Literature DB >> 17495582

SF-36 PCS benefit-cost ratio of lumbar fusion comparison to other surgical interventions: a thought experiment.

David W Polly1, Steven D Glassman, James D Schwender, Christopher I Shaffrey, Charles Branch, J Kenneth Burkus, Matthew F Gornet.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data.
OBJECTIVES: To review systematically the SF-36 PCS outcomes of a large data set, including several randomized clinical trials for lumbar spine fusion at 1 and 2 years after surgery. We also present for comparison a review of typical changes in SF-36 PCS in other surgical interventions (total knee replacement, total hip replacement, and coronary artery bypass surgery) to define the average reimbursement costs per PCS improvement with each of these interventions. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: Data from 11 prospective multicenter studies (9 Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption, Randomized Prospective Clinical Trials, class 1 data) accounted for the lumbar spine fusion group (n = 1826). Data for total knee replacement, total hip replacement, and coronary artery bypass surgery were obtained from a comprehensive review of the literature.
METHODS: Comparisons of SF-36 PCS improvements were made at defined postoperative time points and with published study findings of other medical conditions. Reimbursement estimates (not including estimated physician and rehabilitation fees) for each surgical intervention were based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare Provider Analysis and Review and All Payer Data (2002). Cost estimates were calculated for a minimal clinical important improvement (reimbursement dollars/mean PCS change *5.42 point PCS improvement).
RESULTS: SF-36 PCS significantly improved at both 1 and 2 years following lumbar spine fusion surgery (P < 0.0001), and was comparable to the control surgical outcomes. With the use of data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare Provider Analysis and Review and All Payer Data, hospital reimbursement averaged $15.2-18.2K for lumbar spine fusion, $9.8-11.3K for total knee replacement, $9.6-11.3K for total hip replacement, and $9.8-11.3K for coronary artery bypass surgery. Calculations of reimbursement dollars to elicit minimum clinically important change in PCS of 5.42 points following surgery ranged from $6.1 to $7.3K for lumbar spine fusion, $5.7 to $6.6K for total knee arthroplasty, $3.9 to $4.5K for total hip replacement, and $18.2 to $22.5K for coronary artery bypass surgery.
CONCLUSION: While the exact numbers may vary for each treatment based on the population studied and the cost estimates used, lumbar fusion cost per benefit achieved was very comparable to other well-accepted medical interventions (total hip replacement, total knee replacement, and coronary artery bypass surgery).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17495582     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318053d4e5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  9 in total

1.  Surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity: projected cost effectiveness at 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Jamie Terran; Brian J McHugh; Charla R Fischer; Baron Lonner; Daniel Warren; Steven Glassman; Keith Bridwell; Frank Schwab; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2014

Review 2.  New challenges for intervertebral disc treatment using regenerative medicine.

Authors:  Koichi Masuda; Jeffrey C Lotz
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 6.389

Review 3.  The impact of economic evaluation on quality management in spine surgery.

Authors:  Norbert Boos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  An Eccentrically Biased Rehabilitation Program Early after TKA Surgery.

Authors:  Robin L Marcus; Yuri Yoshida; Whitney Meier; Christopher Peters; Paul C Lastayo
Journal:  Arthritis       Date:  2011-04-07

5.  Clinical performance of an elastomeric lumbar disc replacement: Minimum 12 months follow-up.

Authors:  Luiz Pimenta; Raul Springmuller; Casey K Lee; Leonardo Oliveira; Sandra E Roth; William F Ogilvie
Journal:  SAS J       Date:  2010-03-01

6.  Randomized Controlled Trial of Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Using Triangular Titanium Implants vs Nonsurgical Management for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: 12-Month Outcomes.

Authors:  David W Polly; Daniel J Cher; Kathryn D Wine; Peter G Whang; Clay J Frank; Charles F Harvey; Harry Lockstadt; John A Glaser; Robert P Limoni; Jonathan N Sembrano
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.654

7.  Does breast reduction surgery improve health-related quality of life? A prospective cohort study in Australian women.

Authors:  Tamara Crittenden; David I Watson; Julie Ratcliffe; Philip A Griffin; Nicola R Dean
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-02-17       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Establishing a Reference Procedure Length for Anterior Cervical Fusions: The Role for Standards in Surgical Process Improvement.

Authors:  Michael Bohl; Udaya K Kakarla; Steve W Chang; Rajiv Sethi; Farrokh Farrokhi; Jean-Christophe Leveque
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-02-25

9.  Improvement in Health State Utility after Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Comparison to Normal Populations.

Authors:  Daniel J Cher; David W Polly
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2015-06-25
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.