Norden, Justin

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.