Outpatient Spine Surgery Research Articles

Effects of liposomal bupivacaine on opioid use and healthcare resource utilization after outpatient spine surgery: a real-world assessment

BACKGROUND CONTEXTPerioperative pain management affects cost and outcomes in elective spine surgery. PURPOSEThis study investigated the association between liposomal bupivacaine (LB) and outpatient spine surgery outcomes, including perioperative, postoperative, and postdischarge opioid use and healthcare resource utilization. STUDY DESIGNThis was a retrospective comparative study. PATIENT SAMPLEEligibility criteria included adults with ≥6 months of continuous data before and after outpatient spine procedures including discectomy, laminectomy, or lumbar fusion. Patients receiving LB were matched 1:3 to patients receiving non-LB analgesia by propensity scores. OUTCOME MEASURESOutcomes included (1) opioid use in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) during the perioperative and postdischarge periods and (2) postdischarge readmission and emergency department (ED) visits up to 3 months after surgery. Generalized linear mixed-effects modeling with appropriate distributions was used for analysis. METHODSDeidentified data from the IQVIA linkage claims databases (2016-2019) were used for the analysis. This study was funded by Pacira BioSciences, Inc. RESULTSIn total, 381 patients received LB and 1143 patients received non-LB analgesia. Baseline characteristics were well balanced after propensity score matching. The LB cohort used fewer MMEs versus the non-LB cohort before discharge (80 vs 132 MMEs [mean difference, −52 MMEs; p=.0041]). Following discharge, there was a nonsignificant reduction in opioid use in the LB cohort versus the non-LB cohort within 90 days (429 vs 480 MMEs [mean difference, −50 MMEs; p=.289]) and from >90 days to 180 days (349 vs 381 MMEs [mean difference, −31 MMEs; p=.507]). The LB cohort had significantly lower rates of ED visits at 2 months after discharge versus the non-LB cohort (3.9% vs 7.6% [odds ratio, 0.50; p=.015]). Postdischarge readmission rates did not differ between cohorts. CONCLUSIONSUse of LB for outpatient spine surgery was associated with reduced opioid use at the hospital and nonsignificant reduction in opioid use at all postoperative timepoints examined through 90 days after surgery versus non-LB analgesia. ED visit rates were significantly lower at 60 days after discharge. These findings support reduced cost and improved quality metrics in patients treated with LB versus non-LB analgesia for outpatient spine surgery.

Outpatient Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review

In recent years, outpatient spine surgery has gained momentum as a promising approach to improve healthcare value by reducing costs and enhancing patient outcomes. This narrative review presents an updated summary of studies exploring the clinical outcomes and cost savings associated with outpatient spine surgery. Our review highlights the growing acceptance of outpatient spine surgery, which is driven by advancements in surgical techniques, anesthesia protocols, and perioperative care pathways. Several procedures, including lumbar discectomy, lumbar laminectomy plus/minus fusion, anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF), and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), have shown success in the outpatient setting. A search strategy was employed to identify relevant studies from the MEDLINE database. Seventeen retrospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. Outpatient spine surgery demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes, including lower readmission and reoperation rates, shorter hospital stays, and comparable mortality rates. Additionally, analysis of feasibility outcomes revealed significant cost reductions and decreased operative timing with outpatient procedures. Despite its benefits, challenges persist in implementing outpatient spine surgery. Careful patient selection, standardized protocols, and appropriate financial planning are essential to ensure safe and successful integration into healthcare systems. Patient education and engagement are also crucial for promoting optimal outcomes.

Performing Outpatient Spine Surgery.

Performing Outpatient Spine Surgery.

Outpatient Spine Procedures in Poland: Clinical Outcomes, Safety, Complications, and Technical Insights into an Ambulatory Spine Surgery Center.

This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of spine procedures performed in an ambulatory spine surgery unit in Poland. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 318 patients who underwent ambulatory spine surgery between 2018 and 2021, with procedures including microdiscectomy (MLD), anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), endoscopic interbody fusion (endoLIF), posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD), interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy IELD, and transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD). Patient data were analyzed for pre-operative and post-operative visual analog scale (VAS) scores. The findings indicated that outpatient techniques were safe and effective, with a 2.83% complication rate. All procedures significantly improved VAS scores under short-term observation, and core outcome measurement index (COMI) scores under long-term observation. Ambulatory spine surgery represents a relatively new approach in Poland, with only a select few centers currently offering this type of service. Outpatient spine surgery is a safe, effective, and cost-effective option for patients requiring basic spine surgeries.

Unplanned readmissions following ambulatory spine surgery: assessing common reasons and risk factors

BACKGROUND CONTEXTAlthough outpatient spine surgery is becoming increasingly popular in the United States, unplanned readmission following outpatient surgery remains a significant postoperative concern. PURPOSEThis study aimed to (1) describe the incidence and timing of 30-day unplanned readmission after ambulatory lumbar and cervical spine surgery (2) evaluate the common reasons for readmission, and (3) identify factors associated with readmission in this population. STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGRetrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLEPatients who underwent ambulatory cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. OUTCOME MEASURESHospital readmission within 30 postoperative days. METHODSPatients who underwent ambulatory cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2015 and 2020 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Reasons for and timing of unplanned readmissions were recorded. Multivariable poisson regressions were employed to determine any independent predictors of readmission. RESULTSA total of 33,092 ambulatory cervical and 68,115 ambulatory lumbar spine surgery patients were identified. Incidences of 30-day readmission were 3.37% and 3.07% among cervical and lumbar patients, respectively. The most common surgical site-related reasons for readmission included uncontrolled pain, recurrence of disc herniation or major symptom, and postoperative hematoma/seroma. Common nonsurgical site-related reasons included gastrointestinal, neurological, and cardiovascular complications. Factors associated with readmission among cervical patients included age ≥55, BMI ≥35, functional dependence, diabetes, smoking, COPD, and steroid use, whereas factors associated with readmission following lumbar spine surgery included age ≥65, female sex, BMI ≥35, functional dependence, ASA ≥3, diabetes, smoking, COPD, and hypertension (p<.05 for all). CONCLUSIONThis study highlights the common reasons and factors associated with unplanned readmission following ambulatory spine surgery. Consideration of these factors may be critical to ensuring appropriate patient selection for ambulatory spine surgery.

Outpatient Spine Surgery in Poland: A Survey on Popularity, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.

This study aimed to investigate the popularity of outpatient spine surgery in Poland, identify factors influencing its adoption, and assess its benefits, challenges, and impact on patient outcomes and healthcare costs. Additionally, the study proposes strategies to improve outpatient spine surgery adoption and ensure its safe implementation in Poland. An electronic survey was distributed to members of the Polish Spine Surgery Society and the Polish Neurosurgery Society. Data were analyzed using Matlab R2020b statistical software, employing descriptive statistics to summarize the responses. The survey indicated that 67% of respondents provide spinal procedures commercially, with 58% performing them on an outpatient basis, showing the growing role of the private sector in providing spinal surgery services in Poland. Root nerve blocks and joint blocks were the most common outpatient procedures, followed by microdiscectomy, endoscopic discectomy, and L-S spinal fusion. The public NHF was the most common payer for outpatient procedures. Outpatient spine surgery in Poland is not yet widespread, but improvements can be made to reduce hospital stays and enhance recovery. Changes in reimbursement systems to cover outpatient procedures and addressing physicians' liability concerns, particularly by emphasizing the NO-fault system, are essential. With proper support, outpatient spine surgery could become a valuable addition to Poland's healthcare system.

Medicare procedural costs in ambulatory surgery centers versus hospital outpatient departments for spine surgeries.

Multiple studies have demonstrated the safety of outpatient spine surgery, with reports of equivalent to improved patient outcomes compared with inpatient procedures. This has resulted in the increased use of outpatient surgery over time. However, there remains a paucity of literature evaluating the difference in costs between ambulatory surgery center (ASC)- and hospital outpatient department (HOPD)-based procedures for Medicare beneficiaries. Publicly available data from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were accessed via the Medicare Procedure Price Lookup tool. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify spine-specific procedures approved for the outpatient setting by CMS. Procedures were grouped into decompression (cervical, thoracic, and lumbar), fusion/instrumentation (cervical, lumbar, and sacroiliac), and kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty cohorts, as well as an overall cohort. Data regarding total costs, facility fees, surgeon reimbursement, Medicare payments, and patient copayments were extracted for each procedure. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and standard deviations. Differences between ASC- and HOPD-associated costs were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Twenty-one individual CPT codes approved by Medicare for the ASC and/or HOPD setting were identified. Decompression procedures were associated with a significantly lower total cost ($4183 ± $411.07 vs $7583.67 ± $410.89, p < 0.001), facility fees ($2998 ± $0 vs $6397 ± $0, p < 0.001), Medicare payments ($3345.75 ± $328.80 vs $6064.75 ± $328.80, p < 0.001), and patient payments ($835.58 ± $82.13 vs $1515.58 ± $82.13, p < 0.001) in ASCs compared with HOPDs. Fusion/instrumentation procedures had significantly lower facility fees ($10,436.6 ± $2347.51 vs $14,161 ± $2147.07, p = 0.044) and Medicare payments ($9501.2 ± $1732.42 vs $13,757 ± $2037.58, p = 0.009) in ASCs, as well as a trend toward lower total costs ($11,876.8 ± $2165.22 vs $15,601.2 ± $2016.06, p = 0.076). Patient payments in the HOPD setting were significantly lower in the fusion/instrumentation cohort ($1843.6 ± $73.42 vs $2374.4 ± $433.48, p = 0.009). In the kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty cohort, there was no statistically significant difference between ASCs and HOPDs, despite lower overall costs in the ASC for all variables. Surgeon fees were the same regardless of setting for all procedures (p > 0.99). When combining decompression, fusion/instrumentation, and kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty CPT codes into a single cohort, ASC setting was associated with significant cost savings in total cost, facility fees, Medicare payments, and patient payments. In general, performing spine surgeries in ASCs is associated with cost savings compared with HOPDs. This was demonstrated for decompression and fusion/instrumentation, and kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty Medicare-approved outpatient procedures.

The use of machine learning for predicting candidates for outpatient spine surgery: a review.

While spine surgery has historically been performed in the inpatient setting, in recent years there has been growing interest in performing certain cervical and lumbar spine procedures on an outpatient basis. While conducting these procedures in the outpatient setting may be preferable for both the surgeon and the patient, appropriate patient selection is crucial. The employment of machine learning techniques for data analysis and outcome prediction has grown in recent years within spine surgery literature. Machine learning is a form of statistics often applied to large datasets that creates predictive models, with minimal to no human intervention, that can be applied to previously unseen data. Machine learning techniques may outperform traditional logistic regression with regards to predictive accuracy when analyzing complex datasets. Researchers have applied machine learning to develop algorithms to aid in patient selection for spinal surgery and to predict postoperative outcomes. Furthermore, there has been increasing interest in using machine learning to assist in the selection of patients who may be appropriate candidates for outpatient cervical and lumbar spine surgery. The goal of this review is to discuss the current literature utilizing machine learning to predict appropriate patients for cervical and lumbar spine surgery, candidates for outpatient spine surgery, and outcomes following these procedures.

Patient Selection Criteria in Ambulatory Spine Surgery: Single Canadian Provincial Experience

Ambulatory spinal surgery is a care delivery model meant to improve patient outcomes and reduce in-hospital length of stay (LOS). We reviewed the experience of implementing an outpatient spine surgery program in Manitoba, Canada and highlight elements that can be used to reduce LOS and re-presentation to hospital. This is a retrospective cohort study using data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network and independent chart review of adult patients undergoing outpatient spinal surgery between 2015 and 2018. Patient demographics, comorbidities, perioperative course, LOS, and readmissions were analyzed. We included 217 patients in this analysis. The mean LOS was 36.2 hours; 71.98% of patients had a LOS <24 hours. A Kruskal-Wallis test by ranks analysis was conducted and identified 7 elements that correlated with prolonged length of stay (>1 day): age older than 55 (P= 0.027), body mass index >25 (P= 0.045), uncontrolled diabetes (P= 0.015), preoperative use of opioid medication (P= 0.024), American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of 3 (P= 0.023), non-minimally invasive surgical approach, and multilevel procedures. Most (94.1%) of the patients with none of these elements (i.e., age <55, low body mass index, normal/controlled diabetes, minimal preoperative opioid use, American Society of Anesthesiologist classification <3, minimally invasive surgical procedure) had a favorable LOS, <24 hours, compared with 84.8% with 1 risk factor, 80.4% of those with two, 69.8% with three, 53.1% with four, and 31.2% with 5 or more. A small number of patients (14.98%) presented to an emergency department within 90 days of their operation, and there was a 6.28% readmission rate. We identified several patient and surgical criteria that correlate with prolonged length of stays following planned ambulatory spine surgery. Our work provides some empiric evidence to help guide surgeons on which patients and approaches are ideal for ambulatory surgery.

Risk Factors for Surgical Site Complications After Outpatient Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Background: With the recent increase of minor lumbar spine surgeries being performed in the outpatient setting, there is a need for information on factors that contribute to post-operative complications for these surgeries. Patients and Methods: This was a prospective observational study examining risk factors for self-reported post-operative drainage in patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery. Patient surveys and the hospital's electronic medical records were used to collect data on patient demographic, patient lifestyle, and surgical variables. Univariable and multivariable analyses in addition to a random forest classifier were performed. Results: A total of 146 patients were enrolled in the study with 111 patients included in the final analysis. The average age and body mass index (BMI) of these patients was 66 and 27.8, respectively. None of the 146 patients in this study developed surgical site infection. Older age, no steroid use, no pet ownership, and spine surgery involving two or more levels were all found to be risk factors for wound drainage. Conclusions: This study evaluated lifestyle, environmental, and traditional risk factors for surgical site drainage that have not been explored cohesively related to outpatient orthopedic surgery. Consistent with the existing literature, outpatient spine surgery involving two or more levels was most strongly associated with surgical site drainage after surgery.

Tracking persistent postoperative opioid use: a proof-of-concept study demonstrating a use case for natural language processing

BackgroundLarge language models have been gaining tremendous popularity since the introduction of ChatGPT in late 2022. Perioperative pain providers should leverage natural language processing (NLP) technology and explore pertinent use...

Is outpatient spine surgery associated with new, persistent opioid use in opioid-naïve patients? A retrospective national claims database analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXTAlthough spine procedures have historically been performed inpatient, there has been a recent shift to the outpatient setting for selected cases due to increased patient satisfaction and reduced cost. Effective postoperative pain management while limiting over-prescribing of opioids, which may lead to persistent opioid use, is critical to performing spine surgery in the outpatient setting. PURPOSETo assess if there is an increased risk for new, persistent opioid use between inpatient and outpatient spine procedures. STUDY DESIGNRetrospective analysis using national administrative claims database. PATIENT SAMPLEA total of 390,049 opioid-naïve patients with a perioperative opioid prescription who underwent an inpatient or outpatient spine surgery. OUTCOME MEASURESPatients with perioperative opioid prescriptions who filled ≥ 1 opioid prescription between 90- and 180-days following surgery were defined as new, persistent opioid users. METHODSWe utilized a claims database to identify opioid-naïve patients who underwent lumbar or cervical fusion, total disc arthroplasty, or decompression procedures. We constructed a multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between inpatient versus outpatient surgery and the development of new, persistent opioid use while adjusting for several patient factors. RESULTSA total of 19,205 (11.7%) inpatient and 18,546 (8.2%) outpatient patients developed new, persistent opioid use. Outpatient lumbar and cervical spine surgery patients were significantly less likely to develop new, persistent opioid use following surgery compared to inpatient spine surgery patients (OR = 0.71 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.69, 0.73], p < .001). Average morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) (inpatient = 1,476 MME +/- 22.7, outpatient = 1,072 MME +/- 18.5, p < .001) and average MMEs per day (inpatient = 91.6 MME +/- 0.32, outpatient = 77.7 MME +/- 0.28, p < .001) were lower in the outpatient cohort compared to the inpatient. CONCLUSIONOur results support the shift from inpatient to outpatient spine procedures, as outpatient procedures were not associated with an increased risk for new, persistent opioid use. As more patients become candidates for outpatient spine surgery, predictors of new, persistent opioid use should be considered during risk stratification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCELevel III Prognostic Study. MINI ABSTRACTWe utilized a national administrative claims database to identify opioid-naïve patients who underwent common spine procedures. Outpatient lumbar and cervical spine surgery patients were significantly less likely to be new, persistent opioid users following surgery compared to inpatient spine surgery patients. Our results support the shift to outpatient spine procedures.

669 Is Outpatient Spine Surgery at an Ambulatory Surgical Center Better Than at a Hospital? A MSSIC Study

INTRODUCTION: The number of outpatient surgeries have quadrupled over the past several decades. Although studies have shown increased efficacy and cost-effectiveness of surgery done in an outpatient setting, few studies have compared outpatient surgeries performed at a hospital versus an ambulatory surgery facility (ASF) METHODS: The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative was queried for patients undergoing cervical and/or lumbar spine surgery between 1/1/2021 to 12/31/2021 performed at an ASF or hospital with same day discharge. A 4-to-1 propensity score matching using BMI, location (lumbar, cervical), ASA &gt; 2, fusion procedure and number of levels as the matching variables for lumbar and cervical surgeries. Primary outcomes included: achieving MCID for PROMIS physical function, EQ-5D, Return-to-Work and NASS patient satisfaction. Complications were a secondary outcome and included: Surgical site Infection (SSI), urinary retention, hospital readmission/ED visit, return-to-OR, Axial pain, new radicular findings, weakness, Ileus (lumbar only), and Dysphagia (cervical only). RESULTS: A total of 2,763 patients were identified prior to matching. Of the 1,665 patients that were matched, 1,332 had surgery at a hospital and 333 in an ASF. There were no statistically significant differences for patient satisfaction, PROMIS-PF MCID, or Return-to-Work at 90-days. Patients who had surgery at an ASF had higher rates of axial pain (10% vs 5%, p = 0.002) and new radicular findings(19% vs 12%, p &lt; .001) compared to surgery at a hospital. Dysphagia was also higher in the ASF group (5% vs 0%, p = .006). There were no differences in SSI, readmission, urinary retention, return-to-OR or ED visits between sites CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient spine surgery at an ASF demonstrated no significantly increased surgical morbidity compared to hospitals. Although ASFs had a higher rate of new radicular findings and axial pain, there were no differences in patient satisfaction and PROs after surgery.

Trends in Outpatient Cervical Spine Surgery: Are There Emerging Disparities?

Retrospective analysis on prospectively collected data. The purposes of this study were to (1) assess disparities in relative utilization of outpatient cervical spine surgery between White and Black patients from 2010 to 2019 and (2) to measure how these racial differences have evolved over time. Although outpatient spine surgery has become increasingly popularized over the last decade, it remains unknown how racial disparities in surgical utilization have translated to the outpatient setting and whether restrictive patterns of access to outpatient cervical spine procedures may exist. A retrospective cohort study from 2010 to 2019 was conducted using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Relative utilization of outpatient (same-day discharge) for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (OP-ACDF) and cervical disk replacement (OP-CDR) were assessed and trended over time between races. Multivariable regressions were subsequently utilized to adjust for baseline patient factors and comorbidities. Overall, Black patients were significantly less likely to undergo OP-ACDF or OP-CDR surgery when compared with White patients ( P <0.03 for both OP-ACDF and OP-CDR). From 2010 to 2019, a persisting disparity over time was found in outpatient utilization for both ACDF and CDR ( e.g. White vs. Black OP-ACDF: 6.0% vs. 3.1% in 2010 compared with 16.7% vs. 8.5% in 2019). These results held in all adjusted analyses. To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting racial disparities in outpatient spine surgery and demonstrates an emerging disparity in outpatient cervical spine utilization among Black patients. These restrictive patterns of access to same-day outpatient hospital and surgery centers may contribute to broader disparities in the overall utilization of major spine procedures that have been previously reported. Renewed interventions are needed to both understand and address these emerging inequalities in outpatient care before they become more firmly established within our orthopedic and neurosurgery spine delivery systems.

Implementation of Machine Learning to Predict Cost of Care Associated with Ambulatory Single-Level Lumbar Decompression

With the emergence of the concept of value-based care, efficient resource allocation has become an increasingly prominent factor in surgical decision-making. Validated machine learning (ML) models for cost prediction in outpatient spine surgery are limited. As such, we developed and internally validated a supervised ML algorithm to reliably identify cost drivers associated with ambulatory single-level lumbar decompression surgery. A retrospective review of the New York State Ambulatory Surgical Database was performed to identify patients who underwent single-level lumbar decompression from 2014 to 2015. Patients with a length of stay of >0 were excluded. Using pre- and intraoperative parameters (features) derived from the New York State Ambulatory Surgical Database, an optimal supervised ML model was ultimately developed and internally validated after 5 candidate models were rigorously tested, trained, and compared for predictive performance related to total charges. The best performing model was then evaluated by testing its performance on identifying relationships between features of interest and cost prediction. Finally, the best performing algorithm was entered into an open-access web application. A total of 8402 patients were included. The gradient-boosted ensemble model demonstrated the best performance assessed via internal validation. Major cost drivers included anesthesia type, operating room time, race, patient income and insurance status, community type, worker's compensation status, and comorbidity index. The gradient-boosted ensemble model predicted total charges and associated cost drivers associated with ambulatory single-level lumbar decompression using a large, statewide database with excellent performance. External validation of this algorithm in future studies may guide practical application of this clinical tool.

Advanced Technologies for Outpatient Lumbar Fusion: Barriers and Opportunities.

In recent years, there has been increasing interest in outpatient spine surgery. Minimally invasive techniques have created an opportunity for ambulatory lumbar fusion, and these techniques increasingly involve advanced technologies such as navigation and robotics. To explore the barriers, advantages, and future predictions for such technology in the context of outpatient lumbar fusions. This is a narrative review of studies examining the advantages, limitations, and cost-effectiveness of navigation and spinal robotics in conjunction with the outcomes and costs of outpatient lumbar fusion. Outpatient lumbar fusion is a growing trend with ample evidence of its safety, favorable patient outcomes, and cost savings. Navigation and spinal robotics are associated with improved instrumentation accuracy and fewer complications, and the long-term cost savings can make these technologies financially practical in the outpatient setting. Future capabilities with robotics will only increase their value. Advanced technologies such as navigation and robotics are strategic long-term investments in the context of outpatient lumbar fusion. The favorable outcomes and costs associated with navigation and robotics will be relevant to any spine surgeon interested in developing an outpatient lumbar fusion program.

Emergency Department Visits After Outpatient Spine Surgery.

A retrospective study. This study sought to characterize the incidence and timing of postoperative emergency department (ED) visits after common outpatient spinal surgeries performed at ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) and at hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs). Outpatient spine surgery has markedly grown in popularity over the past decade. The incidence of ED visits after outpatient spine surgery is not well established. This study was a retrospective analysis of a large commercial claims insurance database of patients 65 years old and below. Patients who underwent single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, laminectomy, and microdiscectomy were identified. Incidence, timing, and diagnoses associated with ED visits within the postoperative global period (90d) after surgery were assessed. In total, 202,202 patients received outpatient spine surgery (19.1% in ASC vs. 80.9% in HOPD). Collectively, there were 22,198 ED visits during the 90-day postoperative period. Approximately 9.0% of patients had at least 1 ED visit, and the incidence varied by procedure: anterior cervical discectomy and fusion 9.9%, laminectomy 9.5%, and microdiscectomy 8.5% ( P <0.0001). After adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidity index, the odds of at least 1 ED visit were higher among patients who received surgery at HOPD versus ASC for all 3 procedures. The majority (56.1%) ED visits occurred during the first month postoperatively; 30.8% (n=6841) occurred within the first week postoperatively, and 10.7% (n=2370) occurred on the same day as the surgery. Postoperative pain was the most common reason for ED visits. Among commercially insured patients who received outpatient spine surgery, the incidence of ED visits during the 90-day postoperative period was ~9%. Our results indicate opportunities for improved postoperative care planning after outpatient spinal surgery.

Do all outpatient spine surgeries cost the same? Comparison of economic outcomes data from a state-level database for outpatient lumbar decompression performed in an ambulatory surgery center or hospital outpatient setting.

Spinal procedures are increasingly conducted as outpatient procedures, with a growing proportion conducted in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). To date, studies reporting outcomes and cost analyses for outpatient spinal procedures in the US have not distinguished the various outpatient settings from each other. In this study, the authors used a state-level administrative database to compare rates of overnight stays and nonroutine discharges as well as index admission charges and cumulative 7-, 30-, and 90-day charges for patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression in freestanding ASCs and hospital outpatient (HO) settings. For this project, the authors used the Florida State Ambulatory Surgery Database (SASD), offered by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), for the years 2013 and 2014. Patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression for degenerative diseases were identified using CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) and ICD-9 codes. Outcomes of interest included rates of overnight stays, rate of nonroutine discharges, index admission charges, and subsequent admission cumulative charges at 7, 30, and 90 days. Multivariable analysis was performed to assess the impact of outpatient type on index admission charges. Marginal effect analysis was employed to study the difference in predicted dollar margins between ASCs and HOs for each insurance type. A total of 25,486 patients were identified; of these, 7067 patients (27.7%) underwent lumbar decompression in a freestanding ASC and 18,419 (72.3%) in an HO. No patient in the ASC group required an overnight stay compared to 9.2% (n = 1691) in the HO group (p < 0.001). No clinically significant difference in the rate of nonroutine discharge was observed between the two groups. The mean index admission charge for the ASC group was found to be significantly higher than that for the HO group ($35,017.28 ± $14,335.60 vs $33,881.50 ± $15,023.70; p < 0.001). Patients in ASCs were also found to have higher mean 7-day (p < 0.001), 30-day (p < 0.001), and 90-day (p = 0.001) readmission charges. ASC procedures were associated with increased charges compared to HO procedures for patients on Medicare or Medicaid (mean index admission charge increase $4049.27, 95% CI $2577.87-$5520.67, p < 0.001) and for patients on private insurance ($4775.72, 95% CI $4171.06-$5380.38, p < 0.001). For patients on self-pay or no charge, a lumbar decompression procedure at an ASC was associated with a decrease in index admission charge of -$10,995.38 (95% CI -$12124.76 to -$9866.01, p < 0.001) compared to a lumbar decompression procedure at an HO. These "real-world" results from an all-payer statewide database indicate that for outpatient spine surgery, ASCs may be associated with higher index admission and subsequent 7-, 30-, and 90-day charges. Given that ASCs are touted to have lower overall costs for patients and better profit margins for physicians, these analyses warrant further investigation into whether this cost benefit is applicable to outpatient spine procedures.

Readability Analysis of Patient-Accessible Information Regarding Ambulatory Surgical Center Procedures

As spine surgery in the ambulatory setting becomes more frequent, patients should comprehend the difference from traditional hospital-based, outpatient settings. Limited research exists on the readability of online articles surrounding spine surgery in the ambulatory surgery center (ASC). In this study, we intend to evaluate the readability of online articles pertaining to spine surgery in the outpatient and ambulatory surgical settings. Three search engines were queried, and the first 100 articles pertaining to each outpatient spine surgery search term were collected. Advertisements, videos, and peer-reviewed scientific articles were excluded. Articles were categorized by publishing source as follows: hospital or institution, general medical Websites, private practice, or surgery center. Flesch-Kincaid (FK) grade level, Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score, word count, sentences per paragraph, words per sentence, and characters per word were evaluated for each article. Student's t tests compared readability metrics between groups based on setting and procedure region. A total of 342 articles was analyzed; 279 articles were outpatient hospital related, and 63 ASC related. Flesch-Kincaid grade levels or FRE scores were not significantly different between outpatient hospital and ambulatory center. Comparison of ASC to outpatient articles from a hospital or institution source significantly differed in FRE score (40.7 versus 32.4) and FK grade level (12.3 versus 13.9; all P < .05). Articles addressing procedure type were significantly different in FRE score (36.2 versus 30.0) and FK grade level (13.0 ± 2.1 versus 14.3 ± 1.8). Hospital, private practice, and medical journalists should be aware of significant differences in readability of patient-accessible ASC articles. These articles may be more difficult to read than outpatient hospital articles, and production of more reading-level-appropriate online literature is required. 3 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is a significant difference in the readability of patient-accessible ASC articles.

Lumbar Spine Surgery and What We Lost in the Era of the Coronavirus Pandemic: A Survey of the Lumbar Spine Research Society.

This was a survey of the surgeon members of the Lumbar Spine Research Society (LSRS). The purpose of this study was to assess trends in surgical practice and patient management involving elective and emergency surgery in the early months of the coronavirus pandemic. The novel coronavirus has radically disrupted medical care in the first half of 2020. Little data exists regarding the exact nature of its effect on spine care. A 53-question survey was sent to the surgeon members of the LSRS. Respondents were contacted via email 3 times over a 2-week period in late April. Questions concentrated on surgical and clinical practice patterns before and after the pandemic. Other data included elective surgical schedules and volumes, as well as which emergency cases were being performed. Surgeons were asked about the status of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus testing. Circumstances for performing surgical intervention on patients with and without testing as well as patients testing positive were explored. A total of 43 completed surveys were returned of 174 sent to active surgeons in the LSRS (25%). Elective lumbar spine procedures decreased by 90% in the first 2 months of the pandemic, but emergency procedures did not change. Patients with "stable" lumbar disease had surgeries deferred indefinitely, even beyond 8 weeks if necessary. In-person outpatient visits became increasingly rare events, as telemedicine consultations accounted for 67% of all outpatient spine appointments. In total, 91% surgeons were under some type of confinement. Only 11% of surgeons tested for the coronavirus on all surgical patients. Elective lumbar surgery was significantly decreased in the first few months of the coronavirus pandemic, and much of outpatient spine surgery was practiced via telemedicine. Despite these constraints, spine surgeons performed emergency surgery when indicated, even when the COVID-19 status of patients was unknown. Level IV.