Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: The objective of this study is to compare the likelihood of missing a scheduled telemedicine and in-person appointments for spine patients. The secondary objective is to assess the impact of socioeconomic status on missed telemedicine and in-person appointments. Methods: Patients with scheduled outpatient appointments with orthopedic spine faculty between 2019 and 2021 were divided by appointment type: telemedicine (N = 4,387) and in-person (N = 3810). Socioeconomic status was assessed using Area Deprivation Index (ADI) stratified based on percentile: low (75) levels of socioeconomic disadvantage. The primary outcome measure was missed clinic appointments, which was defined as having at least one appointment that was cancelled or labeled “no show.” Results: Patients with in-person appointments missed appointments more often than patients with telemedicine visits (51.3% vs 24.7%, P < .001). Patients with high ADI missed their in-person appointments more often than patients with medium and low ADI (59.5% vs 52.2% and 47.5%, P < .001). There was no difference in missed telemedicine visits between patients with high, medium, and low ADI (27.6% vs 24.8% vs 23.8%, P = .294). Patients that missed an appointment were 41.9% more likely to be high ADI (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20–1.68, P < .001) and 13.4% more likely to be medium ADI (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03–1.26, P = .015) compared with low ADI patients. Conclusions: Telemedicine may serve a role in reducing disparity in appointment attendance. While further studies are needed to validate these findings, spine surgeons should consider offering telemedicine as an option to patients.

Study Design: Retrospective observational cohort. Objectives: We sought to evaluate the impact of ESR on in-hospital and 90-day postoperative opioid consumption, length of stay, urinary catheter removal and postoperative ambulation after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions. Methods: We evaluated patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery at a single, multi-surgeon center in the transition period prior to (N = 174) and after (N = 116) adoption of ESR, comparing in-hospital and 90-day postoperative opioid consumption. Regression analysis was used to control for confounders. Secondary analysis was preformed to evaluate the association between ESR and length of stay, urinary catheter removal and ambulation after surgery. Results: Mean age study participants was 52.6 years with 62 (47%) females. Demographic characteristics were similar between the Pre-ESR and ESR groups. ESR patients had better 3-month pain scores, ambulated earlier, had urinary catheters removed earlier and decreased in-hospital opioid consumption compared to Pre-ESR patients. There was no difference in 90-day opioid consumption between the 2 groups. Regression analysis showed that ESR was strongly associated with in-hospital opioid consumption, accounting for 30% of the variability in Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MME). In-hospital opioid consumption was also associated with preoperative pain scores, number of surgical levels, and insurance type (private vs government). Pre-op pain sores were associated with 90-day opioid consumption. Secondary analysis showed that ESR was associated with a shorter length of stay and earlier ambulation. Conclusions: This study showed ESR has the potential to improve recovery after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions with reduced in-hospital opioid consumption and improved postoperative pain scores.

The opioid epidemic in the US has led prescribers to reevaluate postoperative pain control particularly in the field of spine surgery, where postoperative analgesia requirements and consumption have historically been high. There is a need to mitigate the quantity of unused pills after surgery by adjusting prescribing practices. Achieving the balance of pain control after surgery without overprescribing opioids may be accomplished by developing a modified approach to prescribing practices; however, there is a need to first understand the opioid requirements of the modern spine surgery patient with respect to their elective spine surgery. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to determine the percentage of opioids not utilized at 90-days after elective spine surgery. Secondary aims were to identify differences in the percentage of unused opioids between surgical subgroups and preoperative opioid status, to determine factors associated with opioid utilization, and to estimate the distribution of opioids consumed to control pain up to the 90th percentile in each surgical subgroup. In this prospective, observational cohort study, adults undergoing elective spine surgery at a multi-surgeon, single center were prospectively enrolled and divided into subgroups: anterior cervical, lumbar decompression, and short-segment lumbar fusion. Prescribed MMEs were identified from prescriptions, consumed MMEs were obtained from pill counts, and the percent leftover was calculated. Distributions of MMEs consumed were analyzed to compare utilization between preoperative opioid users or non-users within each surgical subgroup. Of 117 patients, 41.9% were preoperative opioid users. The percentage of unused opioids by surgical subgroup was: 45.4% cervical, 57.3% lumbar decompression, and 37.4% lumbar fusion (p=0.066). The percentage of unused opioids by preoperative opioid exposure was greater in the opioid non-users (58.0%) than users (28.4%, p<0.001)). Regression analysis showed that surgical subgroup and preoperative opioid exposure were associated with leftover opioids. At 90-days, the percentage of unused opioids was over 45% in this cohort of elective spine surgery patients and was nearly double in the group without preoperative opioid exposure. These results suggest the modern elective spine surgery patient is using less opioids than prescribed, supporting the conclusion that the number of MMEs prescribed can be reduced to minimize quantities of leftover pills available for diversion, without sacrificing the priority of appropriate postoperative pain control.

Retrospective cohort study. This study aims to analyze outcomes and complications of patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures in the setting of ankylosing spinal disorders (ASD) treated with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The operative logs from 2012 to 2019 from one academic, Level I trauma center were reviewed for cases of thoracic and lumbar spinal fractures in patients with ASD treated with a MIS approach. Variables were compared between patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH), and advanced spondylosis. A total of 48 patients with ASD and concomitant thoracic or lumbar spinal fracture managed with an MIS approach were identified. A total of 11 patients were identified with AS, 21 with DISH, and 16 with advanced spondylosis. A total of 27 (56.3%) patients experienced complications. Complications differed between groups; DISH patients experienced a greater number of post-operative complications compared to AS and advanced spondylosis patients (P = .009). There was no significant difference in length of surgery, estimated blood loss, length of stay, readmission, and reoperation rates between AS and DISH patients. There were 3 mortalities unrelated to the surgery. Percutaneous stabilization of patients with ankylosing spinal disorder fractures remains a viable management method. Operative characteristics were similar between AS, DISH, and advanced spondylosis patients; however, DISH patients experienced a greater number of post-operative complications.