Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Clin Spine Surg. 2017 Dec;30(10):E1376-E1381. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000426.

Complications, Readmissions, and Revisions for Spine Procedures Performed by Orthopedic Surgeons Versus Neurosurgeons: A Retrospective, Longitudinal Study.

Author information

1
Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.
2
Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN:

Retrospective database analysis.

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the impact of training pathway, either neurosurgical or orthopedic, on complications, readmissions, and revisions in spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:

Training pathway has been shown to have an impact on outcomes in various surgical subspecialties. Although training pathway has not been shown to have a significant impact on spine surgery outcomes in the perioperative period, long-term results are unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

A retrospective analysis of 197,682 patients receiving 1 of 3 common spine surgeries [lumbar laminectomy, lumbar fusion, and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)] between 2006 and 2010 was conducted. Patient data were obtained from a large claims database. Postoperative adverse effects, all-cause readmission, revision surgery rates, and intermediary payments in these cohorts of patients were compared between spine surgeons with either neurosurgical or orthopedic backgrounds.

RESULTS:

Patient demographics, hospital-stay characteristics, and medical comorbidities were similar between neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. The risks of surgical complications, all-cause readmission, and revision surgery were also similar between neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons across all procedure types assessed, with several minor exceptions: neurosurgeons had marginally higher odds of any complication for lumbar fusions [odds ratio (OR) 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.20] and ACDFs (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.04-1.15). Neurosurgeons also had slightly higher rates of revision surgery for concurrent lumbar laminectomy with fusion (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22), and ACDFs (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.14-1.28). No associations between surgeon type and any particular complication were consistently observed for all procedure groups. There were also no associations between surgeon type and 30-day all-cause readmission. Median total intermediary payments were somewhat higher for neurosurgery patients for all procedure groups assessed.

CONCLUSIONS:

Few significant associations between surgeon type and patient outcomes exist in the context of spine surgery. Those which do are small and unlikely to be clinically meaningful.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:

Level 3.

PMID:
27623297
DOI:
10.1097/BSD.0000000000000426
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center