The SPORT value compass: Do the extra costs of undergoing spine surgery produce better health benefits?

James N. Weinstein; Anna N.A. Tosteson; Tor D. Tosteson; Jon D. Lurie; William A. Abdu; Sohail K. Mirza; Wenyan Zhao; Tamara S. Morgan; Eugene C. Nelson

The SPORT value compass: Do the extra costs of undergoing spine surgery produce better health benefits?

James N. Weinstein, Anna N.A. Tosteson, Tor D. Tosteson, Jon D. Lurie, William A. Abdu, Sohail K. Mirza, Wenyan Zhao, Tamara S. Morgan, Eugene C. Nelson^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

22 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of surgical care versus nonoperative care by measuring longitudinal values: outcomes, satisfaction, and costs.

Methods: This paper aims to summarize available evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial by addressing 2 important questions about outcomes and costs for 3 types of spine problem: (1) how do outcomes and costs of spine patients differ depending on whether they are treated surgically compared with nonoperative care? (2) What is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year for surgical care over nonoperative care?.

Results: After 4 years of follow-up, patients with 3 spine conditions that may be treated surgically or nonoperatively have systematic differences in value endpoints. The average surgical patient enjoys better health outcomes and higher treatment satisfaction but incurs higher costs.

Conclusions: Spine care is preference sensitive and because outcomes, satisfaction, and costs vary over time and between patients, data on value can help patients make better-informed decisions and help payers know what their dollars are buying.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1055-1063
Number of pages	9
Journal	Medical care
Volume	52
Issue number	12
State	Published - Dec 10 2014

Keywords

Costs
Low back pain
Nonsurgical treatment
Preference sensitive
Surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Cite this

@article{fae1c517ece74a6dbe6899b62313cc2a,

title = "The SPORT value compass: Do the extra costs of undergoing spine surgery produce better health benefits?",

abstract = "Background: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of surgical care versus nonoperative care by measuring longitudinal values: outcomes, satisfaction, and costs.Methods: This paper aims to summarize available evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial by addressing 2 important questions about outcomes and costs for 3 types of spine problem: (1) how do outcomes and costs of spine patients differ depending on whether they are treated surgically compared with nonoperative care? (2) What is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year for surgical care over nonoperative care?.Results: After 4 years of follow-up, patients with 3 spine conditions that may be treated surgically or nonoperatively have systematic differences in value endpoints. The average surgical patient enjoys better health outcomes and higher treatment satisfaction but incurs higher costs.Conclusions: Spine care is preference sensitive and because outcomes, satisfaction, and costs vary over time and between patients, data on value can help patients make better-informed decisions and help payers know what their dollars are buying.",

keywords = "Costs, Low back pain, Nonsurgical treatment, Preference sensitive, Surgery",

author = "Weinstein, {James N.} and Tosteson, {Anna N.A.} and Tosteson, {Tor D.} and Lurie, {Jon D.} and Abdu, {William A.} and Mirza, {Sohail K.} and Wenyan Zhao and Morgan, {Tamara S.} and Nelson, {Eugene C.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: Copyright {\textcopyright} 2014 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.",

year = "2014",

month = dec,

day = "10",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "52",

pages = "1055--1063",

journal = "Medical Care",

issn = "0025-7079",

publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The SPORT value compass

T2 - Do the extra costs of undergoing spine surgery produce better health benefits?

AU - Weinstein, James N.

AU - Tosteson, Anna N.A.

AU - Tosteson, Tor D.

AU - Lurie, Jon D.

AU - Abdu, William A.

AU - Mirza, Sohail K.

AU - Zhao, Wenyan

AU - Morgan, Tamara S.

AU - Nelson, Eugene C.

PY - 2014/12/10

Y1 - 2014/12/10

N2 - Background: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of surgical care versus nonoperative care by measuring longitudinal values: outcomes, satisfaction, and costs.Methods: This paper aims to summarize available evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial by addressing 2 important questions about outcomes and costs for 3 types of spine problem: (1) how do outcomes and costs of spine patients differ depending on whether they are treated surgically compared with nonoperative care? (2) What is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year for surgical care over nonoperative care?.Results: After 4 years of follow-up, patients with 3 spine conditions that may be treated surgically or nonoperatively have systematic differences in value endpoints. The average surgical patient enjoys better health outcomes and higher treatment satisfaction but incurs higher costs.Conclusions: Spine care is preference sensitive and because outcomes, satisfaction, and costs vary over time and between patients, data on value can help patients make better-informed decisions and help payers know what their dollars are buying.

AB - Background: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of surgical care versus nonoperative care by measuring longitudinal values: outcomes, satisfaction, and costs.Methods: This paper aims to summarize available evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial by addressing 2 important questions about outcomes and costs for 3 types of spine problem: (1) how do outcomes and costs of spine patients differ depending on whether they are treated surgically compared with nonoperative care? (2) What is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year for surgical care over nonoperative care?.Results: After 4 years of follow-up, patients with 3 spine conditions that may be treated surgically or nonoperatively have systematic differences in value endpoints. The average surgical patient enjoys better health outcomes and higher treatment satisfaction but incurs higher costs.Conclusions: Spine care is preference sensitive and because outcomes, satisfaction, and costs vary over time and between patients, data on value can help patients make better-informed decisions and help payers know what their dollars are buying.

KW - Costs

KW - Low back pain

KW - Nonsurgical treatment

KW - Preference sensitive

KW - Surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84916599705&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84916599705&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 25334052

AN - SCOPUS:84916599705

SN - 0025-7079

VL - 52

SP - 1055

EP - 1063

JO - Medical Care

JF - Medical Care

IS - 12

ER -

The SPORT value compass: Do the extra costs of undergoing spine surgery produce better health benefits?

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this