Cost-effectiveness of Surgical Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Posterior-only versus Antero-posterior Approach.
dc.contributor.author | Ogura, Yoji | |
dc.contributor.author | Gum, Jeffrey L | |
dc.contributor.author | Hostin, Richard A | |
dc.contributor.author | Robinson, Chessie | |
dc.contributor.author | Ames, Christopher P | |
dc.contributor.author | Glassman, Steven D | |
dc.contributor.author | Burton, Douglas C | |
dc.contributor.author | Bess, R Shay | |
dc.contributor.author | Shaffrey, Christopher I | |
dc.contributor.author | Smith, Justin S | |
dc.contributor.author | Yeramaneni, Samrat | |
dc.contributor.author | Lafage, Virginie F | |
dc.contributor.author | Protopsaltis, Themistocles | |
dc.contributor.author | Passias, Peter G | |
dc.contributor.author | Schwab, Frank J | |
dc.contributor.author | Carreon, Leah Y | |
dc.contributor.author | International Spine Study Group (ISSG) | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-05-01T13:42:28Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-05-01T13:42:28Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020-04-11 | |
dc.date.updated | 2020-05-01T13:42:28Z | |
dc.description.abstract | BACKGROUND CONTEXT:Considerable debate exists regarding the optimal surgical approach for adult spinal deformity (ASD). It remains unclear which approach, posterior-only or combined anterior-posterior (AP), is more cost-effective. Our goal is to determine the 2-year cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for each approach. PURPOSE:To compare the 2-year cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment for ASD between the posterior-only approach and combined AP approach. STUDY DESIGN:Retrospective economic analysis of a prospective, multicenter database PATIENT SAMPLE: From a prospective, multicenter surgical database of ASD, patients undergoing 5 or more level fusions through a posterior-only or AP approach were identified and compared. METHODS:QALYs gained were determined using baseline, 1-year, and 2-year post-operative Short Form 6D. Cost was calculated from actual, direct hospital costs including any subsequent readmission or revision. Cost-effectiveness was determined using cost/QALY gained. RESULTS:The AP approach showed significantly higher index cost than the posterior-only approach ($84,329 vs $64,281). This margin decreased at 2-year follow-up with total costs of $89,824 and $73,904, respectively. QALYs gained at two years were similar with 0.21 and 0.17 in the posterior-only and the AP approaches, respectively. The cost/QALY at two years after surgery was significantly higher in the AP approach ($525,080) than in the posterior-only approach ($351,086). CONCLUSIONS:We assessed 2-year cost-effectiveness for the surgical treatment through posterior-only and AP approaches. The posterior-only approach is less expensive both for the index surgery and at 2-year follow-up. The QALY gained at 2-years was similar between the two approaches. Thus, posterior-only approach was more cost-effective than the AP approach under our study parameters. However, both approaches were not cost-effective at 2-year follow-up. | |
dc.identifier | S1529-9430(20)30136-4 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1529-9430 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1878-1632 | |
dc.identifier.uri | ||
dc.language | eng | |
dc.publisher | Elsevier BV | |
dc.relation.ispartof | The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society | |
dc.relation.isversionof | 10.1016/j.spinee.2020.03.018 | |
dc.subject | International Spine Study Group (ISSG) | |
dc.title | Cost-effectiveness of Surgical Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Posterior-only versus Antero-posterior Approach. | |
dc.type | Journal article | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Shaffrey, Christopher I|0000-0001-9760-8386 | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Passias, Peter G|0000-0002-1479-4070|0000-0003-2635-2226 | |
pubs.organisational-group | School of Medicine | |
pubs.organisational-group | Orthopaedics | |
pubs.organisational-group | Neurosurgery | |
pubs.organisational-group | Duke | |
pubs.organisational-group | Clinical Science Departments | |
pubs.publication-status | Published |
Files
Original bundle
- Name:
- 1-s2.0-S1529943020301364-main.pdf
- Size:
- 523.75 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format