Background: Vertebral body tethering and other non-fusion techniques for the treatment of pediatric idiopathic scoliosis are increasing in popularity. There is limited physician consensus on this topic as the result of a paucity of published data regarding which patients most benefit from non-fusion strategies. Thus, much of the decision-making is left to patients and parents, who must select a treatment based on their goals and values and the information available from health-care providers, the internet, and social media. We sought to understand patient and family preferences regarding the attributes of fusion versus non-fusion surgery that drive these choices. Methods: Patients and families were recruited from 7 pediatric spine centers and were asked to complete a survey-based choice experiment that had been jointly developed with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to evaluate patient preferences. Choices between experimentally designed alternatives were analyzed to estimate the relative importance of outcomes and requirements associated with the choice options (attributes). The attributes included appearance, confidence in the planned correction, spinal motion, device failure, reoperation, and recovery period. The inclusion criteria were (1) an age of 10 to 21 years and (2) a diagnosis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in patients who were considering, or who had already undergone, treatment with fusion or non-fusion surgery. Preference weights were estimated from the expected changes in choice given changes in the attributes. Results: A total of 344 respondents (124 patients, 92 parents, and 128 parent/patient dyads) completed the survey. One hundred and seventy-three patients were enrolled prior to surgery, and 171 were enrolled after surgery. Appearance and motion were found to be the most important drivers of choice. For the entire cohort, fusion was preferred over non-fusion. For patients who were considering surgery, the most important attributes were preservation of spinal motion and appearance. Conclusions: Patients and families seeking treatment for idiopathic scoliosis value appearance and preservation of spinal motion and, to a lesser extent, reoperation rates when considering fusion versus non-fusion surgery.
What would be the annual cost savings if fewer screws were used in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treatment in the US?
OBJECT There is substantial heterogeneity in the number of screws used per level fused in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery. Assuming equivalent clinical outcomes, the potential cost savings of using fewer pedicle screws were estimated using a medical decision model with sensitivity analysis. METHODS Descriptive analyses explored the annual costs for 5710 AIS inpatient stays using discharge data from the 2009 Kids’ Inpatient Database (Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), which is a national all-payer inpatient database. Patients between 10 and 17 years of age were identified using the ICD-9-CM code for idiopathic scoliosis (737.30). All inpatient stays were assumed to represent 10-level fusions with pedicle screws for AIS. High screw density was defined at 1.8 screws per level fused, and the standard screw density was defined as 1.48 screws per level fused. The surgical return for screw malposition was set at $23,762. A sensitivity analysis was performed by varying the cost per screw ($600–$1000) and the rate of surgical revisions for screw malposition (0.117%–0.483% of screws; 0.8%–4.3% of patients). The reported outcomes include estimated prevented malpositioned screws (set at 5.1%), averted revision surgeries, and annual cost savings in 2009 US dollars, assuming similar clinical outcomes (rates of complications, revision) using a standard- versus high-density pattern. RESULTS The total annual costs for 5710 AIS hospital stays was $278 million ($48,900 per patient). Substituting a high for a standard screw density yields 3.2 fewer screws implanted per patient, with 932 malpositioned screws prevented and 21 to 88 revision surgeries for implant malposition averted, and a potential annual cost savings of $11 million to $20 million (4%–7% reduction in the total cost of AIS hospitalizations). CONCLUSIONS Reducing the number of screws used in scoliosis surgery could potentially decrease national AIS hospitalization costs by up to 7%, which may improve the safety and efficiency of care. However, such a screw construct must first be proven safe and effective.
Spine Care: Evaluation of the Efficacy and Cost of Emerging Technology