Skip to content

Single Versus Dual Spine Attending Surgeons in Complex Adult Deformity Surgery:

Single Versus Dual Spine Attending Surgeons in Complex Adult Deformity Surgery: A Cost-effectiveness Study Using Activity-based Costing

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02703831
Enrollment
60
Registered
2016-03-09
Start date
2016-05-31
Completion date
2023-05-31
Last updated
2016-03-09

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Scoliosis, Unspecified

Keywords

adult spine deformity, time-driven activity-based costing, three-column posterior osteotomy

Brief summary

Two recent studies showed that having two attending spine surgeons performing complex adult spine deformity surgery instead of one, decreased complications, unplanned surgeries within 30-days \[Ames\], 90-day readmissions, wound infection, pulmonary embolism/deep vein thrombosis and post-operative neurologic complications \[Sethi\]. However, both studies were retrospective and did not evaluate any cost-savings associated with having two spine surgeons instead of one performing complex spine deformity surgery. Most cost-effectiveness studies have used traditional accounting (TA) methods to determine costs. A few cost-effectiveness studies have used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) \[Kaplan\] in medicine \[Au, Balakrishnan\] and none in spine surgery. Objectives: The objectives of the study are (1) to determine if dual spine attendings reduce downstream costs compared to a single spine attending for complex spine surgeries using traditional accounting methods; and (2) to demonstrate an application of the TDABC method to evaluate the operating room phase during complex adult spinal deformity surgery and compare it to traditional accounting methods (TA).

Detailed description

Two recent studies showed that having two attending spine surgeons performing complex adult spine deformity surgery instead of one, decreased complications, unplanned surgeries within 30-days \[Ames\], 90-day readmissions, wound infection, pulmonary embolism/deep vein thrombosis and post-operative neurologic complications \[Sethi\]. However, both studies were retrospective and did not evaluate any cost-savings associated with having two spine surgeons instead of one performing complex spine deformity surgery. With increasing scrutiny on the efficient use of health care dollars, it would be important to determine if there are any downstream cost savings to justify paying the surgeon fees of two spine attendings for these complex and high cost cases. Most cost-effectiveness studies have used traditional accounting (TA) methods to determine costs. TA uses allocated expenses from the general ledger and payroll activity codes. These codes are derived from billable items and procedures entered into accounting software. Costs of services are grouped by cost types, across units of service. A few cost-effectiveness studies have used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) \[Kaplan\] in medicine \[Au, Balakrishnan\] and none in spine surgery. TDABC allows for detailed identification of costs during all phases of a patient's care cycle. While TDABC has been used in other industries, its use has been described only a few times in health care and rarely in the operative setting \[Balakrishnan\]. This may be due to the large amount of manpower necessary to collect TDABC data. Objectives: The objectives of the study are (1) to determine if dual spine attendings reduce downstream costs compared to a single spine attending for complex spine surgeries using traditional accounting methods; and (2) to demonstrate an application of the TDABC method to evaluate the operating room phase during complex adult spinal deformity surgery and compare it to traditional accounting methods (TA).

Interventions

PROCEDUREDual attending

Two attending spine surgeons perform surgery

PROCEDURESingle Attending

One spine attending and an assistant perform surgery. The assistant can be a spine fellow, a resident or a physician's assistant.

Sponsors

Norton Leatherman Spine Center
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
25 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Patients scheduled for a complex spine adult deformity surgery. 1. instrumented posterior fusion from the thoracic spine into the pelvis, S1 or iliac wings; 2. and/or any three-column posterior osteotomy, either a pedicle subtraction osteotomy or a vertebral column resection. 2. Is at least 25 years of age inclusive at time of surgery. 3. Is willing and able to comply with the study plan and sign the Patient Informed Consent Form

Exclusion criteria

1. Has presence of active malignancy. 2. Has overt or active bacterial infection, either local or systemic. 3. Is mentally incompetent. 4. Is a prisoner. 5. Is an alcohol and/or drug abuser as defined by currently undergoing treatment for alcohol and/or drug abuse. 6. Is pregnant or plan to be pregnant during the course of the study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Hospitalization cost12 monthsTotal medical costs including index surgery and re-admissions over 5 years

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain scales6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 monthsPain scales for back and leg pain (0 to 10)
Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 monthsLow back disability
Short Form 6D6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 monthsUtility measure
EurQOL 5d6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 monthsUtility measure
Readmissions90 daysNumber of readmissions 90 days after surgery

Countries

United States

Contacts

Primary ContactLeah Y Carreon, MD, MSc
leah.carreon@nortonhealthcare.org5025847525
Backup ContactKelly R Bratcher, RN
kelly.bratcher2@nortonhealthcare.org5025847525

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026