less than one-year baseline record before hernia repair. Patients were grouped into the CP cohort if their CP diagnosis was made within the two years following index hernia repair. Total, outpatient, and pain prescription costs were collected in the period of five years prehernia to nine years posthernia repair. A longitudinal multivariate analysis was used to model the effects of chronic neuropathic posthernia repair pain on total inpatient/outpatient and pain prescription costs., Results: We identified 76,173 patients who underwent hernia repair and met inclusion criteria (CP: n = 14,919, No CP: n = 61,254). There was a trend for increased total inpatient/outpatient and pain prescription costs one-year posthernia repair, when compared to baseline costs for both cohorts. In both cohorts, total inpatient/outpatient costs remained elevated from baseline through nine years posthernia repair, with the CP cohort experiencing significantly higher cumulative median costs (CP: $51,334, No CP: $37,388). The CP diagnosis year was associated with a 1.75-fold increase (p < 0.001) in total inpatient/outpatient costs and a 2.26-fold increase (p < 0.001) in pain prescription costs versus all other years. In the longitudinal analysis, the CP cohort had a 1.14-fold increase (p < 0.001) in total inpatient/outpatient costs and 2.00-fold increase (p < 0.001) in pain prescription costs., Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the prevalence of CP after hernia surgery to be nearly 20%, with significantly increased costs and healthcare resource utilization. While current treatment paradigms are effective for many, there remains a large number of patients that could benefit from an overall approach that includes nonopioid treatments, such as potentially incorporating neurostimulation, for CP that presents posthernia repair., (© 2018 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established therapy for chronic pain syndromes, with growing applicability to other conditions. Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a widespread, chronic movement disorder managed primarily and incompletely by medication, and its etiology can be classified as idiopathic or secondary., Methods: Three patients underwent SCS implantation for chronic back and/or leg pain with concomitant targeting of RLS: (1) a 34-year-old man with sporadic RLS symptoms that strongly intensified after military-related spinal fractures, (2) a 54-year-old man with RLS likely secondary to meralgia paresthetica, and (3) a 42-year-old man with low back and right lower extremity pain after a military motor vehicle accident., Results: Continuing through 40-month, 2-month, and 28-month follow-ups, respectively, the patients experienced exemplary relief of their RLS symptoms. Notably in the case of patient 1, this benefit appears separate from his pain relief, as during the 5-month period directly after surgery but before adjusted targeting, he only experienced pain alleviation., Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of using SCS as a potentially long-lasting, safe, and highly effective therapy for RLS of mixed etiology. Additionally, 2 patients with RLS possibly secondary to chronic pain also benefited from the therapy. This success may be due to increased inhibition from hypothalamic cells controlling dopaminergic input to the spine., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objectives: Unplanned 30-day readmission rates contribute significantly to growing national healthcare expenditures. Drivers of unplanned 30-day readmission after spinal cord stimulator (SCS) implantation are relatively unknown. The aim of this study was to determine drivers of 30-day unplanned readmission following SCS implantation., Methods: The National Readmission Database was queried to identify all patients who underwent SCS implantation for the 2013 calendar year. Patients were grouped by readmission status, "No Readmission" and "Unplanned 30-day Readmission." Patient demographics and comorbidities were collected for each patient. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of unplanned 30-day readmissions and associated driving factors. A multivariate analysis was used to determine independent predictors of unplanned 30-day readmission after SCS implantation., Results: We identified 1521 patients who underwent SCS implantation, with 113 (7.4%) experiencing an unplanned readmission within 30 days. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics were similar between both cohorts. The three main drivers for 30-day readmission after SCS implantation include: 1) infection (not related to SCS device), 2) infection due to device (limited to only hardware infection), and 3) mechanical complication of SCS device. Furthermore, obesity was found to be an independent predictor of 30-day readmission (OR: 1.86, p = 0.008)., Conclusion: Our study suggests that infectious and mechanical complications are the primary drivers of unplanned 30-day readmission after SCS implantation, with obesity as an independent predictor of unplanned readmission. Given the technological advancements in SCS, repeated studies are necessary to identify factors associated with unplanned 30-day readmission rates after SCS implantation to improve patient outcomes and reduce associated costs., (© 2017 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Objectives: Certain patients ultimately undergo explantation of their spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices. Understanding the predictors and rates of SCS explantation has important implications for healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and pain management. The present study identifies explant predictors and discerns differences in HCRU for at-risk populations., Methods: We designed a large, retrospective analysis using the Truven MarketScan Database. We included all adult patients who underwent a SCS trial from 2007 to 2012. Patients were grouped into cohorts that remained explant-free or underwent explantation over a three-year period, and multivariate models evaluated differences in healthcare resource utilization., Results: A total of 8727 unique instances of trial implants between 2007 and 2012 were identified. Overall, 805 (9.2%) patients underwent device explantation. One year prior to SCS implantation, the explant cohort had significantly higher median baseline costs ($42,140.3 explant vs. $27,821.7 in non-explant groups; p < 0.0001), total number of pain encounters (180 vs. 103 p < 0.0001), and associated costs ($15,446.9 vs. $9,227.9; p < 0.0001). The explant cohort demonstrated increased use of procedures (19.0 vs. 9.0; p < 0.0001) compared to non-explanted patients. For each month after initial SCS implantation, explanted patients had a slower decrease in total costs (4% vs. 6% in non-explant; p < 0.01). At the month of explant, explant patients were expected to have incurred 2.65 times the total cost compared to the non-explant cohort (CR 2.65, 95% CI [1.83, 3.84]; p < 0.001). Medium volume providers had lower rates of explantation at one-year and three-years compared to low volume providers (p = 0.042). Increased age and Charlson index were independent predictors of explantation during the same periods., Conclusions: In this nationwide analysis, we identified that SCS device explantation is correlated with patients who have higher baseline costs, higher total cost post-SCS implantation, and increased use of procedures to control pain. The higher rates of explantation at three-years postimplant among low volume providers suggest that variations in provider experience and approach also contributes to differences in explantation rates., (© 2017 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Objectives: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has emerged as an appropriate modality of treatment for intractable chronic pain. The present study examines variations in SCS trial-to-permanent conversion rates based on provider types performing the procedure., Materials and Methods: We designed a large, retrospective analysis using the Truven MarketScan data base analyzing adult SCS patients with provider information available, with or without IPG implantation from the years 2007-2012. Patients were categorized based on provider type performing the implantation including anesthesiologists, neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R). Univariate and multivariate models identified factors associated with successful conversion., Results: A total of 7667 unique instances of SCS implants were identified across five providers. Overall, 4842 (63.2%) of those receiving trials underwent permanent SCS system implantation. Anesthesiology performed the majority of implants (62.8%), followed by neurosurgery (22.0%), orthopedic surgery (10.2%), and PM&R (5.3%). Compared to anesthesiologists, both neurosurgeons (OR 10.99, 95% CI [9.11, 13.25]; p < 0.001) and orthopedic surgeons (OR 4.64, 95% CI [3.81, 5.65]; p < 0.001) had significantly higher conversion rates, while PM&R (OR 0.71, 95% CI [0.58, 0.87]; p = 0.001) had significantly lower. Percutaneous implants comprised 5473 (71.4%) of all implants. Neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons performed a significantly greater number of paddle implants among the different providers (p < 0.0001). Explant rates were similar across all cohorts analyzed (average 11.6%; p = 0.546)., Conclusions: In this nationwide analysis, our results suggest that over a recent five-year period, conversion rates are highest when SCS trials are performed by neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. The study has important implications for establishing uniform guidelines for training, patient selection, and education of physicians across multiple disciplines., (© 2017 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Objectives: Conversion rates from trial leads to permanent spinal cord stimulation (SCS) systems have important implications for healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and pain management. We hypothesized that there is a volume-outcome effect, with chronic pain patients who visit high volume SCS implanters will have higher trial-to-permanent conversion rates., Materials and Methods: We designed a large, retrospective analysis using the Truven MarketScan database analyzing adult SCS patients with provider information available, with or without IPG implantation from the years 2007 to 2012 was designed. Patients were divided into three provider-based groups: high (>25), medium (9-24), and low (3-8) volume providers. Univariate and multivariate models identified factors associated with successful conversion., Results: A total of 17,850 unique trial implants were performed by 3028 providers. Of 13,879 patients with baseline data available, 8981 (64.7%) progressed to permanent SCS. Higher volume providers were associated with slightly higher conversion rates (65.9% vs. 63.3% low volume, p = 0.029), explant rates (9.2% vs. 7.7% medium volume, p = 0.026), younger age (52.0 ± 13.4 years vs. 53.0 ± 13.4 years, p = 0.0026), Medicare/Medicaid (47.8% vs. 35.0% low volume, p < 0.0001), Southern region (53.5% vs. 38.9% low volume, p < 0.0001), and higher Charlson comorbidity scores (1.0 [SD = 1.4], p = 0.0002). Multivariate regression results showed female gender (1.13 [95% CI: 1.05-1.22], p < 0.001) and high volume providers associated with higher odds of successful trial conversion (1.12 [95% CI: 1.02-1.22], p = 0.014)., Conclusions: In this nationwide analysis, high volume providers achieved higher trial-to-permanent SCS conversion rates than lower volume providers. The study has implications for both training requirements and referral patterns to delineate minimum implant experience necessary for provider proficiency. Future studies may be useful to understand HCRU differences., (© 2016 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Background: Patients with pain conditions place significant demands on health care services globally. Health economists have reported the annual economic cost of pain in the United States as high as $635 billion. A common challenge in treating patients suffering from chronic pain conditions is accurate diagnosis and treatment., Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the modern-day prevalence of individual types of pain diagnoses in adults., Study Design: Retrospective analysis of Truven MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental database., Setting: United States patient population with a pain diagnoses from 2000 to 2012., Methods: Multivariate analysis was used to determine the individual prevalence of specific types of pain diagnoses over a 13-year period., Patients: We grouped the 6,575,999 patients with ICD-9 pain diagnoses into pain groupings., Results: We determined the prevalence of pain groupings as back pain (74.7%), chronic pain (10.4%), complex regional pain syndrome (1.2%), degenerative spine disease (63.6%), limb pain (50.0%), neuritis/radiculitis (52.8%), and post-laminectomy syndrome (14.8%)., Limitations: Retrospective and non-randomized study, with a patient cohort that is weighted towards recent years and commercial insurance. Coding discrepancies that are recorded and collected for patients., Conclusions: The demographic differences and similarities within the subgroups highlighted the concept that pain diagnoses should be considered as separate, but related entities. The present study helps us to better understand the frequency of specific pain diagnoses, and directs future studies to appropriately focus on pain diagnoses based on prevalence. This will allow increased understanding of the variation in pain diagnoses and prevent over-generalization in studies examining pain patients to more accurately reflect the varied subtypes and their economic impact.Duke University Institutional Review Board Protocol: 00053624Key words: Pain diagnoses, CRPS, neuritis, radiculitis, limb pain, degenerative spine disease, back pain, chronic pain, post-laminectomy pain, prevalence, MarketScan.

Introduction: A shorter delay time from chronic pain diagnosis to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) implantation may make it more likely to achieve lasting therapeutic efficacy with SCS. The objective of this analysis was to determine the impact of pain-to-SCS time on patients' post-implant healthcare resource utilization (HCRU)., Methods: A retrospective observational study was performed using a real-world patient cohort derived from MarketScan(®) Commercial and Medicare Supplemental claims data bases from April 2008 through March 2013. The predictor variable was the time from the first diagnosis of chronic pain to permanent SCS implant. Using multivariable analysis, we studied the impact of pain-to-SCS time on HCRU in the first year post-implant. For some regression tests, patients were grouped into terciles by HCRU., Results: A total of 762 patients met inclusion criteria, with a median pain-to-SCS time of 1.35 years (Q1: 0.8, Q3: 1.9). For every one-year increase in pain-to-SCS time, the odds increased by 33% for being in the high medical expenditures group (defined using the upper tercile: $4133 over above) over the low group (first lower: $603 or less). The odds increased by 39% for being in the high opioid prescriptions group (10-58 prescriptions) over the low group (0-1). The odds increased by 44% and 55%, respectively, for being in the high office visits (8-77) or hospitalizations (3-28) group over the low office visits (0-2) or hospitalizations (0) group., Conclusions: HCRU increased in the year following SCS implantation with longer pain-to-SCS time. These results suggest that considering SCS earlier in the care continuum for chronic pain may improve patient outcomes, with reductions in hospitalizations, clinic visits, and opioid usage., (© 2016 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Introduction: The Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) of the International Neuromodulation Society (INS) evaluated evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of neurostimulation to treat chronic pain, chronic critical limb ischemia, and refractory angina and recommended appropriate clinical applications., Methods: The NACC used literature reviews, expert opinion, clinical experience, and individual research. Authors consulted the Practice Parameters for the Use of Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain (2006), systematic reviews (1984 to 2013), and prospective and randomized controlled trials (2005 to 2013) identified through PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar., Results: Neurostimulation is relatively safe because of its minimally invasive and reversible characteristics. Comparison with medical management is difficult, as patients considered for neurostimulation have failed conservative management. Unlike alternative therapies, neurostimulation is not associated with medication-related side effects and has enduring effect. Device-related complications are not uncommon; however, the incidence is becoming less frequent as technology progresses and surgical skills improve. Randomized controlled studies support the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation in treating failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome. Similar studies of neurostimulation for peripheral neuropathic pain, postamputation pain, postherpetic neuralgia, and other causes of nerve injury are needed. International guidelines recommend spinal cord stimulation to treat refractory angina; other indications, such as congestive heart failure, are being investigated., Conclusions: Appropriate neurostimulation is safe and effective in some chronic pain conditions. Technological refinements and clinical evidence will continue to expand its use. The NACC seeks to facilitate the efficacy and safety of neurostimulation., (© 2014 International Neuromodulation Society.)

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an alternative or adjunct therapy to treat chronic pain, a prevalent and clinically challenging condition. Although SCS has substantial clinical success, the therapy is still prone to failures, including lead breakage, lead migration, and poor pain relief. The goal of this study was to develop a computational model of SCS and use the model to compare activation of neural elements during intradural and extradural electrode placement. We constructed five patient-specific models of SCS. Stimulation thresholds predicted by the model were compared to stimulation thresholds measured intraoperatively, and we used these models to quantify the efficiency and selectivity of intradural and extradural SCS. Intradural placement dramatically increased stimulation efficiency and reduced the power required to stimulate the dorsal columns by more than 90%. Intradural placement also increased selectivity, allowing activation of a greater proportion of dorsal column fibers before spread of activation to dorsal root fibers, as well as more selective activation of individual dermatomes at different lateral deviations from the midline. Further, the results suggest that current electrode designs used for extradural SCS are not optimal for intradural SCS, and a novel azimuthal tripolar design increased stimulation selectivity, even beyond that achieved with an intradural paddle array. Increased stimulation efficiency is expected to increase the battery life of implantable pulse generators, increase the recharge interval of rechargeable implantable pulse generators, and potentially reduce stimulator volume. The greater selectivity of intradural stimulation may improve the success rate of SCS by mitigating the sensitivity of pain relief to malpositioning of the electrode. The outcome of this effort is a better quantitative understanding of how intradural electrode placement can potentially increase the selectivity and efficiency of SCS, which, in turn, provides predictions that can be tested in future clinical studies assessing the potential therapeutic benefits of intradural SCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Patients with chronic low back pain have high healthcare resource utilization. • Majority of healthcare costs for chronic low back pain are from outpatient services. • Patients with chronic low back pain needed opioids years after initial diagnosis. • Diabetes, outpatient visits, and prescriptions are associated with high utilization. Chronic low back pain is a leading cause of morbidity and is among the largest cost drivers for the healthcare system. Research on healthcare resource utilization of patients with low back pain who are not surgical candidates is limited, and few studies follow individuals who generate high healthcare costs over time. This claims study aimed to identify patients with high-impact mechanical, chronic low back pain (CLBP), quantify their low back pain-related health resource utilization, and explore associated patient characteristics. We hypothesize that patients in the top quartile of healthcare resource utilization in the second year after initial diagnosis will continue to generate considerable back pain-related costs in subsequent years. IBM MarketScan Research Databases from 2009-2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Adults in the United States with an initial diagnosis of low back pain between 2010 and 2014 who did not have cancer, spine surgery, recent pregnancy, or inflammatory spine conditions, were identified using the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. To ensure patients had chronic low back pain, it was required that individuals had additional claims with a low back pain diagnosis 6 to 12 and 12 to 24 months after initial diagnosis. Cost and utilization of inpatient visits, outpatient visits, emergency room visits, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment options and imaging for chronic low back pain. Annual back pain-related costs and the use of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for 5 years were analyzed. Logistic regression was utilized to identify factors associated with persistent high spending. Of 16,917 individuals who met the criteria for chronic low back pain, 4,229 met the criteria for having high healthcare utilization, defined as being in the top quartile of back pain-related costs in the 12 to 24 months after their initial diagnosis. The mean and median back pain-related cost in the first year after an initial diagnosis was $7,112 (SD $9,670) and $4,405 (Q1 $2,147, Q3 $8,461). Mean and median back pain related costs in the second year were $11,989 (SD $20,316) and $5,935 (Q1 $3,892, Q3 $10,678). Costs continued to be incurred in years 3 to 5 at a reduced rate. The cumulative mean cost for back pain over the 5 years following the initial diagnosis was $31,459 (SD $39,545). The majority of costs were from outpatient services. Almost a quarter of the high utilizers remained in the top quartile of back pain-related costs during years 3 to 5 after the initial diagnosis, and another 19% remained in the top quartile for 2 of the 3 subsequent years. For these two groups combined (42%), the 5-year cumulative mean cost for back pain was $43,818 (SD $48,270). Patient characteristics associated with a higher likelihood of remaining as high utilizers were diabetes, having a greater number of outpatient visits and pharmacologic prescriptions, and lower utilization of imaging services. This is one of the first studies to use an administrative claims database to identify high healthcare resource utilizers among a population of United States individuals with nonsurgical, chronic low back pain and follow their utilization over time. There was a population of individuals who continued to experience high costs 5 years beyond their initial diagnosis, and the majority of individuals continued to seek outpatient services. Further longitudinal claims research that incorporates symptom severity is needed to understand the economic implications of this condition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]