The Impact of Nurse Navigator-Led Preoperative Education on Hospital Outcomes Following Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion Surgery

Socioeconomic Status Impacts Length of Stay and Nonhome Discharge Disposition After Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To examine how community-level economic disadvantage impacts short-term outcomes following posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The effects of socioeconomic factors, measured by the Distress Community Index (DCI), on postoperative outcomes after PCDF are underexplored. By understanding the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on PCDF outcomes, disparities in care can be addressed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of 554 patients who underwent PCDF for cervical spondylotic myelopathy between 2017 and 2022. SES was assessed using DCI obtained from patient zip codes. Patients were stratified into quintiles from Prosperous to Distressed based on DCI. Bivariate analyses and multivariate regressions were performed to evaluate the associations between social determinants of health and surgical outcomes, including length of stay, home discharge, complications, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Patients living in at-risk/distressed communities were more likely to be Black (53.3%). Patients living in at-risk/distressed communities had the longest hospitalization (6.24 d vs. prosperous: 3.92, P =0.006). Significantly less at-risk/distressed patients were discharged home without additional services (37.3% vs. mid-tier: 52.5% vs. comfortable: 53.4% vs. prosperous: 56.4%, P <0.001). On multivariate analysis, residing in an at-risk/distressed community was independently associated with nonhome discharge [odds ratio (OR): 2.28, P =0.007] and longer length of stay (E:1.54, P =0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged communities experience longer hospitalizations and are more likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility following PCDF. Social and economic barriers should be addressed as part of presurgical counseling and planning in elective spine surgery to mitigate these disparities and improve the quality and value of health care delivery, regardless of socioeconomic status.

The Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Spine Surgery in High and Low/Middle-income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In this review article, we explore the implementation and outcomes of enhanced recovery after spine surgery (spine ERAS) across different World Bank country-income levels. A systematic literature search was conducted through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases for articles on the implementation of spine ERAS in both adult and pediatric populations. Study characteristics, ERAS elements, and outcomes were analyzed and meta-analyses were performed for length of stay (LOS) and cost outcomes. The number of spine ERAS studies from low-middle-income countries (LMICs) increased since 2017, when the first spine ERAS implementation study was published. LMICs were more likely than high-income countries (HICs) to conduct studies on patients aged ≥18 years (odds ratio [OR], 6.00; 95% CI, 1.58-42.80), with sample sizes 51 to 100 (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.21-22.90), and randomized controlled trials (OR, 7.25; 95% CI, 1.77-53.50). Preoperative optimization was more frequently implemented in LMICs than in HICs (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.06-4.41), and operation time was more often studied in LMICs (OR 3.78; 95% CI, 1.77-8.35). Implementation of spine ERAS resulted in reductions in LOS in both LMIC (-2.06; 95% CI, -2.47 to -1.64 d) and HIC (-0.99; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.70 d) hospitals. However, spine ERAS implementation did result in a significant reduction in costs. This review highlights the global landscape of ERAS implementation in spine surgery, demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing LOS across diverse settings. Further research with standardized reporting of ERAS elements and outcomes is warranted to explore the impact of spine ERAS on cost-effectiveness and other patient-centered outcomes.

Effect of Lower Extremity Osteoarthritis on Outcomes of Lumbar Decompression

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to evaluate how hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) and total joint arthroplasty impact the outcomes of patients undergoing lumbar decompression.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 342 patients undergoing lumbar decompression without fusion from January 2019 and June 2021 at a single institution was performed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare outcomes between patients with and without concomitant hip or knee OA.

RESULTS

Forty-six percent of patients had a hip or knee OA diagnosis and were higher risk as they were older, had higher BMIs, were more likely to be former smokers, had higher ASA scores, and were more likely to undergo 3+ level surgery. Postoperatively, after adjusting for differences between groups, hip or knee OA patients were more likely to be readmitted (OR=12.45, p=0.026) or have a complication (OR=13.77, p=0.031). However, patient reported outcomes as measured by Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-physical function. were similar at 1-3 months and 3-6 months. Higher levels of physical function were observed at 3-6 months postoperatively in hip OA patients with a history of THA.

CONCLUSION

Patients with concomitant hip or knee OA are at higher risk for readmission and postoperative complications but may achieve similar levels of physical function as those without OA.

Lower Extremity Osteoarthritis: A Risk Factor for Mental Health Disorders, Prolonged Opioid Use, and Increased Resource Utilization After Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have examined the effect of hip or knee osteoarthritis, together described as lower extremity osteoarthritis (LEOA) on patient outcomes after lumbar fusion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of LEOA on postoperative outcomes and resource utilization in patients undergoing single-level lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Using a national deidentified database, TriNetX, a retrospective observational study of 17,289 patients undergoing single-level lumbar fusion with or without a history of LEOA before September 1, 2019, was conducted. The no-LEOA and LEOA groups were propensity score matched, and 2-year outcomes were compared using univariate statistical analysis.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 2289 patients with no differences in demographics or comorbidities remained in each group. No differences in the rate of repeat lumbar surgery were observed between groups (all P > 0.30). In comparison with patients with no LEOA, patients with LEOA experienced higher rates of overall and new onset depression or anxiety, prolonged opioid use, hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and ambulatory visits over the 2-year postoperative period (all P < 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Patients with LEOA undergoing single-level lumbar fusion surgery are at higher risk for suboptimal outcomes and increased resource utilization postoperatively. This complex population may benefit from additional individualized education and multidisciplinary management.