Search

Objective: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys, completed by patients following an inpatient stay, are utilized to assess patient satisfaction and quality of the patient experience. HCAHPS results directly impact hospital and provider reimbursements. While recent work has demonstrated that pre- and postoperative factors can affect HCAHPS results following lumbar spine surgery, little is known about how these results are influenced by hospital length of stay (LOS). Here, the authors examined HCAHPS results in patients with LOSs greater or less than expected following lumbar spine surgery to determine whether LOS influences survey scores after these procedures., Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective review of HCAHPS surveys, patient demographics, and outcomes following lumbar spine surgery at a single institution. A total of 391 patients who had undergone lumbar spine surgery and had completed an HCAHPS survey in the period between 2013 and 2015 were included in this analysis. Patients were divided into those with a hospital LOS equal to or less than the expected (LTE-LOS) and those with a hospital LOS longer than expected (GTE-LOS). Expected LOS was based on the University HealthSystem Consortium benchmarks. Nineteen questions from the HCAHPS survey were examined in relation to patient LOS. The primary outcome measure was a comparison of "top-box" ("9-10" or "always or usually") versus "low-box" ("1-8" and "somewhat or never") scores on the HCAHPS questions. Secondary outcomes of interest were whether the comorbid conditions of cancer, chronic renal failure, diabetes, coronary artery disease, hypertension, stroke, or depression occurred differently with respect to LOS. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test for the 2 × 2 contingency tables and the chi-square test for categorical variables., Results: Two hundred fifty-seven patients had an LTE-LOS, whereas 134 patients had a GTE-LOS. The only statistically significant difference in preoperative characteristics between the patient groups was hypertension, which correlated to a shorter LOS. A GTE-LOS was associated with a decreased likelihood of a top-box score for the HCAHPS survey items on doctor listening and pain control., Conclusions: Here, the authors report a decreased likelihood of top-box responses for some HCAHPS questions following lumbar spine surgery if LOS is prolonged. This study highlights the need to further examine the factors impacting LOS, identify patients at risk for long hospital stays, and improve mechanisms to increase the quality and efficiency of care delivered to this patient population.

The use of intraoperative multimodal monitoring (IOM) in spinal deformity surgeries is well documented. In particular, pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), a corrective procedure for sagittal deformity of the spine, often involves IOM usage. By providing immediate feedback to the operating surgeon, IOM has the potential to eliminate or at least minimize the risk of iatrogenic neurological injury. However, despite the widespread usage of IOM, there is currently no standardization of IOM usage in complex spine surgeries, including lumbar PSOs, and decisions concerning IOM utilization are often driven by surgeon experience and preference. This creates a state of clinical equipoise, which is further complicated by the varying degrees of benefit that IOM has on patient outcomes depending on the operation and spinal levels involved. For instance, while IOM use in thoracic PSOs has been shown to be effective, there is no established consensus on the net impact of IOM use in PSOs of the lumbar spine. Although IOM has the potential to mitigate neurological damage, it also increases operation time and cost; thus, it should only be used in operations where it will have a net positive impact on patient outcomes. The question thus becomes whether PSO of the lumbar spine is one such operation. To address this, we examine the most frequently used IOM modalities and evaluate their current usage and efficacy in lumbar PSOs. Furthermore, we will also examine the utility of IOM for other surgeries of the lumbar spine, including corrective procedures for idiopathic scoliosis and degenerative scoliosis, and routine lumbar procedures, such as discectomies and decompression surgeries for foraminal and canal stenosis.

Study Design: This was a retrospective cohort study., Objective: The main objectives of this study were: (1) to determine whether patient-reported allergies (PRAs) are associated with patient satisfaction scores, and (2) to clarify the association between PRAs and preoperative anxiety and depression in a lumbar spine surgery population., Summary of Background Data: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey is currently used to measure the patient experience and there is concern that psychosocial factors are unaccounted for. Interestingly, PRAs have been linked to concurrent mood and other psychiatric disorders, as well as poor clinical outcomes in the orthopedic surgery setting., Methods: HCAHPS survey data, patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and preoperative health status were obtained for each patient. Allergies were categorized as medical (ie, medications) and environmental (ie, food, animals). Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine whether the number of medical and environmental PRAs are associated with HCAHPS scores. In addition, multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the association between PRAs and psychological distress., Results: In 421 patients included, PRAs were associated with lower HCAHPS scores under several dimensions of the patient experience of care, including: nursing communication, pain management, communication about medicines, and transition of care. Medical PRAs was an independent predictor of low satisfaction with communication about a medication's side effects [odds ratio (OR), 0.88; P=0.03] and understanding the purpose for new medications (OR, 0.90; P=0.03). Environmental PRAs was an independent predictor of low satisfaction with both communication about a medication's side effects (OR, 0.68; P=0.03), and pain control (OR, 0.67; P=0.01). Moreover, having a PRA (OR, 1.64; P=0.04) was associated with EuroQol-5 Dimensions anxiety/depression and having an environmental PRA (OR, 2.13; P=0.03) was associated with depression., Conclusions: These findings highlight the potential utility of PRAs to help identify patients with psychological distress who are at risk for a poor experience of lumbar spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE The Patient Experience of Care, composed of 9 dimensions derived from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, is being used by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to adjust hospital reimbursement. Currently, there are minimal data on how scores on the constituent HCAHPS items impact the global dimension of satisfaction, the Overall Hospital Rating (OHR). The purpose of this study was to determine the key drivers of overall patient satisfaction in the setting of inpatient lumbar spine surgery. METHODS Demographic and preoperative patient characteristics were obtained. Patients selecting a top-box score for OHR (a 9 or 10 of 10) were considered to be satisfied with their hospital experience. A baseline multivariable logistic regression model was then developed to analyze the association between patient characteristics and top-box OHR. Then, multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for patient-level covariates were used to determine the association between individual components of the HCAHPS survey and a top-box OHR. RESULTS A total of 453 patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery were included, 80.1% of whom selected a top-box OHR. Diminishing overall health status (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.91) was negatively associated with top-box OHR. After adjusting for potential confounders, the survey items that were associated with the greatest increased odds of selecting a top-box OHR were: staff always did everything they could to help with pain (OR 12.5, 95% CI 6.6-23.7), and nurses were always respectful (OR 11.0, 95% CI 5.3-22.6). CONCLUSIONS Patient experience of care is increasingly being used to determine hospital and physician reimbursement. The present study analyzed the key drivers of patient experience among patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery and found several important associations. Patient overall health status was associated with top-box OHR. After adjusting for potential confounders, staff always doing everything they could to help with pain and nurses always being respectful were the strongest predictors of overall satisfaction in this population. These findings highlight opportunities for quality improvement efforts in the spine care setting.

Background Context: Lumbar fusion is an effective and durable treatment for symptomatic lumbar spondylolisthesis; however, the current literature provides insufficient evidence to recommend an optimal surgical fusion strategy., Purpose: The present study aims to compare the clinical outcomes, fusion rates, blood loss, and operative times between open posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) alone and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) + posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis., Study Design: This is a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of English language studies for the treatment of spondylolisthesis with PLF versus PLF + TLIF., Patient Sample: Data were obtained from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies., Outcome Measures: Clinical outcomes included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back pain, leg pain, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores. Fusion rate, operative time, blood loss, and infection rate were also assessed., Methods: A literature search of three electronic databases was performed to identify investigations performed comparing PLF alone with PLF + TLIF for treatment of low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis. The summary effect size was assessed from pooling observational studies for each of the outcome variables, with odds ratios (ORs) used for fusion and infection rate, mean difference used for improvement in ODI and leg pain as well as operative time and blood loss, and standardized mean difference used for improvement in back pain and HRQOL outcomes. Studies were weighed based on the inverse of the variance and heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 -an estimate of the error caused by between-study variation. Effect sizes from the meta-analysis were then compared with data from the RCTs to assess congruence in outcomes., Results: The initial literature search yielded 282 unique, English language studies. Seven were determined to meet our inclusion criteria and were included in our qualitative analysis. Five observational studies were included in our quantitative meta-analysis. The pooled fusion success rates were 84.7% (100/118) in the PLF group and 94.3% (116/123) in the TLIF group. Compared with TLIF patients, PLF patients had significantly lower odds of achieving solid arthrodesis (OR 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.82, p=.02; I 2 =0%). With regard to improvement in back pain, the point estimate for the effect size was -0.27 (95% CI -0.43 to -0.10, p=.002; I 2 =0%), in favor of the TLIF group. For ODI, the pooled estimate for the effect size was -3.73 (95% CI -7.09 to -0.38, p=.03; I 2 =35%), significantly in favor of the TLIF group. Operative times were significantly shorter in the PLF group, with a summary effect size of -25.55 (95% CI -43.64 to -7.45, p<.01; I 2 =54%). No significant difference was observed in leg pain, HRQOL improvement, blood loss, or infection rate. Our meta-analysis results were consistent with RCTs, in favor of TLIF for achieving radiographic fusion and greater improvement in ODI and back pain., Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that for patients undergoing fusion for spondylolisthesis, TLIF is superior to PLF with regard to achieving radiographic fusion. However, current data only provide weak support, if any, favoring TLIF over PLF for clinical improvement in disability and back pain., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Context: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or anterior lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screws (ALIFPS) offer significantly higher radiographic fusion rates than other fusion techniques for L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). As it stands, there is a relative paucity of comparative data of the two techniques., Purpose: To define the clinical, radiographic, and financial differences between TLIF and ALIFPS for L5-S1 IS., Design/setting: A retrospective cohort study conducted at a single tertiary care center., Patient Sample: Sixty-six patients who underwent either TLIF or ALIPFS for L5-S1 IS at a single tertiary care center between 2009 and 2014., Outcome Measures: Quality of life outcome scores including the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Sagittal balance parameters including: pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, segmental lordosis, total lordosis, degree of slip, disc height, and L1-axis S1 distance (LASD). Cost measures included in-hospital charges, hospital length of stay (LOS), and post-admission costs accrued over 1 year., Methods: Quality of life (QoL) outcome scores, radiographic data, and financial data were collected with a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Clinical results were investigated using the PDQ, PHQ-9, and EQ-5D. Radiographic measurements included lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, height of disc, L-1 axis S-1 distance, and the degree of slip. Cost data were generated based on patient-level resource utilization. Comparative data were presented as median with interquartile range (IQR). Continuous variables were compared using either independent Student t tests assuming unequal variance or Mann-Whitney U tests for parametric and nonparametric variables, respectively. The minimally clinical important difference (MCID) used for each questionnaire was as follows: PDQ (26), PHQ-9 (5), and EQ-5D (0.4)., Results: A total of 66 patients met inclusion criteria. In the ALIFPS cohort, PDQ scores improved from 69 [47, 82] to 26 [18.2, 79.7], p=.02. In the TLIF cohort, PDQ scores improved from 73 [46, 85] to 48.5 [23, 67.5], p=.01. Both groups also showed a significant improvement in EQ-5D scores at 1 year, but the ALIFPS group showed a significantly greater improvement in EQ-5D scores at 1 year (0.1 [0,0.2] vs. 0.2 [0.1, 0.4], p=.02). Furthermore, only the ALIFPS cohort showed a significant improvement in segmental lordosis. The ALIFPS cohort showed a significantly greater improvement in disc height than did TLIF (3.5 [2, 5.5] vs. 6.7 [4.1, 10], p=.01). No significant differences were found in the direct costs of both procedures., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that anterior lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screws can achieve better clinical outcomes compared with TLIF for the treatment of IS. We believe the superior radiographic outcomes achieved through ALIFPS, namely a greater restoration of segmental lordosis and disc height, may have contributed to the improved clinical outcomes presented in the current study., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys are used to assess the quality of the patient experience following an inpatient stay. Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems scores are used to determine reimbursement for hospital systems and incentivize spine surgeons nationwide. There are conflicting data detailing whether early readmission or other postdischarge complications are associated with patient responses on the HCAHPS survey. Currently, the association between postdischarge emergency department (ED) visits and HCAHPS scores following lumbar spine surgery is unknown., Purpose: To determine whether ED visits within 30 days of discharge are associated with HCAHPS scores for patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Patient Sample: A total of 453 patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery who completed the HCAHPS survey between 2013 and 2015 at a single tertiary care center., Outcome Measures: The HCAHPS survey-the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' official measure of patient experience-results for each patient were analyzed as the primary outcome of this study., Methods: All patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery between 2013 and 2015 who completed an HCAHPS survey were studied. Patients were excluded from the study if they had been diagnosed with spinal malignancy or scoliosis. Patients who had an ED visit at our institution within 30 days of discharge were included in the ED visit cohort. The primary outcomes of this study include 21 measures of patient experience on the HCAHPS survey. Statistical analysis included Pearson chi-square for categorical variables, Student t test for normally distributed continuous variables, and Mann-Whitney U test for nonparametric variables. Additionally, log-binomial regression models were used to analyze the association between ED visits within 30 days after discharge and odds of top-box HCAHPS scores. No funds were received in support of this study, and the authors report no conflict of interest-associated biases., Results: After adjusting for patient-level covariates using log-binomial regression models, we found postdischarge ED visits were independently associated with lower likelihood of top-box score for several individual questions on HCAHPS. Emergency department visits within 30 days of discharge were negatively associated with perceiving your doctor as "always" treating you with courtesy and respect (risk ratio [RR] 0.26, p<.001), as well as perceiving your doctor as "always" listeningcarefully to you (RR 0.40, p=.003). Also, patients with an ED visit were less likely to feel as if their preferences were taken into account when leaving the hospital (RR 0.61, p=.008), less likely to recommend the hospital to family or friends (RR 0.46, p=.020), and less likely to rate the hospital as a 9 or a 10 out of 10, the top-box score (RR 0.43, p=.005)., Conclusions: Our results demonstrate a strong association between postdischarge ED visits and low HCAHPS scores for doctor communication, discharge information, and global measures of hospital satisfaction in a lumbar spine surgery population., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Context: Lumbar fusion is a common and costly procedure in the United States. Reimbursement for surgical procedures is increasingly tied to care quality and patient safety as part of value-based reimbursement programs. The incidence of adverse quality events among lumbar fusion patients is unknown using the definition of care quality (patient safety indicators [PSI]) used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The association between insurance status and the incidence of PSI is similarly unknown in lumbar fusion patients., Purpose: This study sought to determine the incidence of PSI in patients undergoing inpatient lumbar fusion and to quantify the association between primary payer status and PSI in this population., Study Design: A retrospective cohort study was carried out., Patient Sample: The sample comprised all adult patients aged 18 years and older who were included in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) that underwent lumbar fusion from 1998 to 2011., Outcome Measure: The incidence of one or more PSI, a validated and widely used metric of inpatient health-care quality and patient safety, was the primary outcome variable., Methods: The NIS data were examined for all cases of inpatient lumbar fusion from 1998 to 2011. The incidence of adverse patient safety events (PSI) was determined using publicly available lists of the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. Logistic regression models were used to determine the association between primary payer status (Medicaid and self-pay relative to private insurance) and the incidence of PSI., Results: A total of 539,172 adult lumbar fusion procedures were recorded in the NIS from 1998 to 2011. Patients were excluded from the secondary analysis if "other" or "missing" was listed for primary insurance status. The national incidence of PSI was calculated to be 2,445 per 100,000 patient years of observation, or approximately 2.5%. In a secondary analysis, after adjusting for patient demographics and hospital characteristics, Medicaid and self-pay patients had significantly greater odds of experiencing one or more PSI during the inpatient episode relative to privately insured patients (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.27)., Conclusions: Among patients undergoing inpatient lumbar fusion, insurance status is associated with the adverse health-care quality events used to determine hospital reimbursement by the CMS. The source of this disparity must be studied to improve the quality of care delivered to vulnerable patient populations., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Repetitive lumbar hyperextension and rotation during athletic activity affect the structural integrity of the lumbar spine. While many sports have been associated with an increased risk of developing a pars defect, few previous studies have systematically investigated spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis in professional baseball players. Purpose: To characterize the epidemiology and treatment of symptomatic lumbar spondylolysis and isthmic spondylolisthesis in American professional baseball players. We also sought to report the return-to-play (RTP) and performance-based outcomes associated with the diagnosis of a pars defect in this elite athlete population. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among all Major and Minor League Baseball (MLB and MiLB, respectively) players who had low back pain and underwent lumbar spine imaging between 2011 and 2016. Players with radiological evidence of a pars defect (with or without listhesis) were included. Analyses were conducted to assess the association between player-specific characteristics and RTP time. Baseball performance metrics were also compared before and after the injury episode to determine whether there was an association between the diagnosis of a pars defect and diminished player performance. Results: During the study period of 6 MLB seasons, 272 professional baseball players had low back pain and underwent lumbar spine imaging. Overall, 75 of these athletes (27.6%) received a diagnosis of pars defect. All affected athletes except one (98.7%) successfully returned to professional baseball, with a median RTP time of 51 days. Players with spondylolisthesis returned to play faster than those with spondylolysis, MLB athletes returned faster than MiLB athletes, and position players returned faster than pitchers. Athletes with a diagnosed pars defect did not show a significant decline in performance after returning to competition after their injury episode. Conclusion: Lumbar pars defects were a common cause of low back pain in American professional baseball players. The vast majority of affected athletes were able to return to competition without demonstrating a significant decline in baseball performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]