A cost-effectiveness comparisons of adult spinal deformity surgery in the United States and Japan
Abstract
Purpose
Information about the cost-effectiveness of surgical procedures for adult spinal deformity (ASD) is critical for providing appropriate treatments for these patients. The purposes of this study were to compare the direct cost and cost-effectiveness of surgery for ASD in the United States (US) and Japan (JP).
Methods
Retrospective analysis of 76 US and 76 JP patients receiving surgery for ASD with ≥2-year follow-up was identified. Data analysis included preoperative and postoperative demographic, radiographic, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and direct cost for surgery. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was determined using cost/quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost/QALY was calculated from the 2-year cost and HRQOL data.
Results
JP exhibited worse baseline spinopelvic alignment than the US (pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis: 35.4° vs 22.7°, p < 0.01). The US had more three-column osteotomies (50 vs 16%), and shorter hospital stay (7.9 vs 22.7 days) (p < 0.05). The US demonstrated worse postoperative ODI (41.3 vs. 33.9%) and greater revision surgery rate (40 vs 10%) (p < 0.05). Due to the high initial cost and revision frequency, the US had greater total cost ($92,133 vs. $49,647) and cost/QALY ($511,840 vs. $225,668) at 2-year follow-up (p < 0.05).
Conclusion
Retrospective analysis comparing the direct costs and cost-effectiveness of ASD surgery in the US vs JP demonstrated that the total direct costs and cost/QALY were substantially higher in the US than JP. Variations in patient cohort, healthcare costs, revision frequencies, and HRQOL improvement influenced the cost/QALY differential between these countries.
Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00586-017-5274-5
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-017-5274-5
Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.
Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.