Journal Article
Review
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

"Does the outcome of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery justify the rising cost of the procedures?".

BACKGROUND: As the cost of medical care has steady risen, patients, insurance companies, and the government, have all appropriately questioned the benefit of the care provided versus the cost. Expensive treatments such as surgery for spinal deformity have been especially scrutinized. This article reviews the history of spinal implant usage in deformity surgery, including the benefits of these implants to the patient and also the associated costs. The paper was presented at the One Day Course during the 2009 Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America annual meeting in Boston.

METHODS: A review was conducted regarding the benefits and costs of the care provided to patients as spinal implants became more clinically effective.

RESULTS: Compared with postoperative casting, spinal implants provide better deformity correction and better stability of the fusion mass with resulting lower rates of secondary surgery, mostly because of fewer pseudarthoses. Many of these advantages were achieved with the less-expensive second and third-generation implants. Unfortunately, patient outcomes when the latest, most expensive implants are used are not significantly different from outcomes when older, less-expensive implants are used.

CONCLUSIONS: Although the cost of spinal deformity surgery has risen the benefit to the patient from modern spinal implants has also increased. Nevertheless, patient outcomes have not improved in proportion to the increase in costs. Outcomes from the newest, all pedicle screw constructs are not significantly better than outcomes from the older, less-expensive hybrid constructs. Rising expenses and dramatic variation in the cost of the same implant have led payors, hospitals, and the government to question the value added to the care of the patient. Some implant costs should fall as hospitals use competitive bidding. Surgeons should help their hospitals in the competitive bidding process and declare a willingness to switch to an equivalent system if price differences are excessive.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level IV Economic Analysis.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app