How Do the True Intraoperative Costs of Endoscopic Diskectomy Compare With Microdiskectomy for Lumbar Disk Herniations? A Time-Driven Activity-Based Cost Analysis.
Journal
Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)
ISSN: 2332-4260
Titre abrégé: Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101635417
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Jun 2024
18 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
11
03
2024
accepted:
18
03
2024
medline:
18
6
2024
pubmed:
18
6
2024
entrez:
18
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (ED) is a minimally invasive option for addressing lumbar disk herniations. With the introduction of value-based care systems, assessing the true cost of certain procedures is critical when creating reimbursement models and comparing procedures. Here, we compared the costs of performing a microdiskectomy (MD) and ED using time-driven activity-based costing. Total cost for the intraoperative episode was calculated using time-driven activity-based costing methodology. Individual costs were obtained by direct observation and electronic medical records and through querying multiple departments (business operations, sterile processing, plant operations, and pharmacy). Timestamps for all involved personnel and material resources were documented. A retrospective analysis was performed on 202 patients who underwent lumbar diskectomy through either MD (n = 167) or ED (n = 35) from 2018 to 2022. Personnel cost was calculated by multiplying the cost per unit time for each personnel type by the length of time spent in the operating room. Supply cost was calculated by aggregating the cost of all individual supplies, from medications to consumables to surgical trays, used during the case. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed comparing the costs between these procedures. The average intraoperative cost per case for ED and MD was $3915 ± $1025 and $3162 ± $954, respectively. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that ED had higher total cost (β-coefficient: $912 ± $281, P = <.01) and supply cost (β-coefficient: $474 ± $155, P = <.01) than MD. When accounting for surgeon as a covariate, however, total cost (P = .478) and supply cost (P = .468) differences between ED and MD were negligible. ED has shown to be a better value option in addressing lumbar disk herniations, mostly because of advantages in perioperative care. Here, we show that when correcting for surgeon-level effects, the cost between the two procedures is statistically insignificant, reaffirming the value provided by ED.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
Endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (ED) is a minimally invasive option for addressing lumbar disk herniations. With the introduction of value-based care systems, assessing the true cost of certain procedures is critical when creating reimbursement models and comparing procedures. Here, we compared the costs of performing a microdiskectomy (MD) and ED using time-driven activity-based costing.
METHODS
METHODS
Total cost for the intraoperative episode was calculated using time-driven activity-based costing methodology. Individual costs were obtained by direct observation and electronic medical records and through querying multiple departments (business operations, sterile processing, plant operations, and pharmacy). Timestamps for all involved personnel and material resources were documented. A retrospective analysis was performed on 202 patients who underwent lumbar diskectomy through either MD (n = 167) or ED (n = 35) from 2018 to 2022. Personnel cost was calculated by multiplying the cost per unit time for each personnel type by the length of time spent in the operating room. Supply cost was calculated by aggregating the cost of all individual supplies, from medications to consumables to surgical trays, used during the case. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed comparing the costs between these procedures.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The average intraoperative cost per case for ED and MD was $3915 ± $1025 and $3162 ± $954, respectively. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that ED had higher total cost (β-coefficient: $912 ± $281, P = <.01) and supply cost (β-coefficient: $474 ± $155, P = <.01) than MD. When accounting for surgeon as a covariate, however, total cost (P = .478) and supply cost (P = .468) differences between ED and MD were negligible.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
ED has shown to be a better value option in addressing lumbar disk herniations, mostly because of advantages in perioperative care. Here, we show that when correcting for surgeon-level effects, the cost between the two procedures is statistically insignificant, reaffirming the value provided by ED.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38888329
doi: 10.1227/ons.0000000000001204
pii: 01787389-990000000-01192
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.
Références
Barber SM, Nakhla J, Konakondla S, et al. Outcomes of endoscopic discectomy compared with open microdiscectomy and tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniations: a meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Spine 2019;31(6):802-815.
Jeong JS, Lee SH, Lee SJ, Hwang BW. The clinical comparison between open surgery and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2006;39(6):413-418.
Kim M, Lee S, Kim HS, Park S, Shim SY, Lim DJ. A comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation in the Korean: a meta-analysis. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:9073460.
Lee DY, Shim CS, Ahn Y, Choi YG, Kim HJ, Lee SH. Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar microdiscectomy for recurrent disc herniation. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2009;46(6):515-521.
Zhao XM, Chen AF, Lou XX, Zhang YG. Comparison of three common intervertebral disc discectomies in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on multiple data. J Clin Med. 2022;11(22):6604.
Center for Evidence-based Policy. Endoscopic Decompression of Spinal Cord for Adults with Sciatica or Low Back Pain (CPT 62380). Portland, OR, Oregon Health and Science University, 2017.
Kaplan RS, Anderson SR. Time-driven Activity-based Costing: A Simpler and More Powerful Path to Higher Profits. Harvard Business School Press; 2007:266. xv.
Kaplan RS, Porter ME. The big idea: how to solve the cost crisis in health care. Harvard Business Review. 2011;89(9):46.
Sarikonda A, Leibold A, Ali DM, et al. What is the marginal intraoperative cost of using an exoscope or operative microscope for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion? A time-driven activity-based cost analysis. World Neurosurg. 2024;181:e3-e10.
Sarikonda A, Tecce E, Leibold A, et al. What is the marginal cost of using robot assistance or navigation for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion? A time-driven activity-based cost analysis. Neurosurgery. Published online March 11, 2024. doi: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002899
doi: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002899
Tecce E, Sarikonda A, Leibold A, et al. Does body mass index influence intraoperative costs and operative times for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion? A time-driven activity-based costing analysis. World Neurosurg. 2024;185:e563-e571.
Katz JN. Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: socioeconomic factors and consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(Suppl 2):21-24.
Pattwell M. What’s Driving the Transition to Value-Based Care? Medical Economics; 2022.
Ahmad M, Patel JN, Vipparthy SC, et al. Conscious sedation versus general anesthesia in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a cost and outcome analysis. Cureus. 2019;11(6):e4812.
Choi KC, Shim HK, Kim JS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of microdiscectomy versus endoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation. Spine J. 2019;19(7):1162-1169.
van den Akker ME, Arts MP, van den Hout WB, Brand R, Koes BW, Peul WC. Tubular diskectomy vs conventional microdiskectomy for the treatment of lumbar disk-related sciatica: cost utility analysis alongside a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Neurosurgery. 2011;69(4):829-836; discussion 835-836.
Parker SL, Adogwa O, Davis BJ, et al. Cost-utility analysis of minimally invasive versus open multilevel hemilaminectomy for lumbar stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2013;26(1):42-47.
McGirt MJ, Parker SL, Lerner J, Engelhart L, Knight T, Wang MY. Comparative analysis of perioperative surgical site infection after minimally invasive versus open posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of hospital billing and discharge data from 5170 patients. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14(6):771-778.
Parker SL, Mendenhall SK, Shau DN, et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis. World Neurosurg. 2014;82:230-238.
Golan JD, Elkaim LM, Alrashidi Q, Georgiopoulos M, Lasry O. Economic comparisons of endoscopic spine surgery: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2023;32(8):2627-2636.
Yoon JW, Wang MY. The evolution of minimally invasive spine surgery: JNSPG 75th Anniversary Invited Review Article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;30(2):149-158.