Economic value of treating lumbar disc herniation in Brazil

Predictors of Recovery Following Lumbar Microdiscectomy for Sciatica: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Chronic post-surgical pain is reported by up to 40% of patients after lumbar microdiscectomy for sciatica, a complaint associated with disability and loss of productivity. We conducted a systematic review of observational studies to explore factors associated with persistent leg pain and impairments after microdiscectomy for sciatica. We searched eligible studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL that explored, in an adjusted model, predictors of persistent leg pain, physical impairment, or failure to return to work after microdiscectomy for sciatica. When possible, we pooled estimates of association using random-effects models using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Moderate-certainty evidence showed that the female sex probably has a small association with persistent post-surgical leg pain (odds ratio (OR) = 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.63 to 2.08; absolute risk increase (ARI) = 1.8%, 95% CI = -4.7% to 11.3%), large association with failure to return to work (OR = 2.79, 95% CI = 1.27 to 6.17; ARI = 10.6%, 95% CI = 1.8% to 25.2%), and older age is probably associated with greater postoperative disability (β = 1.47 points on the 100-point Oswestry Disability Index for every 10-year increase from age (>/=18 years), 95% CI = -4.14 to 7.28). Among factors that were not possible to pool, two factors showed promise for future study, namely, legal representation and preoperative opioid use, which showed large associations with worse outcomes after surgery. The moderate-certainty evidence showed female sex is probably associated with persistent leg pain and failure to return to work and that older age is probably associated with greater post-surgical impairment after a microdiscectomy. Future research should explore the association between legal representation and preoperative opioid use with persistent pain and impairment after microdiscectomy for sciatica.

Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment

OBJECTIVES

The present study is a systematic review conducted as part of a methodological approach to develop evidence-based recommendations for economic evaluations in spine surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the methodology and quality of currently available clinical cost-effectiveness studies in spine surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit and The National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database were searched through 8 December 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Studies were included if they met all of the following eligibility criteria: (1) spine surgery, (2) the study cost-effectiveness and (3) clinical study. Model-based studies were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The following data items were extracted and evaluated: pathology, number of participants, intervention(s), year, country, study design, time horizon, comparator(s), utility measurement, effectivity measurement, costs measured, perspective, main result and study quality.

RESULTS

130 economic evaluations were included. Seventy-four of these studies were retrospective studies. The majority of the studies had a time horizon shorter than 2 years. Utility measures varied between the EuroQol 5 dimensions and variations of the Short-Form Health Survey. Effect measures varied widely between Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Neck Disability Index, Oswestry Disability Index, reoperation rates and adverse events. All studies included direct costs from a healthcare perspective. Indirect costs were included in 47 studies. Total Consensus Health Economic Criteria scores ranged from 2 to 18, with a mean score of 12.0 over all 130 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The comparability of economic evaluations in spine surgery is extremely low due to different study designs, follow-up duration and outcome measurements such as utility, effectiveness and costs. This illustrates the need for uniformity in conducting and reporting economic evaluations in spine surgery.

Sciatica-Related Spinal Imbalance in Lumbar Disc Herniation Patients: Radiological Characteristics and Recovery Following Endoscopic Discectomy

Background

Sciatica-related spinal imbalance could be observed in lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients. However, their characteristics and recovery process remained unclear. The purpose was to analyze the radiological characteristics of spinal imbalance related to sciatica and recovery following endoscopic discectomy.

Methods

The records of LDH patients with sciatica and spinal imbalance receiving endoscopic discectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided to Group A (sagittal imbalance), Group B (coronal imbalance) and Group C (sagittal and coronal imbalance). The whole-spine x-ray was performed at pre-operation, immediately post-operation, 3-month and 6-month follow-up and related radiological parameters were measured.

Results

A total of 110 LDH patients (18.3%) presented with spinal imbalance were included and there were 31 patients in Group A, 38 patients in Group B and 41 patients in Group C. In this study, 77.2% of the coronal imbalance patients present with trunk shifted to contralateral side of disc herniation and 65.3% of the sagittal imbalance patients present with forward trunk. Most patients present mild and moderate sagittal and coronal imbalance. The magnitude of sagittal and coronal imbalance in Group C was significantly more severe than that of Group A and Group B. Most patients (≥75%) acquired spinal balance immediately after surgery. The sagittal imbalance improved better than coronal imbalance and single plane imbalance improved better than biplane imbalance. At the postoperative 6-month follow-up, all patients recovered to normal sagittal and coronal balance.

Conclusion

Sciatica-related spinal imbalance occurs in 18.3% of the LDH patients receiving endoscopic discectomy. Different subgroups of spinal imbalance present different characteristics. Spontaneous correction of the spinal imbalance could be achieved when sciatica was relieved immediately after surgery and well maintained during follow-up.

Direct medical costs after surgical or nonsurgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal disease: A nationwide matched cohort study with a 10-year follow-up

Objective

The demand for treating degenerative lumbar spinal disease has been increasing, leading to increased utilization of medical resources. Thus, we need to understand how the budget of insurance is currently used. The objective of the present study is to overview the utilization of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) by providing the direct insured cost between patients receiving surgery and patients receiving nonsurgical treatment for degenerative lumbar disease.

Methods

The NHIS-National Sample Cohort was utilized to select patients with lumbar disc herniation, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis or spondylolysis. A matched cohort study design was used to show direct medical costs of surgery (n = 2,698) and nonsurgical (n = 2,698) cohorts. Non-surgical treatment included medication, physiotherapy, injection, and chiropractic. The monthly costs of the surgery cohort and nonsurgical cohort were presented at initial treatment, posttreatment 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months and yearly thereafter for 10 years.

Results

The characteristics and matching factors were well-balanced between the matched cohorts. Overall, surgery cohort spent $50.84/patient/month, while the nonsurgical cohort spent $29.34/patient/month (p<0.01). Initially, surgery treatment led to more charge to NHIS ($2,762) than nonsurgical treatment ($180.4) (p<0.01). Compared with the non-surgical cohort, the surgery cohort charged $33/month more for the first 3 months, charged less at 12 months, and charged approximately the same over the course of 10 years.

Conclusion

Surgical treatment initially led to more government reimbursement than nonsurgical treatment, but the charges during follow-up period were not different. The results of the present study should be interpreted in light of the costs of medical services, indirect costs, societal cost, quality of life and societal willingness to pay in each country. The monetary figures are implied to be actual economic costs but those in the reimbursement system instead reflect reimbursement charges from the government.

Assessment and Post-Intervention Recovery After Surgery for Lumbar Disk Herniation Based on Objective Gait Metrics from Wearable Devices Using the Gait Posture Index

OBJECTIVE

Surgery for lumbar disk herniation (LDH) presents an option for patients when conservative measures fail. The objective of this clinical study is to investigate a novel, objective outcome measure in patients undergoing lumbar microdiscectomy.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients were evaluated pre- and postoperatively using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and a novel objective scoring tool, the Gait Posture index (GPi). The score is calculated from 4 key physical health metrics: daily step count, walking speed, step length, and walking posture. The GPi ranges from 0 (nonambulant) to 100 (excellent walking performance). Wearable accelerometers and observational recordings were used to evaluate the components of the GPi. The GPi was calculated and compared with the ODI, pre- and postintervention. The study was designed as a proof of concept and confirmation of validity for use of the GPi in LDH.

RESULTS

At follow-up (average 66 ± 36 days), 23 of 24 patients had an improvement in their GPi after surgery. The average GPi of the cohort improved from 59.33 ± 16.06 to 85.75 ± 9.22 with P < 0.001, with significant changes in all 4 components. The average preoperative ODI was 54.54 ± 20.70, improving to 16.33 ± 14.095 with P < 0.001. The Pearson correlation coefficient was r = 0.56, indicating a correlation between change in ODI and change in GPi.

CONCLUSIONS

The GPi score is a new, objective descriptor of mobility in spinal surgery which can be used to augment traditional subjective outcome scoring surveys such as the ODI. Significant changes are seen in the GPi and its constituent metrics in patients undergoing surgery for LDH.

Cost-effectiveness Applications of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Spine Surgery

Because of the rising health care costs in the United States, there has been a focus on value-based care and improving the cost-effectiveness of surgical procedures. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can not only give physicians and health care providers immediate feedback on the well-being of the patients but also be used to assess health and determine outcomes for surgical research purposes. Recently, PROMs have become a prominent tool to assess the cost-effectiveness of spine surgery by calculating the improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost of a procedure per QALY gained is an essential metric to determine cost-effectiveness in universal health care systems. Common patient-reported outcome questionnaires to calculate QALY include the EuroQol-5 dimensions, the SF-36, and the SF-12. On the basis of the health-related quality of life outcomes, the cost-effectiveness of various spine surgeries can be determined, such as cervical fusions, lumbar fusions, microdiscectomies. As the United States attempts to reduce costs and emphasize value-based care, PROMs may serve a critical role in spine surgery moving forward. In addition, PROM-driven QALYs may be used to analyze novel spine surgical techniques for value-based improvements.

Cost-utility Analysis for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: Conservative Treatment Versus Discectomy Versus Discectomy With Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

This study was an ambispective long-term cost-utility analysis with retrospective chart review and included the prospective completion of health questionnaires by patients.

OBJECTIVE

This was a cost-utility analysis, comparing conservative treatment, discectomy, and discectomy with spinal fusion for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation after a previous discectomy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar disc herniation is an important health problem, with recurrence rates ranging from 5% to 15%. Management of recurrences is controversial due to a lack of high-level evidence. Cost-effectiveness analyses are useful when making clinical decisions. There are economic assessments for first herniations, but not in the context of recurrent lumbar disc herniations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients with disc herniation recurrence underwent conservative treatment (n=11), discectomy (n=20), or discectomy with fusion (n=19), and they completed the Short-Form 36, EuroQol-5D, and Oswestry Disability Index.Baseline case quality-adjusted life year (QALY) values, cost-utility ratios, and incremental cost-utility ratios were calculated on the basis of the SF-36. Direct health costs were calculated by applying the health care system perspective. Both QALY and costs were discounted at a rate of 3%. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted for uncertainty variables, such as other health surveys or 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Cost-utility analysis of conservative treatment versus discectomy showed that the former is dominant, mainly because it is significantly more economical (&OV0556;904 vs. &OV0556;6718, P<0.001), while health results were very similar (3.48 vs. 3.18, P=0.887). Cost-utility analysis of discectomy versus discectomy with fusion revealed that discectomy is dominant, showing a trend to be both more economical (&OV0556;6718 vs. &OV0556;9364, P=0.054) and more effective (3.18 vs. 1.92 QALY, P=0.061).

CONCLUSIONS

This cost-utility analysis showed that conservative treatment is more cost-effective than discectomy in patients with lumbar disc herniation recurrence. In cases of recurrence in which conservative treatment is not feasible, and another surgery must be performed for the patient, discectomy is a more cost-effective surgical alternative than discectomy with fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.