Trends in the treatment of lumbar spine fractures in the United States: A socioeconomics perspective - Clinical article

Department of Neurosurgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine (Impact Factor: 2.38). 07/2011; 15(4):367-70. DOI: 10.3171/2011.5.SPINE10934
Source: PubMed


The objective of this study was to investigate a national health care database and analyze demographics, hospital charges, and treatment trends of patients diagnosed with lumbar spine fractures in the US over a 5-year period.
Clinical data were derived from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the years 2003 through 2007. The NIS is maintained by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and represents a 20% random stratified sample of all discharges from nonfederal hospitals within the US. Patients with lumbar spine fractures were identified using the appropriate ICD-9-CM code. Data on the number of vertebral body augmentation procedures were also retrieved. National estimates of discharges, hospital charges, discharge patterns, and treatment with spinal fusion trends were retrieved and analyzed.
More than 190,000 records of patients with lumbar spine fractures were abstracted from the database. During the 5-year period, there was a 17% increase in hospitalizations for lumbar spine fractures. This was associated with a 27% increase in hospital charges and a 55% increase in total national charges (both adjusted for inflation). The total health care bill associated with lumbar spine fractures in 2007 exceeded 1 billion US dollars. During this same time period, there was a 24% increase in spinal fusions for lumbar fractures, which was associated with a 15% increase in hospital charges. The ratio of spinal fusions to hospitalizations (surgical rate) during this period, however, was stable with an average of 7.4% over the 5-year period. There were an estimated 13,000 vertebral body augmentation procedures for nonpathological fractures performed in 2007 with a total national bill of 450 million US dollars.
An increasing trend of hospitalizations, surgical treatment, and charges associated with lumbar spine fractures was observed between 2003 and 2007 on a national level. This trend, however, does not appear to be as steep as that of surgical utilization in degenerative spine disease. Furthermore, the ratio of spinal fusions to hospitalizations for lumbar fractures appears to be stable, possibly indicating no significant changes in indications for surgical intervention over the time period studied.

10 Reads

  • World Neurosurgery 01/2012; 78(5). DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2012.01.045 · 2.88 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The prevalence, costs, and disability associated with chronic pain continue to escalate. So too, the numerous modalities of treatments applied in managing these patients continue to increase as well. In the period from 2000 to 2011 interventional techniques increased 228%. In addition, analysis of utilization trends and expenditures for spinal interventional techniques alone from 2000 to 2008 illustrated an increase in Medicare fee-for-service expenditures of 240% in terms of dollars spent in the United States. The Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services showed an increase in facet joint and transforaminal epidural injections, with a significant proportion of these services did not meet the medical necessity criteria.The increasing utilization of interventional techniques is also associated with significant variations among specialty groups and regional variations among states. Overall procedures have increased by 173%, with rate of 130% per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries for epidural injections; 383%, with a rate of 308% for facet joint interventions; and overall 410%, or a rate of 331% for sacroiliac joint interventions. Certain high volume interventions such as lumbar transforaminal epidural injections and lumbar facet joint neurolysis have actually increased a staggering 806% and 662%.Coverage policies across ambulatory settings and by multiple payers are highly variable. Apart from variability in the development of coverage policies, payments also substantially vary by site of service. In general, amongst the various ambulatory settings the highest payments are made to hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) the lowest to in-office procedures, and payment to ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) falling somewhere in the middle.This manuscript describes the many differences that exist between the various settings, and includes suggestions for accountable interventional pain management with coverage for techniques with evidence, addressing excessive use of specific techniques, and equalizing payments across multiple ambulatory settings.
    Pain physician 11/2012; 16(6):E635-E670. · 3.54 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment for traumatic central cord syndrome (TCCS) without bone injury is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to examine trends in the treatment for TCCS without bone injury in the United States. Clinical data were obtained from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2000 to 2009. Patients with TCCS without bone injury were identified and divided into those receiving surgical treatment and those receiving conservative treatment according to the International Classification of Diseases-9th Rev.-Clinical Modification codes. Patient and health care system-related demographic data were retrieved. Trends in the treatment and patient outcomes were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was then performed to identify the predictors for surgical treatment. The ratio of patients who underwent surgical treatment was 27.1%. This ratio increased from 14.8% in 2000 to 30.5% in 2009 (p = 0.008). A total of 47.2% of surgical procedures were performed between Days 0 and 2. Multivariate analysis revealed that larger hospital size was a significant predictor for surgical treatment and patients who received treatment in Northeastern region were less likely to undergo surgical treatment. Comparisons between patients receiving surgical and conservative treatment revealed that those receiving surgical treatment had significantly higher overall in-hospital complication rate (18.6% vs. 14.5%), lower pulmonary embolism rate (0.5% vs. 1.2%), lower in-hospital mortality rate (2.0% vs. 2.7%), longer hospital stays (11.2 days vs. 9.9 days), and increased total hospital costs ($93,940 vs. $50,701). The ratio of patients who underwent surgical treatment for TCCS without bone injury increased from 2000 to 2009. Approximately half of surgical procedures were performed from Days 0 to 2. Patients who received treatment in a small hospital or the Northeastern region were less likely to undergo surgical treatment. Although the overall in-hospital complication rate was higher in patients with surgical treatment, pulmonary embolism and in-hospital mortality rates were higher in patients with conservative treatment than those in patients with surgical treatment. Prognostic and epidemiologic study, level III. Therapeutic study, level IV.
    Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 09/2013; 75(3):453-458. DOI:10.1097/TA.0b013e31829cfd7f · 2.74 Impact Factor
Show more

Similar Publications