The cost effectiveness of single-level instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion at 5 years after surgery

Spine

Volumn 37, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 769-774

  Glassman, Steven D ^a,b   Polly, David W ^c   Dimar, John R ^a,b   Carreon, Leah Y ^a  

^a NORTON LEATHERMAN SPINE CENTER   (United States)

^b University of Louisville School of Medicine   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; lumbar spine; posterolateral fusion; QALY; spine fusion

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICARE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; REIMBURSEMENT; REOPERATION; REVIEW; SHORT FORM 36; SPINE FUSION; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

ABSENTEEISM; ADULT; AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EMERGENCY SERVICE, HOSPITAL; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; INSURANCE, HEALTH, REIMBURSEMENT; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MEDICARE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ECONOMIC; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REOPERATION; SPINAL FUSION; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84860337129     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e03099     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, et al. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY:Oxford University Press;1996.
2. Loomes G, McKenzie L. The use of QALYs in health care decision making. Soc Sci Med 1989;28:299-308. (Pubitemid 19053139)
3. Testa MA, Nackley JF. Methods for quality-of-life studies. Annu Rev Public Health 1994;15:535-59. (Pubitemid 24179015)
4. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ 1986;5:1-30. (Pubitemid 16098443)
5. Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, et al. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Making 2000;20:332-42. (Pubitemid 30479101)
6. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, et al. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ 1992;146:473-81.
7. McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold. What it is and what it means. Pharmacoeconomics 2008;226:733-44.
8. NICE Guide to the Methods of Health Technology Appraisal. Explicit single threshold rather than the current. London, United Kingdom:NICE; 2004.
9. Winkelymayer WC, Weinstein MC, Mittelman MA, et al. Health economic evaluations: the special case of end-stage renal disease treatment. Med Decis Making 2002;22:417-30.
10. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SK. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summaries Scales: A User's Manual. Boston, MA:The Health Institute;1994.
11. Fairbank J. Revised Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine 2000;25:2552.
12. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, et al. The Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Physiotherapy 1980;66:271-3. (Pubitemid 11234479)
13. Burkus JK, Transfeldt EE, Kitchel SH, et al. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Spine 2002;27:2396-408. (Pubitemid 35266228)
14. Dimar JR, Glassman SD, Burkus KJ, et al. Clinical outcomes and fusion success at 2 years of single-level instrumented posterolateral fusions with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2/compression resistant matrix versus iliac crest bone graft. Spine 2006;31:2534-9. (Pubitemid 44632234)
15. Glassman SD, Carreon LY, Djurasovic M, et al. RhBMP-2 versus iliac crest bone graft for lumbar spine fusion: a randomized, controlled trial in patients over sixty years of age. Spine 2008;33:2843-9.
16. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, et al. Surgical versus non-operative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: four-year results for the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine 2008;33:2789-800.
17. Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, et al. Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J 2008;8:968-74.
18. Glassman SD, Copay AG, Berven SH, et al. Defining substantial clinical benefit following lumbar spine arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90:1839-47.
19. Polly DW Jr, Glassman SD, Schwender JD, et al. Lumbar Spine Study Group. SF-36 PCS benefit-cost ratio of lumbar fusion com-parison to other surgical interventions: a thought experiment. Spine 2007; 32 (suppl 11): S20-6. (Pubitemid 46733666)
20. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21:271-92. (Pubitemid 34143147)
21. Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Berven S, et al. Predicting SF-6D scores from the Oswestry disability index and numeric rating scales for back and leg pain. Spine 2009;34:2085-9.
22. Kuntz KM, Snider RK, Weinstein JN, et al. Cost-effectiveness of fusion with and without instrumentation for patients with degen-erative spondylolisthe-sis and spinal stenosis. Spine 2000;25:1132-9. (Pubitemid 30317196)
23. Rivero-Arias O, Campbell H, Gray A, et al. Surgical stabilisation of the spine compared with a programme of intensive rehabilitation for the management of patients with chronic low back pain: cost utility analysis based on a randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2005;330:1239.
24. Soegaard R, Christensen FB, Christiansen T, et al. Costs and effects in lumbar spinal fusion. A follow-up study in 136 consecutive patients with chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 2007;16:657-68. (Pubitemid 46763989)
25. Tosteson AN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, et al. SPORT investigators. Surgical treatment of spinal stenosis with and without degenerative spondylolisthesis: cost-effectiveness after 2 years. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149:845-53.
26. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Overview of BLS wage data by area and occupation [US Department of Labor web site]. 2009. Available at: http://www.bls.gov/bls/blswage.htm. Accessed October 12, 2009.
27. Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, et al. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1172-7. (Pubitemid 26329746)
28. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, et al. Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1253-8. (Pubitemid 26337709)
29. Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Olchanski NV, et al. Cost-utility analyses in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87:1253-9. (Pubitemid 40756625)
30. Levin DA, Bendo JA, Quirno M, et al. Comparative charge analysis of one-and two-level lumbar total disc arthroplasty versus circum-ferential lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila PA 1976) 2007;32:2905-9. (Pubitemid 351339364)
31. Räsänen P, Paavolainen P, Sintonen H, et al. Effectiveness of hip or knee replacement surgery in terms of quality-adjusted life years and costs. Acta Orthop 2007;78:108-15. (Pubitemid 46570266)
32. Rissanen P, Aro S, Sintonen H, et al. Costs and cost-effectiveness in hip and knee replacements. A prospective study. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1997;13:575-88. (Pubitemid 28016446)
33. Pearson A, Blood E, Lurie J, et al. Predominant leg pain is associ-ated with better surgical outcomes in degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. Spine J 2008;8 (suppl 1): 1S.
34. Dalziel K, Segal L, Mortimer D. Review of Australian health eco-nomic evaluation-245 interventions: what can we say about cost effectiveness? Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2008;6:9.
35. King JT Jr, Tsevat J, Lave JR, et al. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: implications for societal health care resource allocation. Med Decis Making 2005;25:667-77. (Pubitemid 41667135)