General Versus Nongeneral Anesthesia for Spinal Surgery: A Comparative National Analysis of Reimbursement Trends Over 10 Years

Author:

Ghaith Abdul Karim12ORCID,Akinduro Oluwaseun O.3ORCID,El-Hajj Victor Gabriel24ORCID,De Biase Gaetano3ORCID,Ghanem Marc5,Rajjoub Rami12,Faisal Umme Habiba3,Saad Hassan6,Abdulrahim Mostafa7,Bon Nieves Antonio12,Chen Selby G.3,Pirris Stephen M.3,Bydon Mohamad12ORCID,Abode-Iyamah Kingsley3

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA;

2. Mayo Clinic Neuro-Informatics Laboratory, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA;

3. Department of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA;

4. Department of Neurosurgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden;

5. Gilbert and Rose-Marie Chagoury School of Medicine, Lebanese American University, Beirut, Lebanon;

6. Department of Neurological Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA;

7. Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nongeneral anesthesia (non-GA) spine surgery is growing in popularity and has facilitated earlier postoperative recovery, reduced cost, and fewer complications compared with spine surgery under general anesthesia (GA). Changes in reimbursement policies have been demonstrated to correlate with clinical practice; however, they have yet to be studied for GA vs non-GA spine procedures. We aimed to investigate trends in physician reimbursement for GA vs non-GA spine surgery in the United States. METHODS: We queried the ACS-NSQIP for GA and non-GA (regional, epidural, spinal, and anesthesia care/intravenous sedation) spine surgeries during 2011–2020. Work relative value units per operative hour (wRVUs/h) were retrieved for decompression or stabilization of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed using all baseline variables. RESULTS: We included 474 706 patients who underwent spine decompression or stabilization procedures. GA was used in 472 248 operations, whereas 2458 operations were non-GA. The proportion of non-GA spine operations significantly increased during the study period. Operative times (P < .001) and length of stays (P < .001) were shorter in non-GA when compared with GA procedures. Non-GA lumbar procedures had significantly higher wRVUs/h when compared with the same procedures performed under GA (decompression; P < .001 and stabilization; P = .039). However, the same could not be said about cervicothoracic procedures. Lumbar decompression surgeries using non-GA witnessed significant yearly increase in wRVUs/h (P < .01) contrary to GA (P = .72). Physician reimbursement remained stable for procedures of the cervical or thoracic spine regardless of the anesthesia. CONCLUSION: Non-GA lumbar decompressions and stabilizations are associated with higher and increasing reimbursement trends (wRVUs/h) compared with those under GA. Reimbursement for cervical and thoracic surgeries was equal regardless of the type of anesthesia and being relatively stable during the study period. The adoption of a non-GA technique relative to the GA increased significantly during the study period.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Surgery

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3