Does insurance type influence patient-reported satisfaction at 60 months following surgery for cervical myelopathy? A Spine CORe™ analysis of QOD data.

Abstract

Surgical intervention is a standard treatment for severe cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM), but postoperative outcomes can vary based on socioeconomic characteristics such as insurance status. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of insurance on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 60 months postoperatively. In this prospective cohort study, the Spine CORe™ study group analyzed data from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) database. Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to identify the associations between sociodemographic and clinical variables and insurance type. The chi-square test was also used to examine the influence of insurance type on the achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for each outcome measure. Statistically significant covariates (p < 0.001) were used in a multivariate linear regression model measuring the influence of insurance type on 60-month changes in scores for neck and arm pain numeric rating scale (NRS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), EQ-5D, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. From a dataset of 1085 patients who underwent CSM surgery, 106 patients died during the 5-year follow-up period and 793 had an NDI score at the 5-year follow-up. The follow-up rate was 83% ([793 with NDI + 106 died]/1085 patients). Of the 1085 patients, the authors excluded patients with Veterans Affairs insurance, no insurance, or who were missing baseline PROs, which left 1030 patients with Medicare (n = 408), Medicaid (n = 75), and private (n = 547) insurance with 60-month PROs. Insurance status varied based on demographics and medical comorbidities (each p < 0.05). Medicaid patients had significantly worse scores at baseline and 60 months for arm and neck NRS, NDI, EQ-5D, and mJOA (each p < 0.05). In multivariate analysis after adjustment for relevant covariates, compared with private insurance, only Medicare insurance was associated with lower 60-month EQ-5D scores (β -0.05, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.01; p < 0.05). Otherwise, there was no significant difference in PROs. Medicaid insurance was not significantly associated with differences in any of the outcomes after covariate adjustment compared to private insurance. Despite having worse baseline scores, patients with Medicaid insurance coverage had similar rates of achievement of MCID compared with those with private insurance. These results suggest that patients with CSM who underwent surgery had improvement in PROs for all insurance types.

Department

Description

Provenance

Subjects

Cervical Vertebrae, Humans, Spinal Cord Diseases, Treatment Outcome, Cohort Studies, Prospective Studies, Adult, Aged, Middle Aged, Insurance, Health, Patient Satisfaction, Female, Male, Spondylosis, Patient Reported Outcome Measures

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.3171/2025.12.focus25941

Publication Info

Park, Christine, Bradley Q Fox, Anthony M DiGiorgio, Erica F Bisson, Mohamad Bydon, Anthony L Asher, Paul K Kim, Eric A Potts, et al. (2026). Does insurance type influence patient-reported satisfaction at 60 months following surgery for cervical myelopathy? A Spine CORe™ analysis of QOD data. Neurosurgical focus, 60(5). p. E8. 10.3171/2025.12.focus25941 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/34638.

This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.

Scholars@Duke

Shaffrey

Christopher Ignatius Shaffrey

Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery

I have more than 25 years of experience treating patients of all ages with spinal disorders. I have had an interest in the management of spinal disorders since starting my medical education. I performed residencies in both orthopaedic surgery and neurosurgery to gain a comprehensive understanding of the entire range of spinal disorders. My goal has been to find innovative ways to manage the range of spinal conditions, straightforward to complex. I have a focus on managing patients with complex spinal disorders. My patient evaluation and management philosophy is to provide engaged, compassionate care that focuses on providing the simplest and least aggressive treatment option for a particular condition. In many cases, non-operative treatment options exist to improve a patient’s symptoms. I have been actively engaged in clinical research to find the best ways to manage spinal disorders in order to achieve better results with fewer complications.

Gottfried

Oren N Gottfried

Professor of Neurosurgery

I specialize in the surgical management of all complex cervical, thoracic, lumbar, or sacral spinal diseases by using minimally invasive as well as standard approaches for arthritis or degenerative disease, deformity, tumors, and trauma. I have a special interest in the treatment of thoracolumbar deformities, occipital-cervical problems, and in helping patients with complex spinal issues from previously unsuccessful surgery or recurrent disease.I listen to my patients to understand their symptoms and experiences so I can provide them with the information and education they need to manage their disease. I make sure my patients understand their treatment options, and what will work best for their individual condition. I treat all my patients with care and concern – just as I would treat my family. I am available to address my patients' concerns before and after surgery.  I aim to improve surgical outcomes for my patients and care of all spine patients with active research evaluating clinical and radiological results after spine surgery with multiple prospective databases. I am particularly interested in prevention of spinal deformity, infections, complications, and recurrent spinal disease. Also, I study whether patient specific variables including pelvic/sacral anatomy and sagittal spinal balance predict complications from spine surgery.


Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.