Clinical Trials Directory

Trials / Unknown

UnknownNCT02703831

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
Phase
N/A
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60 (estimated)
Sponsor
Norton Leatherman Spine Center · Academic / Other
Sex
All
Age
25 Years
Healthy volunteers
Not accepted

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).

Conditions

Interventions

TypeNameDescription
PROCEDUREDual attendingTwo attending spine surgeons perform surgery
PROCEDURESingle AttendingOne spine attending and an assistant perform surgery. The assistant can be a spine fellow, a resident or a physician's assistant.

Timeline

Start date
2016-05-01
Primary completion
2018-05-01
Completion
2023-05-01
First posted
2016-03-09
Last updated
2016-03-09

Locations

1 site across 1 country: United States

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT02703831. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.