Insurance Type is Associated with Baseline Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients with Lumbar Stenosis

Disparities in access but not outcomes: Medicaid versus non-Medicaid patients in multidisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation

Purpose: There are known disparities in chronic pain severity, treatment, and opioid-related risks amongst individuals from lower socioeconomic status, including Medicaid beneficiaries, but little is known about whether Medicaid beneficiaries benefit in a similar way from multidisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation. This study investigated differences in clinical outcomes between Medicaid and non-Medicaid beneficiaries who completed a 3-week multidisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation program.Methods: Participants (N = 131) completed a broad range of clinical measures pre- and post-treatment including pain severity, pain interference, depression, anxiety, objective physical functioning, and opioid misuse risk. Patients with Medicaid were compared with non-Medicaid patients in terms of baseline characteristics and rate of change, utilizing two-factor repeated measures analyses of variance.Results: There were baseline characteristic differences, with Medicaid beneficiaries being more likely to be African American, have higher rates of pain, worse physical functioning, and lower rates of opioid use. Despite baseline differences, both groups demonstrated significantly improved outcomes across all measures (p<.001) and no significant difference in rate of improvement.Conclusions: Results suggest that pain rehabilitation is as effective for Medicaid recipients as non-Medicaid recipients. Patients with Medicaid are particularly vulnerable to disparities in treatment, so efforts to expand access to multidisciplinary pain treatments are warranted.

Expandable versus static transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages: comparing radiographic outcomes and complication profiles

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages have become popular in recent years due to anticipated advantages of increased disc height, improved segmental lordosis, and ease of implantation. Such benefits have not been conclusively demonstrated in the literature.

PURPOSE

To determine whether expandable cages increase disc height and segmental lordosis in a durable way following surgery and compare complication profiles between cage types.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective cohort study conducted within a large academic health system involving 31 different spine surgeons.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Adults undergoing single-level TLIF for an indication other than infection, tumor, trauma, or revision instrumentation from 2021 to 2023.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Our primary outcomes were changes in segmental disc height, segmental lordosis, and L4-S1 lordosis at 2 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year following surgery relative to baseline. Our secondary outcomes were frequencies of incidental durotomies, surgical site infections, readmissions, death, subsidence, and unplanned return to the operating room.

METHODS

Radiographic variables were collected from our institutional imaging registry. Demographics and surgical characteristics were abstracted from chart review. Generalized linear modeling was used for each primary outcome, with cage type (expandable vs. static) as our primary predictor and age, biologic sex, race, CCI, year of surgery, duration of surgery, invasiveness of surgery, surgeon specialty (Orthopedics vs. Neurosurgery), and level of surgery as covariates.

RESULTS

Our cohort consisted of 417 patients with a mean age of 62. Static cages were used in 306 patients and expandable cages in 111. Expandable cages were associated with increased changes in disc height relative to static cages at 2 weeks (1.1 mm [0.2-1.9]; p=.01) and 6 months (1.2 mm [0.2-2.3]; p=.02) following surgery, but differences were no longer significant at 1 year (0.4 mm [-0.9-1.8]; p=.4). Expandable cages were found to subside more commonly than static cages (14.1% vs. 6.6%; p=.04). No significant differences between cage types were identified in lordotic parameters at any timepoint (p=0.25 to p=0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Expandable cages were associated with an initial increase in disc height relative to static cages, but this difference diminished with the first year of surgery, likely due to a higher rate of subsidence within the expandable cohort.

Disparities in Surgical Intervention and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Racial/Ethnic Groups With Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Racial and socioeconomic disparities in spine surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis persist in the United States, potentially contributing to unequal health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. This is important as lumbar spondylolisthesis is one of the most common causes of surgical low back pain, and low back pain is the largest disabler of individuals worldwide. Our objective was to assess the relationship between race, socioeconomic factors, treatment utilization, and outcomes in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

This cohort study analyzed prospectively collected data from 9941 patients diagnosed with lumbar spondylolisthesis between 2015 and 2020 at 5 academic hospitals. Exposures were race, socioeconomic status, health coverage, and HRQoL measures. Main outcomes and measures included treatment utilization rates between racial groups and the association between race and treatment outcomes using logistic regression, adjusting for patient characteristics, socioeconomic status, health coverage, and HRQoL measures.

RESULTS

Of the 9941 patients included (mean [SD] age, 67.37 [12.40] years; 63% female; 1101 [11.1%] Black, Indigenous, and People of Color [BIPOC]), BIPOC patients were significantly less likely to use surgery than White patients (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.62-0.75). Furthermore, BIPOC race was associated with significantly lower odds of reaching the minimum clinically important difference for physical function (OR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.60; 0.91) and pain interference (OR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97). Medicaid beneficiaries were significantly less likely (OR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92) to reach a clinically important improvement in HRQoL when accounting for race.

CONCLUSION

This study found that BIPOC patients were less likely to use spine surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis despite reporting higher pain interference, suggesting an association between race and surgical utilization. These disparities may contribute to unequal HRQoL outcomes for patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis and warrant further investigation to address and reduce treatment disparities.

The Oswestry Disability Index is reflective of pain interference and mobility in children

PURPOSE

The 9-item Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1a (ODI-9) has never been formally validated in children. Our primary purpose was to evaluate the ODI-9 using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pediatric Pain Interference (PI) and Mobility Computer Adapted Test (CAT) and Pain Catastrophizing Scale for Children (PCS-C) as anchors to determine concurrent validity in children.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed cross-sectional patient-reported outcomes data using a convenience sample of children referred to a tertiary pediatric orthopedic institution for any spine condition from April 2021 to April 2022. The ODI-9, PI, and Mobility were completed at clinic intake in 2,097 children (1453 girls, 644 boys) aged 14.2 ± 2.6 years (range 5-18 years) during the same visit. The ODI-9 was administered when children or caregivers responded "yes" to the presence of back pain. The PCS-C was administered only when pain intensity was rated as "very severe" or "the worst imaginable" on Item 1 of the ODI-9 (n = 51).

RESULTS

Average ODI-9 scores were 18.3% ± 14.8%, indicating minimal disability (ODI-9 ≤ 20%). Moderate, statistically and clinically significant associations were seen between the ODI-9 and PI (r = 0.68, p < 0.001), the ODI-9 and Mobility (r = - 0.68, p < 0.001), and the ODI-9 and PCS-C (r = 0.59, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Worse ODI-9 scores correlate with worse PROMIS PI scores, worse PROMIS Mobility scores, and worse PCS-C scores. The associations were moderate (PROMIS PI [r = 0.68], PROMIS Mobility [r = - 0.68], PCS-C [r = 0.59]).

Socioeconomic Status Correlates With Initial Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) Scores but Not the Likelihood of Spine Surgery

Objective To explore how socioeconomic status and patient characteristics may be associated with initial self-reports of pain and determine if there was an increased association with undergoing spine surgery. Methods Patients at an academic center between 2015 and 2021 who completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) questionnaire were included. Multivariable linear regression models were used to determine the association between insurance type and patient factors with initial reports of pain. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine the association between PI and the likelihood of surgery in two time periods, three and 12 months. Results The study included 9,587 patients. The mean PROMIS-PI scores were 61.93 (SD 7.82) and 63.74 (SD 6.93) in the cervical and lumbar cohorts, respectively. Medicaid and Workers' Compensation insurance patients reported higher pain scores compared to those with private insurance: Medicaid (cervical: 2.77, CI (1.76-3.79), p<0.001; lumbar (2.05, CI (1.52-2.59), p<0.001); Workers' Compensation (cervical: 2.12, CI (0.96-3.27), p<0.001; lumbar: 1.51, CI (0.79-2.23), p<0.001). Black patients reported higher pain compared to White patients (cervical: 1.50, CI (0.44-2.55), p=0.01; lumbar: 1.51, CI (0.94-2.08), p<0.001). Higher PROMIS-PI scores were associated with a higher likelihood of surgery. There was no increased association of likelihood of surgery in Black, Medicaid, or Workers' Compensation patients when controlling for pain severity. Conclusion Black patients and patients with Medicaid and Workers' compensation insurance were likely to report higher pain scores. Higher initial pain scores were associated with an increased likelihood of surgery. However, despite increased pain scores, Black patients and those with Medicaid and Workers' Compensation insurance did not have a higher likelihood of undergoing surgery.

Validation of the Stopping Opioids After Surgery (SOS) Score for the Sustained Use of Prescription Opioids Following Orthopaedic Surgery

BACKGROUND

The Stopping Opioids after Surgery (SOS) score was developed to identify patients at risk for sustained opioid use following surgery. The SOS score has not been specifically validated for patients in a general orthopaedic context. Our primary objective was to validate the SOS score within this context.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we considered a broad array of representative orthopaedic procedures performed between January 1, 2018, and March 31, 2022. These procedures included rotator cuff repair, lumbar discectomy, lumbar fusion, total knee and total hip arthroplasty, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of ankle fracture, ORIF of distal radial fracture, and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The performance of the SOS score was evaluated by calculating the c-statistic, receiver operating characteristic curve, and the observed rates of sustained prescription opioid use (defined as uninterrupted prescriptions of opioids for ≥90 days) following surgery. For our sensitivity analysis, we compared these metrics among various time epochs related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

A total of 26,114 patients were included, of whom 51.6% were female and 78.1% were White. The median age was 63 years. The observed prevalence of sustained opioid use was 1.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2% to 1.5%) in the low-risk group (SOS score of <30), 7.4% (95% CI, 6.9% to 8.0%) in the medium-risk group (SOS score of 30 to 60), and 20.8% (95% CI, 17.7% to 24.2%) in the high-risk group (SOS score of >60). The performance of the SOS score in the overall group was strong, with a c-statistic of 0.82. The performance of the SOS score showed no evidence of worsening over time. The c-statistic was 0.79 before the COVID-19 pandemic and ranged from 0.77 to 0.80 throughout the waves of the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

We validated the use of the SOS score for sustained prescription opioid use following a diverse array of orthopaedic procedures across subspecialties. This tool is easy to implement for the purpose of prospectively identifying patients in musculoskeletal service lines who are at higher risk for sustained opioid use, thereby enabling the future implementation of upstream interventions and modifications to avert opioid abuse and to combat the opioid epidemic.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Time to achievement of minimum clinically important difference after lumbar decompression

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to examine factors associated with delayed time to achieve minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in patients undergoing lumbar decompression (LD) for the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg pain.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LD with preoperative and postoperative ODI, VAS back, and VAS leg scores were retrospectively reviewed from April 2016 to January 2021. MCID values from previously established studies were utilized to determine MCID achievement. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis determined the time to achieve MCID. Hazard ratios from multivariable Cox regression were utilized to determine the preoperative factors predictive of MCID achievement.

RESULTS

Three-hundred and forty-three patients were identified undergoing LD. Overall MCID achievement rates were 67.4% for ODI, 67.1% for VAS back, and 65.0% for VAS leg. The mean time in weeks for MCID achievement was 22.52 ± 30.48 for ODI, 18.90 ± 27.43 for VAS back, and 20.96 ± 29.81 for VAS leg. Multivariable Cox regression revealed active smoker status, preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), ODI, VAS Back, and VAS Leg (HR 1.03-2.14) as predictors of early MCID achievement, whereas an American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) classification of 2, Black ethnicity, workers' compensation, private insurance, and diagnosis of foraminal stenosis were predictors of late MCID achievement (HR 0.34-0.58).

CONCLUSION

Most patients undergoing LD achieved MCID within 6 months of surgery. Significant factors for early MCID achievement were active smoking status and baseline PROs. Significant factors for late MCID achievement were ASA = 2, Black ethnicity, type of insurance, and foraminal stenosis diagnosis. These factors may be considered by surgeons in setting patient expectations.

Projected Lifetime Cancer Risk Associated With Intraoperative Computed Tomography for Lumbar Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE

(1) To determine the incremental increase in intraoperative ionizing radiation conferred by computed tomography (CT) as compared with conventional radiography; and (2) to model different lifetime cancer risks contextualized by the intersection between age, sex, and intraoperative imaging modality.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Emerging technologies in spine surgery, like navigation, automation, and augmented reality, commonly utilize intraoperative CT. Although much has been written about the benefits of such imaging modalities, the inherent risk profile of increasing intraoperative CT has not been well evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Effective doses of intraoperative ionizing radiation were extracted from 610 adult patients who underwent single-level instrumented fusion for lumbar degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis from January 2015 through January 2022. Patients were divided into those who received intraoperative CT (n=138) and those who underwent conventional intraoperative radiography (n=472). Generalized linear modeling was utilized with intraoperative CT use as a primary predictor and patient demographics, disease characteristics, and preference-sensitive intraoperative considerations ( e.g. surgical approach and surgical invasiveness) as covariates. The adjusted risk difference in radiation dose calculated from our regression analysis was used to prognosticate the associated cancer risk across age and sex strata.

RESULTS

(1) After adjusting for covariates, intraoperative CT was associated with 7.6 mSv (interquartile range: 6.8-8.4 mSv; P <0.001) more radiation than conventional radiography. (2) For the median patient in our population (a 62-year-old female), intraoperative CT use increased lifetime cancer risk by 2.3 incidents (interquartile range: 2.1-2.6) per 10,000. Similar projections for other age and sex strata were also appreciated.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative CT use significantly increases cancer risk compared with conventional intraoperative radiography for patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusions. As emerging technologies in spine surgery continue to proliferate and leverage intraoperative CT for cross-sectional imaging data, strategies must be developed by surgeons, institutions, and medical technology companies to mitigate long-term cancer risks.

Intraoperative CT for Lumbar Fusion Is Not Associated with Improved Short- or Long-Term Complication Profiles

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The use of intraoperative CT has continued to grow in recent years, as various techniques leverage the promise of improved instrumentation accuracy and the hope for decreased complications. Nonetheless, the literature regarding the short- and long-term complications associated with such techniques remains scant and/or confounded by indication and selection bias.

PURPOSE

To use causal inference techniques to determine whether intraoperative CT use is associated with an improved complication profile as compared to conventional radiography for single-level lumbar fusions, an increasingly commonplace application for this technology.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Inverse probability weighted retrospective cohort study carried out within a large integrated healthcare network PATIENT SAMPLE: Adult patients who underwent surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis via lumbar fusion from January 2016 through December 2021 OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was the incidence rate of revision surgery. Our secondary outcome was the incidence of composite 90-day complications (deep and superficial surgical site infection, venous thromboembolic events, and unplanned readmissions).

METHODS

Demographics, intraoperative information, and postoperative complications were abstracted from electronic health records. A propensity score was developed utilizing a parsimonious model to account for covariate interaction with our primary predictor, intraoperative imaging technique. This propensity score was utilized in the creation of inverse probability weights to adjust for indication and selection bias. The rate of revisions within 3 years as well as the rate of revisions at any time-point were compared between cohorts using Cox regression analysis. The incidence of composite 90-day complications were compared using negative binomial regression.

RESULTS

Our patient population consisted of 583 patients, with 132 who underwent intraoperative CT and 451 who underwent conventional radiographic techniques. There were no significant differences between cohorts following inverse probability weighting. No significant differences were detected in 3-year revision rates (HR 0.74 [95% CI 0.29, 1.92]; p=0.5), overall revision rates (HR 0.54 [95% CI 0.20, 1.46]; p=0.2), or 90-day complications (RC -0.24 [95% CI -1.35, 0.87]; p=0.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative CT use was not associated with an improved complication profile in either the short- or long-term for patients undergoing single-level instrumented fusion. This observed clinical equipoise should be weighed against resource and radiation-related costs when considering intraoperative CT for low complexity fusions.

Insurance types are correlated with baseline patient-reported outcome measures in patients with adult spinal deformity

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly recognized as a key component of healthcare value, allowing comparison of therapeutic impact across different specialties. Prior literature suggests that insurance type may be associated with differing baseline PROMs among patients with degenerative conditions, including lumbar stenosis and hip arthritis. This association, however, has not been investigated for adult spinal deformity (ASD).

METHODS

Baseline PROMs were reviewed from 207 patients with ASD presenting for treatment between 2015 and 2019. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10a (PF10a), PROMIS Global-Mental, PROMIS Global-Physical, and visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain were assessed. Negative binomial regression was used to determine the impact of sociodemographic factors, including insurance type, on severity of symptoms and degree of disability at baseline.

RESULTS

Mean age of the study population was 62.2 +/- 15 years, with 61.8 % male prevalence. The Medicaid population had a greater proportion of Hispanic and non-English speaking patients, compared to commercially insured patients. Medicaid insured patients had significantly greater VAS low back pain scores compared with commercially insured individuals (IRR 1.535, 95 % CI 1.122-2.101, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Medicaid insured patients demonstrated worse baseline PROMs at presentation with ASD, as compared to commercially insured or Medicare patients. Stakeholders across spine care delivery should elucidate the etiology of baseline disparities in ASD patients, as they may result from health system asymmetries. In an ecosystem moving toward value-driven treatment algorithms, accounting for and addressing these differences will be necessary to provide equitable care for ASD populations.