Browse

You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for

  • Refine by Access: user x
  • By Author: Sciubba, Daniel M. x
  • By Author: Neuman, Brian J. x
Clear All
Restricted access

Alvaro Ibaseta, Rafa Rahman, Nicholas S. Andrade, Richard L. Skolasky, Khaled M. Kebaish, Daniel M. Sciubba, and Brian J. Neuman

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the concurrent validity, discriminant ability, and responsiveness of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in adult spinal deformity (ASD) and to calculate minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for PROMIS scores.

METHODS

The authors used data obtained in 186 surgical patients with ASD. Concurrent validity was determined through correlations between preoperative PROMIS scores and legacy measure scores. PROMIS discriminant ability between disease severity groups was determined using the preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) value as the anchor. Responsiveness was determined through distribution- and anchor-based methods, using preoperative to postoperative changes in PROMIS scores. MCIDs were estimated on the basis of the responsiveness analysis.

RESULTS

The authors found strong correlations between PROMIS Pain Interference and ODI and the Scoliosis Research Society 22-item questionnaire Pain component; PROMIS Physical Function and ODI; PROMIS Anxiety and Depression domains and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2, Physical and Mental Components, Scoliosis Research Society 22-item questionnaire Mental Health component (anxiety only), 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire (anxiety only), and 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder questionnaire; PROMIS Fatigue and 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire; and PROMIS Satisfaction with Participation in Social Roles (i.e., Social Satisfaction) and ODI. PROMIS discriminated between disease severity groups in all domains except between none/mild and moderate Anxiety, with mean differences ranging from 3.7 to 8.4 points. PROMIS showed strong responsiveness in Pain Interference; moderate responsiveness in Physical Function and Social Satisfaction; and low responsiveness in Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, and Sleep Disturbance. Final PROMIS MCIDs were as follows: –6.3 for Anxiety, –4.4 for Depression, –4.6 for Fatigue, –5.0 for Pain Interference, 4.2 for Physical Function, 5.7 for Social Satisfaction, and –3.5 for Sleep Disturbance.

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS is a valid assessment of patient health, can discriminate between disease severity levels, and shows responsiveness to changes after ASD surgery. The MCIDs provided herein may help clinicians interpret postoperative changes in PROMIS scores, taking into account the fact that they are pending external validation.

Free access

Rafa Rahman, Alvaro Ibaseta, Jay S. Reidler, Nicholas S. Andrade, Richard L. Skolasky, Lee H. Riley III, David B. Cohen, Daniel M. Sciubba, Khaled M. Kebaish, and Brian J. Neuman

OBJECTIVE

The authors conducted a study to analyze associations between changes in depression/anxiety before and 12 months after spine surgery, as well as changes in scores using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) at the same time points.

METHODS

Preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively, the authors assessed PROMIS scores for depression, anxiety, pain, physical function, sleep disturbance, and satisfaction with participation in social roles among 206 patients undergoing spine surgery for deformity correction or degenerative disease. Patients were stratified according to preoperative/postoperative changes in depression and anxiety, which were categorized as persistent, improved, newly developed postoperatively, or absent. Multivariate regression was used to control for confounders and to compare changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

Fifty patients (24%) had preoperative depression, which improved in 26 (52%). Ninety-four patients (46%) had preoperative anxiety, which improved in 70 (74%). Household income was the only preoperative characteristic that differed significantly between patients whose depression persisted and those whose depression improved. Compared with the no-depression group, patients with persistent depression had less improvement in all 4 domains, and patients with postoperatively developed depression had less improvement in pain, physical function, and satisfaction with social roles. Compared with the group of patients with postoperatively improved depression, patients with persistent depression had less improvement in pain and physical function, and patients with postoperatively developed depression had less improvement in pain. Compared with patients with no anxiety, those with persistent anxiety had less improvement in physical function, sleep disturbance, and satisfaction with social roles, and patients with postoperatively developed anxiety had less improvement in pain, physical function, and satisfaction with social roles. Compared with patients with postoperatively improved anxiety, patients with persistent anxiety had less improvement in pain, physical function, and satisfaction with social roles, and those with postoperatively developed anxiety had less improvement in pain, physical function, and satisfaction with social roles. All reported differences were significant at p < 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

Many spine surgery patients experienced postoperative improvements in depression/anxiety. Improvements in 12-month PROs were smaller among patients with persistent or postoperatively developed depression/anxiety compared with patients who had no depression or anxiety before or after surgery and those whose depression/anxiety improved after surgery. Postoperative changes in depression/anxiety may have a greater effect than preoperative depression/anxiety on changes in PROs after spine surgery. Addressing the mental health of spine surgery patients may improve postoperative PROs.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE Type of question: causation; study design: prospective cohort study; evidence: class III.

Full access

Micheal Raad, Jay S. Reidler, Mostafa H. El Dafrawy, Raj M. Amin, Amit Jain, Brian J. Neuman, Lee H. Riley III, Daniel M. Sciubba, Khaled M. Kebaish, and Richard L. Skolasky

OBJECTIVE

It is important to identify differences in the treatment of common diseases over time and across geographic regions. Several studies have reported increased use of arthrodesis to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). The purpose of this study was to investigate geographic variations in the treatment of LSS by US region.

METHODS

The authors reviewed inpatient and outpatient medical claims from 2010 to 2014 using the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database (Truven Health Analytics), which includes data on commercially insured members younger than 65 years. ICD-9 code 724.02 was used to identify patients aged ≥ 40 and < 65 years who underwent surgery for “spinal stenosis of the lumbar region” and for whom LSS was the only principal diagnosis. The primary outcome was the performance of spinal arthrodesis as part of the procedure. Geographic regions were based on patient residence and defined according to the US Census Bureau as the Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.

RESULTS

Rates of arthrodesis, as opposed to decompression alone, varied significantly by region, from 48% in the South, to 42% in the Midwest, 36% in the Northeast, and 31% in the West. After controlling for patient age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index values, the differences remained significant. Compared with patients in the Northeast, those in the South (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.50–1.75) and Midwest (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.18–1.41) were significantly more likely to undergo spinal arthrodesis. On multivariate analysis, patients in the West were significantly less likely to have a prolonged hospital stay (> 3 days) than those in the Northeast (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75–0.94). Compared with the rate in the Northeast, the rates of discharge to a skilled nursing facility were lower in the South (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.31–0.55) and West (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53–0.98). The 30-day readmission rate was significantly lower in the West (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65–0.98) than in the Northeast and similar between the other regions. Mean payments were significantly higher in the Midwest (mean difference $5503, 95% CI $4279–$6762), South (mean difference $6187, 95% CI $5041–$7332), and West (mean difference $7732, 95% CI $6384–$9080) than in the Northeast.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of spinal arthrodesis, as well as surgical outcomes and payments for the treatment of LSS, varies significantly by US region. This highlights the importance of developing national recommendations for the treatment of LSS.

Full access

Micheal Raad, Callum J. Donaldson, Mostafa H. El Dafrawy, Daniel M. Sciubba, Lee H. Riley III, Brian J. Neuman, Khaled M. Kebaish, and Richard L. Skolasky

OBJECTIVE

Recommendations for the surgical treatment of isolated lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) (i.e., in the absence of concomitant scoliosis or spondylolisthesis) are unclear. The aims of this study were to investigate trends in the surgical treatment of isolated LSS in US adults and determine implications for outcomes.

METHODS

The authors analyzed inpatient and outpatient claims from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database for 20,279 patients aged 40–64 years who underwent surgery for LSS between 2010 and 2014. Only patients with continuous 12-month insurance coverage after surgery were included. The rates of decompression with arthrodesis versus decompression only and of simple (1- or 2-level, single-approach) versus complex (> 2-level or combined-approach) arthrodesis were analyzed by year and geographic region. These trends were further analyzed with respect to complications, length of hospital stay, payments made to the hospital, and patient discharge status. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients who underwent decompression with arthrodesis compared with decompression only increased significantly and linearly from 2010 to 2014 (OR 1.08; 95% CI 1.06–1.10). Arthrodesis was more likely to be complex rather than simple with each subsequent year (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.33–1.49). This trend was accompanied by an increased likelihood of postoperative complications (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.02–1.21), higher costs (payments increased by a mean of US$1633 per year; 95% CI 1327–1939), and greater likelihood of being discharged to a skilled nursing facility as opposed to home (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.03–1.20). The South and Midwest regions of the US had the highest proportions of patients undergoing arthrodesis (48% and 42%, respectively). The mean length of hospital stay did not change significantly (p = 0.324).

CONCLUSIONS

From 2010 to 2014, the proportion of adults undergoing decompression with arthrodesis versus decompression only for the treatment of LSS increased, especially in the South and Midwest regions of the US. A greater proportion of these fusions were complex and were associated with more complications, higher costs, and a greater likelihood of being discharged to a skilled nursing facility.

Full access

Micheal Raad, Brian J. Neuman, Amit Jain, Hamid Hassanzadeh, Peter G. Passias, Eric Klineberg, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Emily K. Miller, Justin S. Smith, Virginie Lafage, D. Kojo Hamilton, Shay Bess, Khaled M. Kebaish, Daniel M. Sciubba, and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Given the recent shift in health care toward quality reporting requirements and a greater emphasis on a cost-quality approach, patient stratification with respect to long-term outcomes and the use of health care resources is of increasing value. Stratification tools may be effective if they are simple and evidence based. The authors hypothesize that preoperative patient-reported activity levels might independently predict postoperative outcomes in patients with adult spinal deformity.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort. A total of 575 patients in a prospective adult spinal deformity surgical database were identified with complete data regarding the preoperative level of activity. Answers to question 5 of the Scoliosis Research Society-22r Patient Questionnaire (SRS-22r) were used to stratify patients into active and inactive groups. Outcomes were length of hospital stay (LOS), level of activity, and reaching the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for SRS-22r domains and the Physical Component Summary (PCS) of the SF-36 at 2 years postoperatively. The 2 groups were compared with respect to several potential confounders. Covariates with p < 0.1 were controlled for. The impact of activity on LOS was assessed using multivariate negative binomial regression analysis. Multivariate logistic regression models additionally controlling for the respective baseline health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores were used to assess the association between preoperative activity levels and reaching the MCID at 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 420 (73%) of the 575 patients who met the inclusion criteria had complete data at 2 years postoperatively. The inactive group was more likely to be significantly older, have a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, worse baseline radiographic deformity, and greater correction of most radiographic parameters. After controlling for possible confounders, the active group had a significantly shorter LOS (incidence risk ratio 0.91, p = 0.043). After adding respective baseline HRQOL scores to the models, active patients were significantly more likely to reach the MCID for the SRS-22r pain domain (OR 1.72, p = 0.026) and PCS (OR 1.94, p = 0.013). Active patients were also significantly more likely to be active at 2 years postoperatively on multivariate analysis (OR 8.94, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The authors’ results show that patients who belong to the inactive group are likely to have a longer LOS and lower odds of reaching the MCID in HRQOL or being active at 2 years postoperatively. Inquiring about patients’ preoperative activity levels might be a reliable and simple stratification tool in terms of long- and short-term outcomes in ASD patients.

Free access

Emily K. Miller, Brian J. Neuman, Amit Jain, Alan H. Daniels, Tamir Ailon, Daniel M. Sciubba, Khaled M. Kebaish, Virginie Lafage, Justin K. Scheer, Justin S. Smith, Shay Bess, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Christopher P. Ames, and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to analyze the value of an adult spinal deformity frailty index (ASD-FI) in preoperative risk stratification. Preoperative risk assessment is imperative before procedures known to have high complication rates, such as ASD surgery. Frailty has been associated with risk of complications in trauma surgery, and preoperative frailty assessments could improve the accuracy of risk stratification by providing a comprehensive analysis of patient factors that contribute to an increased risk of complications.

METHODS

Using 40 variables, the authors calculated frailty scores with a validated method for 417 patients (enrolled between 2010 and 2014) with a minimum 2-year follow-up in an ASD database. On the basis of these scores, the authors categorized patients as not frail (NF) (< 0.3 points), frail (0.3–0.5 points), or severely frail (SF) (> 0.5 points). The correlation between frailty category and incidence of complications was analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall mean ASD-FI score was 0.33 (range 0.0–0.8). Compared with NF patients (n = 183), frail patients (n = 158) and SF patients (n = 109) had longer mean hospital stays (1.2 and 1.6 times longer, respectively; p < 0.001). The adjusted odds of experiencing a major intraoperative or postoperative complication were higher for frail patients (OR 2.8) and SF patients ( 4.1) compared with NF patients (p < 0.01). For frail and SF patients, respectively, the adjusted odds of developing proximal junctional kyphosis (OR 2.8 and 3.1) were higher than those for NF patients. The SF patients had higher odds of developing pseudarthrosis (OR 13.0), deep wound infection (OR 8.0), and wound dehiscence (OR 13.4) than NF patients (p < 0.05), and they had 2.1 times greater odds of reoperation (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Greater patient frailty, as measured by the ASD-FI, was associated with worse outcome in many common quality and value metrics, including greater risk of major complications, proximal junctional kyphosis, pseudarthrosis, deep wound infection, wound dehiscence, reoperation, and longer hospital stay.