Study Design: Literature review. Objectives: Paraspinal muscle integrity is believed to play a critical role in low back pain (LBP) and numerous spinal deformity diseases and other pain pathologies. The influence of paraspinal muscle atrophy (PMA) on the clinical and radiographic success of spinal surgery has not been established. We aim to survey the literature in order to evaluate the impact of paraspinal muscle atrophy on low back pain, spine pathologies, and postoperative outcomes of spinal surgery. Methods: A review of the literature was conducted using a total of 267 articles identified from a search of the PubMed database and additional resources. A full-text review was conducted of 180 articles, which were assessed based on criteria that included an objective assessment of PMA in addition to measuring its relationship to LBP, thoracolumbar pathology, or surgical outcomes. Results: A total of 34 studies were included in this review. The literature on PMA illustrates an association between LBP and both decreased cross-sectional area and increased fatty infiltration of paraspinal musculature. Atrophy of the erector spinae and psoas muscles have been associated with spinal stenosis, isthmic spondylolisthesis, facet arthropathy, degenerative lumbar kyphosis. A number of studies have also demonstrated an association between PMA and worse postoperative outcomes. Conclusions: PMA is linked to several spinal pathologies and some studies demonstrate an association with worse postoperative outcomes following spinal surgery. There is a need for further research to establish a relationship between preoperative paraspinal muscle integrity and postoperative success, with the potential for guiding surgical decision making.

Study Design: The following is a narrative discussion of bundled payments in spine surgery. Objective: The cost of healthcare in the United States has continued to increase. To lower the cost of healthcare, reimbursement models are being investigated as potential cost saving interventions by driving incentives and quality improvement in fields such a spine surgery. Methods: Narrative overview of literature pertaining to bundled payments in spine surgery synthesizing findings from computerized databases and authoritative texts. Results: Spine surgery is challenging to define payment modes because of high cost variability and surgical decision-making nuances. While implementing bundled care payments in spine surgery, it is important to understand concepts such as value-based purchasing, episodes of care, prospective versus retrospective payment models, one versus two-sided risk, risk adjustment, and outlier protection. Strategies for implementation underscore the importance of risk stratification and modeling, adoption of evidence based clinical pathways, and data collection and dissemination. While bundled care models have been successfully implemented, challenges facing institutions adopting bundled care payment models include financial stressors during adoption of the model, distribution of risks, incentivization of treating only low risk patients, and nuanced variation in procedures leading to variation in costs. Conclusion: An alternative for fee for service payments, bundled care payments may lead to higher cost savings and surgeon accountability in a patient’s care.

While medical and technological advances continue to shape and advance health care, there has been growing emphasis on translating these advances into improvement in overall health care quality outcomes in the United States. Innovators such as Abraham Flexner and Ernest Codman engaged in rigorous reviews of systems and patient outcomes igniting wider spread interest in quality improvement in health care. Codman’s efforts even contributed to the founding of the American College of Surgeons. This society catalyzed a quality improvement initiative across the United States and the formation of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals. Since that time, those such as Avedis Donabedian and the Institute of Medicine have worked to structure the process of improving both the quality and delivery of health care. Significant advances include the defining of minimum standards for hospital accreditation, 7 pillars of quality in medicine, and the process by which quality in medicine is evaluated. All of these factors have affected current practice more each day. In a field such as spinal surgery, cost and quality measures are continually emphasized and led to large outcome databases to better evaluate outcomes in complex, heterogeneous populations. Going forward, these databases will be instrumental in developing practice patterns and improving spinal surgery outcomes.

Study design: Multicenter study. Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has obligated physicians to recur to additional resources and make drastic changes regarding the standard physician-patient encounter. In the last century, there has been a substantial improvement in technology, which over the years has opened the door to a new form of medical practicing known as telemedicine. Methods: Healthcare workers from three hospitals involved in the care for COVID-19 patients in the united states were invited to share their experience using telemedicine to deliver clinical care to their patients. Results: Since the appearance of this worldwide outbreak, social distancing has been a key factor in preventing the spread of the virus, for which measures have been taken to limit physical contact. Because of the ongoing situation, telemedicine has been progressively incorporated into the physician-patient encounters and quickly has become an essential component in the day-today medical practice. Conclusions: It is feasible to deliver viable spine practice with the use of telemedicine. A proper patient selection of patients requiring virtual treatment versus those requiring in-person visits should be considered.

OBJECTIVE: Posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) is a commonly performed procedure to address cervical myelopathy. A significant number of these patients require revision surgery for adjacent-segment disease (ASD) or pseudarthrosis. Currently, there is no consensus among spine surgeons on the inclusion of proximal thoracic spine instrumentation. This study investigates the benefits of thoracic extension in long-segment cervical fusions and the potential drawbacks. The authors compare outcomes in long-segment subaxial cervical fusion for degenerative cervical myelopathy with caudal vertebral levels of C6, C7, and T1. METHODS: A retrospective analysis identified 369 patients who underwent PCDF. Patients were grouped by caudal fusion level. Reoperation rates for ASD and pseudarthrosis, infection, and blood loss were examined. Data were analyzed with chi-square, 1-way ANOVA, and logistic regression. RESULTS: The total reoperation rate for symptomatic pseudarthrosis or ASD was 4.8%. Reoperation rates, although not significant, were lower in the C3–6 group (2.6%, vs 8.3% for C3–7 and 3.8% for C3–T1; p = 0.129). Similarly, rates of infection were lower in the shorter-segment fusion without achieving statistical significance (2.6% for C3–6, vs 5.6% for C3–7 and 5.5% for C3–T1; p = 0.573). The mean blood loss was documented as 104, 125, and 224 mL for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Given the lack of statistical difference in reoperation rates for long-segment cervical fusions ending at C6, C7, or T1, shorter fusions in high-risk surgical candidates or elderly patients may be performed without higher rates of reoperation.