Browsing by Author "Carreon, Leah Yacat"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Cell Saver for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery Reduces Cost.
    (Spine deformity, 2017-07) Gum, Jeffrey L; Carreon, Leah Yacat; Kelly, Michael P; Hostin, Richard; Robinson, Chessie; Burton, Douglas C; Polly, David W; Shaffrey, Christopher I; LaFage, Virginie; Schwab, Frank J; Ames, Christopher P; Kim, Han Jo; Smith, Justin S; Bess, R Shay; International Spine Study Group

    Study design

    Retrospective cohort.

    Objectives

    To determine if the use of cell saver reduces overall blood costs in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery.

    Summary of background data

    Recent studies have questioned the clinical value of cell saver during spine procedures.

    Methods

    ASD patients enrolled in a prospective, multicenter surgical database who had complete preoperative and surgical data were identified. Patients were stratified into (1) cell saver available during surgery, but no intraoperative autologous infusion (No Infusion group), or (2) cell saver available and received autologous infusion (Infusion group).

    Results

    There were 427 patients in the Infusion group and 153 in the No infusion group. Patients in both groups had similar demographics. Mean autologous infusion volume was 698 mL. The Infusion group had a higher percentage of EBL relative to the estimated blood volume (42.2%) than the No Infusion group (19.6%, p < .000). Allogeneic transfusion was more common in the Infusion group (255/427, 60%) than the No Infusion group (67/153, 44%, p = .001). The number of allogeneic blood units transfused was also higher in the Infusion group (2.4) than the No Infusion group (1.7, p = .009). Total blood costs ranged from $396 to $2,146 in the No Infusion group and from $1,262 to $5,088 in the Infusion group. If the cost of cell saver blood was transformed into costs of allogeneic blood, total blood costs for the Infusion group would range from $840 to $5,418. Thus, cell saver use yielded a mean cost savings ranging from $330 to $422 (allogeneic blood averted). Linear regression showed that after an EBL of 614 mL, cell saver becomes cost-efficient.

    Conclusion

    Compared to transfusing allogeneic blood, cell saver autologous infusion did not reduce the proportion or the volume of allogeneic transfusion for patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity. The use of cell saver becomes cost-efficient above an EBL of 614 mL, producing a cost savings of $330 to $422.

    Level of evidence

    Level III.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Impact of cost valuation on cost-effectiveness in adult spine deformity surgery.
    (The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2017-01) Gum, Jeffrey L; Hostin, Richard; Robinson, Chessie; Kelly, Michael P; Carreon, Leah Yacat; Polly, David W; Bess, R Shay; Burton, Douglas C; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Smith, Justin S; LaFage, Virginie; Schwab, Frank J; Ames, Christopher P; Glassman, Steven D; International Spine Study Group

    Background context

    Over the past decade, the number of adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeries has more than doubled in the United States. The complex surgeries needed to manage ASD are associated with significant resource utilization and high cost, making them a primary target for increased scrutiny. Accordingly, it is important to not only demonstrate value in ASD surgery as clinical effectiveness but also to translate outcome assessment to cost-effectiveness.

    Purpose

    To compare the difference between Medicare allowable rates and the actual, direct hospital costs for ASD surgeries.

    Study design

    Longitudinal cohort.

    Patient sample

    Consecutive patients enrolled in an ASD database from a single institution.

    Outcome measures

    Short Form (SF)-6D.

    Methods

    Consecutive patients enrolled in an ASD database from a single institution from 2008 to 2013 were identified. Direct hospital costs were collected from hospital administrative records for the entire inpatient episode of surgical care. Medicare allowable rates were calculated for the same inpatient stays using the year-appropriate Center for Medicare-Medicaid Services Inpatient Pricer Payment System Tool. The SF-6D, a utility index derived from the SF-36v1, was used to determine quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3.5% annually.

    Results

    Of 580 surgical ASD patients eligible for 2-year follow up, 346 (60%) had complete baseline and 2-year data, and 60 were Medicare beneficiaries comprising the cohort for the present study. Mean SF-6D gained is 0.10 during year 1 after surgery and 0.02 at year 2, resulting in a cumulative SF-6D gain of 0.12 over 2 years. Mean Medicare allowable rate over the 2 years is $82,050 (range $42,383 to $220,749) and mean direct cost is $99,114 (range $28,447 to $217,717). Mean cost per QALY over 2 years is $683,750 using Medicare allowable rates and $825,950 using direct costs. This difference of $17,181 between the 2 cost calculation represents a 17% difference, which was statistically significant (p<.001).

    Conclusions

    There is a significant difference in direct hospital costs versus Medicare allowable rates in ASD surgery and in turn, there is a similar difference in the cost per QALY calculation. Utilizing Medicare allowable rates not only underestimates (17%) the cost of ASD surgery, but it also creates inaccurate and unrealistic expectations for researchers and policymakers.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Minimum Detectable Measurement Difference for Health-Related Quality of Life Measures Varies With Age and Disability in Adult Spinal Deformity
    (SPINE, 2018-07) Kelly, Michael P; Kim, Han Jo; Ames, Christopher P; Burton, Douglas C; Carreon, Leah Yacat; Polly, David W; Hostin, Richard; Jain, Amit; Gum, Jeffrey L; Lafage, Virginie; Schwab, Frank J; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Smith, Justin S; Bess, Shay; International Spine Study Group
    Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Study Design. Retrospective cohort. Objective. To investigate the minimum detectable measurement difference (MDMD) in the Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r) outcomes instrument in adult spinal deformity (ASD) and to evaluate the effect of baseline data on measurable difference. Summary of Background Data. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is the smallest, clinically relevant change observed and has been proposed for the SRS-22r instrument in ASD as 0.4. The MCID must be greater than the MDMD to be useful. The MDMD for the SRS-22r has not been calculated, nor have the effect of patient baseline values on MDMD. Methods. A prospective observation cohort was queried for patients treated both operatively and nonoperatively for ASD. Patients with baseline and 1-year, 2-year follow-up SRS-22r data were included in the analysis. The MDMD was calculated using classical test theory and item-response theory methods. Effect size and standardized response means were calculated. The effect of baseline data values was evaluated for MDMD. Results. A total 839 Patients were eligible for cohort inclusion with 428 (51%) eligible for analysis with complete data. MDMD for Pain (0.6) and Self-Image (0.5) were greater than 0.4. MDMD varied with age (highest for the youngest patients) and with disability (highest for SF-36 Physical Component Summary <28.6). MDMD was less than 0.4 for Activity (0.3), Mental Health (0.3), and Total Score (0.2). Gender and mental health did not affect MDMD for the SRS-22r instrument. Conclusion. An MCID of 0.4 for the SRS-22r total score and domain scores may not be an appropriate value as the calculated MDMD is greater than 0.4 for both the Pain and Self-Image subscores. The MDMD for the SRS-22r instrument varied with age and baseline disability, making the assessment of clinically significant change more difficult using this tool. The MCID must be considered in the setting of the MDMD for instruments used to assess outcomes in ASD.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Unilateral versus bilateral lower extremity motor deficit following complex adult spinal deformity surgery: is there a difference in recovery up to 2-year follow-up?
    (The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2019-03) Tuchman, Alexander; Lenke, Lawrence G; Cerpa, Meghan; Fehlings, Michael G; Lewis, Stephen J; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Cheung, Kenneth MC; Carreon, Leah Yacat; Dekutoski, Mark B; Schwab, Frank J; Boachie-Adjei, Oheneba; Kebaish, Khaled; Ames, Christopher P; Qiu, Yong; Matsuyama, Yukihiro; Dahl, Benny T; Mehdian, Hossein; Pellisé, Ferran; Berven, Sigurd H

    Background context

    Scoli-RISK-1 is a multicenter prospective cohort designed to study neurologic outcomes following complex adult spinal deformity (ASD). The effect of unilateral versus bilateral postoperative motor deficits on the likelihood of long-term recovery has not been previously studied in this population.

    Purpose

    To evaluate whether bilateral postoperative neurologic deficits have a worse recovery than unilateral deficits.

    Study design

    Secondary analysis of a prospective, multicenter, international cohort study.

    Methods

    In a cohort of 272 patients, neurologic decline was defined as deterioration of the American Spinal Injury Association Lower Extremity Motor Scores (LEMS) following surgery. Patients with lower extremity neurologic decline were grouped into unilateral and bilateral cohorts. Differences in demographics, surgical variables, and patient outcome measures between the two cohorts were analyzed.

    Results

    A total of 265 patients had LEMS completed at discharge. Unilateral decline was seen in 32 patients (12%), while 29 (11%) had bilateral symptoms. At 2 years, there was no significant difference in either median LEMS (unilateral 50.0, interquartile range [IQR] 47.5-50.0; bilateral 50.0, IQR 48.0-50.0, p=.939) or change in LEMS from baseline (unilateral 0.0, IQR -1.0 to 0.0; bilateral 0.0, IQR -1.0 to 0.0, p=.920). In both groups, approximately two-thirds of patients saw recovery to at least their preoperative baseline by 2 years postoperatively (unilateral n=15, 63%; bilateral n=14, 67%). The mean Scoliosis Research Society-22R (SRS-22R) score at 2 years was 3.7±0.6 versus 3.2±0.6 (p=.009) for unilateral and bilateral groups, respectively.

    Conclusions

    The prognosis for neurologic recovery of new motor deficits following complex adult spinal deformity is similar with both unilateral and bilateral weaknesses. Despite similar rates of neurologic recovery, patient reported outcomes for those with bilateral motor decline measured by SRS-22R are worse at 2 years after surgery.