The Utility of Cervical Spine Bracing As a Postoperative Adjunct to Multilevel Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery

Trends in Spinal Orthosis Utilization Among Patients Insured Through Medicare Part B

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective population-based database analysis from the Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Medicare/Medicaid Data Set.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive analysis of trends in spinal orthosis utilization over a 12-year period.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Widespread prescription of spinal orthosis persists, despite evidence suggesting equivocal efficacy in many spinal conditions. The utilization of spinal orthosis on a national level, including prescribing specialty data, has not been previously analyzed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Health care common procedure coding system codes for cervical (CO), thoracic-lumbar-sacral (TLSO), lumbar (LO), lumbar-sacral (LSO), and cervical-thoracic-lumbar-sacral (CTLSO) orthosis were used to determine spinal orthosis utilization from 2010 to 2021. Provider specialty codes were utilized to compare trends between select specialties. In addition, a neurosurgical CO analysis based on subclassifications of cervical bracing was performed. Linear trendlines were implemented to elucidate and present trends by slope (β).

RESULTS

Among 332,241 claims, decreases in CO (β=-0.3387), TLSO (β=-0.0942), LO (β=-0.3485), and LSO (β=-0.1545) per 100,000 Medicare Part B enrollees and CTLSO (β=-0.052) per 1,000,000 Medicare Part B enrollees were observed. Decreases among neurosurgery (β=-7.9208), family medicine (β=-1.0097), emergency medicine (β=-2.1958), internal medicine (β=-1.1151), interventional pain management (β=-5.0945), and chiropractic medicine (β=-49.012), and increases among orthopedic surgery (β=5.5891), pain management (β=30.416), physical medicine and rehabilitation (β=4.6524), general practice (β=79.111), and osteopathic manipulative medicine (β=45.303) in total spinal orthosis use per 100,000 specialty claims were observed. Analysis of subclassifications of cervical orthosis among neurosurgeons revealed decreases in flexible (β=-1.7641), semirigid (β=-0.6157), and collar bracing (β=-2.7603), and an increase in multipost collar bracing (β=2.2032) per 100 neurosurgical cervical orthosis claims.

CONCLUSIONS

While utilization of spinal orthosis decreased between 2010 and 2021, increased utilization was observed among a subset of specialties. Identifying these specialties allows for focused research and educational efforts to minimize unnecessary durable medical equipment use for effective health care spending.

Biomaterials for Interbody Fusion in Bone Tissue Engineering

In recent years, interbody fusion cages have played an important role in interbody fusion surgery for treating diseases like disc protrusion and spondylolisthesis. However, traditional cages cannot achieve satisfactory results due to their unreasonable design, poor material biocompatibility, and induced osteogenesis ability, limiting their application. There are currently 3 ways to improve the fusion effect, as follows. First, the interbody fusion cage is designed to facilitate bone ingrowth through the preliminary design. Second, choose interbody fusion cages made of different materials to meet the variable needs of interbody fusion. Finally, complete post-processing steps, such as coating the designed cage, to achieve a suitable osseointegration microstructure, and add other bioactive materials to achieve the most suitable biological microenvironment of bone tissue and improve the fusion effect. The focus of this review is on the design methods of interbody fusion cages, a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of various materials, the influence of post-processing techniques and additional materials on interbody fusion, and the prospects for the future development of interbody fusion cages.