Literature DB >> 22193055

Repeat surgery after lumbar decompression for herniated disc: the quality implications of hospital and surgeon variation.

Brook I Martin1, Sohail K Mirza, David R Flum, Thomas M Wickizer, Patrick J Heagerty, Alex F Lenkoski, Richard A Deyo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Repeat lumbar spine surgery is generally an undesirable outcome. Variation in repeat surgery rates may be because of patient characteristics, disease severity, or hospital- and surgeon-related factors. However, little is known about population-level variation in reoperation rates.
PURPOSE: To examine hospital- and surgeon-level variation in reoperation rates after lumbar herniated disc surgery and to relate these to published benchmarks. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: Retrospective analysis of a discharge registry including all nonfederal hospitals in Washington State.
METHODS: We identified adults who underwent an initial inpatient lumbar decompression for herniated disc from 1997 to 2007. We then performed generalized linear mixed-effect logistic regressions, controlling for patient characteristics and comorbidity, to examine the variation in reoperation rates within 90 days, 1 year, and 4 years.
RESULTS: Our cohort included 29,529 patients with a mean age of 47.5 years, 61% privately insured, and 15% having any comorbidity. The age-, sex-, insurance-, and comorbidity-adjusted mean rate of reoperation among hospitals was 1.9% at 90 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-3.1), with a range from 1.1% to 3.4%; 6.4% at 1 year (95% CI, 3.9-10.6), with a range from 2.8% to 12.5%; and 13.8% at 4 years (95% CI, 8.8-19.8), with a range from 8.1% to 24.5%. The adjusted mean reoperation rates of surgeons were 1.9% at 90 days (95% CI, 1.4-2.4) with a range from 1.2% to 4.6%, 6.1% at 1 year (95% CI, 4.8-7.7) with a range from 4.3% to 10.5%, and 13.2% at 4 years (95% CI, 11.3-15.5) with a range from 10.0% to 19.3%. Multilevel random-effect models suggested that variation across surgeons was greater than that of hospitals and that this effect increased with long-term outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Even after adjusting for patient demographics and comorbidity, we observed a large variation in reoperation rates across hospitals and surgeons after lumbar discectomy, a relatively simple spinal procedure. These findings suggest uncertainty about indications for repeat surgery, variations in perioperative care, or variations in quality of care. Copyright Â
© 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22193055      PMCID: PMC3299929          DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  30 in total

1.  Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) observational cohort.

Authors:  James N Weinstein; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Jonathan S Skinner; Brett Hanscom; Anna N A Tosteson; Harry Herkowitz; Jeffrey Fischgrund; Frank P Cammisa; Todd Albert; Richard A Deyo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial.

Authors:  James N Weinstein; Tor D Tosteson; Jon D Lurie; Anna N A Tosteson; Brett Hanscom; Jonathan S Skinner; William A Abdu; Alan S Hilibrand; Scott D Boden; Richard A Deyo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Surgeon-specific report cards.

Authors:  Clifford F Hughes; George Bearham
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.872

4.  Reoperation rates following lumbar spine surgery and the influence of spinal fusion procedures.

Authors:  Brook I Martin; Sohail K Mirza; Bryan A Comstock; Darryl T Gray; William Kreuter; Richard A Deyo
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse: updated Cochrane Review.

Authors:  J N Alastair Gibson; Gordon Waddell
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Renewal of surgical quality and safety initiatives: a multispecialty challenge.

Authors:  Hiram C Polk
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 7.616

7.  Population-based trends in volumes and rates of ambulatory lumbar spine surgery.

Authors:  Darryl T Gray; Richard A Deyo; William Kreuter; Sohail K Mirza; Patrick J Heagerty; Bryan A Comstock; Leighton Chan
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Are lumbar spine reoperation rates falling with greater use of fusion surgery and new surgical technology?

Authors:  Brook I Martin; Sohail K Mirza; Bryan A Comstock; Darryl T Gray; William Kreuter; Richard A Deyo
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Economic impact of improving outcomes of lumbar discectomy.

Authors:  John Sherman; Joseph Cauthen; Doug Schoenberg; Matthew Burns; Nancy L Reaven; Steven L Griffith
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations.

Authors:  V M Taylor; R A Deyo; D C Cherkin; W Kreuter
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  31 in total

1.  A decade's experience in lumbar spine surgery in Belgium: sickness fund beneficiaries, 2000-2009.

Authors:  Marc Du Bois; Marek Szpalski; Peter Donceel
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-06-03       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Development and Validation of a Prediction Model for Pain and Functional Outcomes After Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Sara Khor; Danielle Lavallee; Amy M Cizik; Carlo Bellabarba; Jens R Chapman; Christopher R Howe; Dawei Lu; A Alex Mohit; Rod J Oskouian; Jeffrey R Roh; Neal Shonnard; Armagan Dagal; David R Flum
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 14.766

3.  Triangular Titanium Implants for Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: 2-Year Follow-Up from a Prospective Multicenter Trial.

Authors:  Bradley S Duhon; Fabien Bitan; Harry Lockstadt; Don Kovalsky; Daniel Cher; Travis Hillen
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-04-20

4.  [Who benefits from medical technical innovations? : A medical and medical economic analysis using the example of lumbar disc surgery].

Authors:  Richard Bostelmann; Athanasios Petridis; Adrian Meder; Susanne Fröhlich
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.087

5.  Risk Factors for Reoperation in Patients Treated Surgically for Intervertebral Disc Herniation: A Subanalysis of Eight-Year SPORT Data.

Authors:  Dante Leven; Peter G Passias; Thomas J Errico; Virginie Lafage; Kristina Bianco; Alexandra Lee; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Wenyan Zhao; Kevin F Spratt; Tamara S Morgan; Michael C Gerling
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Six-month outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of minimally invasive SI joint fusion with triangular titanium implants vs conservative management.

Authors:  Bengt Sturesson; Djaya Kools; Robert Pflugmacher; Alessandro Gasbarrini; Domenico Prestamburgo; Julius Dengler
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-05-14       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Hospital and surgeon variation in complications and repeat surgery following incident lumbar fusion for common degenerative diagnoses.

Authors:  Brook I Martin; Sohail K Mirza; Gary M Franklin; Jon D Lurie; Todd A MacKenzie; Richard A Deyo
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-06-20       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Risk factors for early reherniation after lumbar discectomy with or without annular closure: results of a multicenter randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Jenny C Kienzler; Javier Fandino; Erik Van de Kelft; Sandro Eustacchio; Gerrit Joan Bouma
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 2.216

9.  The high-risk discectomy patient: prevention of reherniation in patients with large anular defects using an anular closure device.

Authors:  Gerrit J Bouma; Martin Barth; Darko Ledic; Milorad Vilendecic
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-02-03       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Effect of a strutted intradiscal spacer (DIVA®) on disc reherniation following lumbar discectomy: A 2-year retrospective matched cohort study.

Authors:  Robin Srour; Amira El Arbi; Ahmed Rahmouni; Hani Aljohani; Daniel Orenstein; Xavier Hoarau; Mustapha Ali Benali; Jihad Mortada; François Sellal
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2021-05-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.