Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 5, 2026

Optimizing Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Fully 3D CT O-Arm Navigated Workflow in MIS TLIF
Published on: October 17, 2025
Bending the Cost Curve-Establishing Value in Spine Surgery
Scott L Parker1, Silky Chotai1, Clinton J Devin1
1Department of Orthopedics Surgery and Neurological surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Background:
As publically promoted by all stakeholders in health care reform, prospective outcomes registry platforms lie at the center of all current evidence-driven value-based models.
Objective:
To demonstrate the variability in outcomes and cost at population level and individual patient level for patients undergoing spine surgery for degenerative diseases.
Methods:
Retrospective analysis of prospective longitudinal spine registry data was conducted. Baseline and postoperative 1-year patient-reported outcomes were recorded. Previously published minimal clinically important difference for Oswestry Disability Index (14.9) was used. Back-related resource utilization and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were assessed. Variations in outcomes and cost were analyzed at population level and at the individual patient level.
Results:
A total of 1454 patients were analyzed. There was significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes at postoperative 1 year ( P < .0001). For patients demonstrating health benefit at population level, 12.5%, n = 182 of patients experienced no gain from surgery and 38%, n = 554 failed to achieve minimal clinically important difference. Mean 1-year QALY-gained was 0.29; 18% of patients failed to report gain in QALY. For patients with 2-year follow-up, surgery resulted in 0.62 QALY-gained at average direct cost of $28 953. A wide variation in both QALY-gained and cost was observed.
Conclusion:
Spine treatments that on average are cost-effective may have wide variability in value at the individual patient level. The variability demonstrated here represents an opportunity, through registries, to identify specific care that may be less effective, and refine patient-specific care delivery and indications to drive overall group-level treatment value. Understanding value of spine care at an individualized as well as population level will allow clinicians, and eventually payers, to better target resources for improving care for nonresponders, ultimately driving up the average health for the whole population.
More Related Videos
04:19Minimally Invasive Treatment for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Using Sagittal Alignment Screws and A Trauma Reduction Device
Published on: November 8, 2024
08:38Three-dimensional Navigation-guided, Prone, Single-position, Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Technique
Published on: July 15, 2021