Cost-Effectiveness of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Surgery at 2-Year Follow-up

Fischer, Charla R.; Cassilly, Ryan T.; Dyrszka, Marc D; Trimba, Yuriy; Peters, Austin; Goldstein, Jeffrey A.; Spivak, Jeffrey M.; Bendo, John A.

doi:10.1016/j.jspd.2015.05.006

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They will be used in a separate study to develop evidence-based recommendations for economic evaluations in spine surgery. Finally, a total of 130 clinical cost-effectiveness studies were included 24–153…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe present study is a systematic review conducted as part of a methodological approach to develop evidence-based recommendations for economic evaluations in spine surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the methodology and quality of currently available clinical cost-effectiveness studies in spine surgery.Study designSystematic literature review.Data sourcesPubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit and The National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database were searched through 8 December 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies were included if they met all of the following eligibility criteria: (1) spine surgery, (2) the study cost-effectiveness and (3) clinical study. Model-based studies were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisThe following data items were extracted and evaluated: pathology, number of participants, intervention(s), year, country, study design, time horizon, comparator(s), utility measurement, effectivity measurement, costs measured, perspective, main result and study quality.Results130 economic evaluations were included. Seventy-four of these studies were retrospective studies. The majority of the studies had a time horizon shorter than 2 years. Utility measures varied between the EuroQol 5 dimensions and variations of the Short-Form Health Survey. Effect measures varied widely between Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Neck Disability Index, Oswestry Disability Index, reoperation rates and adverse events. All studies included direct costs from a healthcare perspective. Indirect costs were included in 47 studies. Total Consensus Health Economic Criteria scores ranged from 2 to 18, with a mean score of 12.0 over all 130 studies.ConclusionsThe comparability of economic evaluations in spine surgery is extremely low due to different study designs, follow-up duration and outcome measurements such as utility, effectiveness and costs. This illustrates the need for uniformity in conducting and reporting economic evaluations in spine surgery.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10,41,42 Although those issues have been analyzed by using medical records, the costs varied among societies to obtain a generalized picture of the utilization of medical services. 24,27,[43][44][45][46][47][48] This issue could be addressed by using registered data to reveal the big picture. 21,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][43][44][45][46][47][48] Recently, claim data have not only been used for accounting but also been used to improve the management of spinal disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…24,27,[43][44][45][46][47][48] This issue could be addressed by using registered data to reveal the big picture. 21,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][43][44][45][46][47][48] Recently, claim data have not only been used for accounting but also been used to improve the management of spinal disease. 9,10,20,22,34,[42][43][44][45][49][50][51][52][53][54] National population-based data can be utilized to accomplish goals, such as determining the change in the number of surgical cases, average cost for treatment, use of resources and factors in uencing cost.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Direct medical costs after surgical or nonsurgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal disease: a nationwide matched cohort study with a 10-year follow-up

Kim

Chung

Choi

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Demand for degenerative lumbar spinal disease treatments has been increasing, leading to the increased utilization of medical resources. The present study compared the direct costs between surgical and nonsurgical treatment. The national health insurance service sample cohort was used in a matched cohort study comparing surgical treatment (n=2,698) with nonsurgical treatment (n=2,698). Insurance covers both Western and Asian medicine. First, the overall monthly costs were compared between cohorts. Second, the monthly costs were compared at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after treatment and yearly thereafter for 10 years. The surgery cohort spent $50.84/patient/month, and the nonsurgery cohort spent $29.34/patient/month (p<0.01). Surgery cost more ($2,762) than nonsurgical interventions ($180.4) (p<0.01). Compared with the nonsurgery cohort, the surgery cohort paid $33/month more for the first 3 months, paid less for the first 12 months, and paid approximately the same over the course of 10 years. Surgery initially cost more than nonsurgical interventions, but the costs incurred during the follow-up period were not higher. The results of the present study should be interpreted in light of the costs of medical services, indirect costs, quality of life and societal willingness to pay.

show abstract

“…20 Several studies have explored the connection between PROMs and cost analysis by calculating QALYs from PROMs. [21][22][23] McAnany et al conducted a study evaluating 5-year costs associated with anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) using cost utility values derived from SF-36. 23 From this identified that CDA generated 2.84 QALYs compared with ACDF, which generated 2.1 QALYs, despite costing $17,540 less than ACDF.…”

Section: Patient-reported Outcome Measure Applications In Analysis Of...mentioning

confidence: 99%

State-of-the-art Applications of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Spinal Care

Lee

Issa

Vaccaro

2023

J Am Acad Orthop Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assign objective measures to patient's subjective experiences of health, pain, disability, function, and quality of life. PROMs can be useful for providers in shared decision making, outcome assessment, and indicating patients for surgery. In this article, we provide an overview of the legacy PROMs used in spinal care, recent advancements in patientreported outcomes, and future directions in PROMs. Recent advances in patient-reported outcome assessments have included standardization of measurement tools, integration of data collection into workflow, and applications of outcome measures in predictive models and decision-making tools. Continual appraisal of instruments and incorporation into artificial intelligence and machine learning analytics will continue to augment the delivery of high-value spinal care.

show abstract

Cost-Effectiveness of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Surgery at 2-Year Follow-up

Abstract: IV.

Cited by 11 publications

References 45 publications

Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment

Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment

Direct medical costs after surgical or nonsurgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal disease: a nationwide matched cohort study with a 10-year follow-up

State-of-the-art Applications of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Spinal Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About