• Scott L Parker, Silky Chotai, Clinton J Devin, Lindsay Tetreault, Thomas E Mroz, Darrel S Brodke, Michael G Fehlings, and Matthew J McGirt.
• Department of Orthopedics Surgery and Neurological surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
• Neurosurgery. 2017 Mar 1; 80 (3S): S61-S69.

BackgroundAs publically promoted by all stakeholders in health care reform, prospective outcomes registry platforms lie at the center of all current evidence-driven value-based models.ObjectiveTo demonstrate the variability in outcomes and cost at population level and individual patient level for patients undergoing spine surgery for degenerative diseases.MethodsRetrospective analysis of prospective longitudinal spine registry data was conducted. Baseline and postoperative 1-year patient-reported outcomes were recorded. Previously published minimal clinically important difference for Oswestry Disability Index (14.9) was used. Back-related resource utilization and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were assessed. Variations in outcomes and cost were analyzed at population level and at the individual patient level.ResultsA total of 1454 patients were analyzed. There was significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes at postoperative 1 year ( P < .0001). For patients demonstrating health benefit at population level, 12.5%, n = 182 of patients experienced no gain from surgery and 38%, n = 554 failed to achieve minimal clinically important difference. Mean 1-year QALY-gained was 0.29; 18% of patients failed to report gain in QALY. For patients with 2-year follow-up, surgery resulted in 0.62 QALY-gained at average direct cost of $28 953. A wide variation in both QALY-gained and cost was observed.ConclusionSpine treatments that on average are cost-effective may have wide variability in value at the individual patient level. The variability demonstrated here represents an opportunity, through registries, to identify specific care that may be less effective, and refine patient-specific care delivery and indications to drive overall group-level treatment value. Understanding value of spine care at an individualized as well as population level will allow clinicians, and eventually payers, to better target resources for improving care for nonresponders, ultimately driving up the average health for the whole population.Copyright © 2016 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons

23 keywords...

hide…