Hygienic economic evaluation of inter-spinal distraction fusion and fixation for lumbar disc herniation
10.3760/cma.j.issn115396-20211108-00431
- VernacularTitle:棘突间融合撑开固定术在治疗腰椎退行性疾病中的卫生经济学评价
- Author:
Hai TANG
1
;
Guan SHI
;
Hao CHEN
;
Pu JIA
;
Li BAO
;
Fei FENG
;
Mengmeng CHEN
;
Jianlin SHAN
Author Information
1. 首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院骨科，北京 100050
- Keywords:
Lumbar vertebrae;
Treatment outcome;
Comparative study;
Inter-spinal distraction fusion and fixation;
Lumbar disc herniation;
Posterior lumbar interbody fu
- From:
International Journal of Surgery
2022;49(2):103-107
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To analyze the clinical efficacy of inter-spinal distraction fusion and fixation and Posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation with stenosis, and to evaluate the health economics of the two surgical methods.Methods:Retrospectivly analyzed the clinical data of 400 patients with lumbar disc herniation with stenosis, who were enrolled in Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University from Jan. 2015 to Jan. 2019, including 190 male cases and 210 female cases, aged from 50 to 87 years old, with the average age of 67.97. All patients were divided into two groups according to different surgical methods. Among them, 200 patients used interspinous process fusion and distraction fixation (ISDFF group), the other 200 cases used posterior lumbar decompression and pedicle internal fixation (PLIF group). All patients completed the follow-up time of more than 1 year after operation. The basic information of patients′ age, gender, total number of days in hospital, intraoperative bleeding, operation time, surgical incision length and other basic information were observed. The Oswestry dysfunction index (ODI), the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score (JOA) and the visual analog scale (VAS) were used to evaluate the relief of symptoms before and after the two groups of patients. Total medical expenses, anesthesia expenses, surgical expenses and other expenses were analysed. The software of SPSS 20.0 were conducted to analyze data.Results:The patients in the ISDFF group were (70.84±8.93) years old, and the PLIF group was (65.10±10.23) years old ( t=5.98, P=0.008). The operation time in the ISDFF group was (59.21±16.22) min, and the operation time in the PLIF group was (81.31±17.24) min( t=13.20, P<0.001). The bleeding volume of the ISDFF group was (33.24±11.31) mL, and the bleeding volume of the PLIF group was (67.30±17.61) mL ( t=23.02, P<0.001). The length of the surgical incision in the ISDFF group was (8.27±2.53) cm, and the length of the surgical incision in the PLIF group was (11.15±1.91) cm ( t=11.848, P<0.001). The total hospitalization time in the ISDFF group was (15.15±0.54) days, and the total hospitalization time in the PLIF group was (19.86±0.97) days( t=4.26, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in preoperative ODI, JOA and VAS between the two groups ( P>0.05). Symptoms of postoperative patients were significantly improved compared with preoperative. There were statistical differences in ODI, JOA and VAS between the two groups before and after operation ( P<0.05). However, ODI, JOA and VAS were no statistical difference between the two groups after operation. Complications occurred in 5 cases of the two groups of patients, including two cases of superficial infection in the PLIF group, two cases of dural tear in the PLIF group, one case of spinous process fracture in the ISDFF group. The total hospitalization fee for ISDFF was (57 450±8 670) (yuan), and the total hospitalization fee for PLIF was (75 770±1 640) (yuan), with statistical differences ( t=9.92, P<0.001). The cost of ISDFF operation was 1864±38.19 (yuan), and the cost of PLIF operation was 2352±41.39 (yuan) ( t=8.65, P<0.001). ISDFF antibacterial drug usage fee was 635.5±64.69 (yuan), PLIF antibacterial drug usage fee was 1449±307.1 (yuan) ( t=2.59, P<0.001). The one-time medical material cost during the ISDFF operation was (38 990±300) (yuan), and the one-time medical material cost during the PLIF operation was (52 110±150) (yuan) ( t=5.88, P<0.001). The excellent and good rate of ISDFF group was 92%, and that of PLIF group was 86%. In this study, the total cost of hospitalization was used as an indicator to measure the cost, and further cost-effectiveness evaluation was made. For every good patient, the cost of the ISDFF group was 62 450 yuan, and the cost of the PLIF group was 88, 100 yuan. Conclusions:ISDFF is beneficial to reduce the cost of medical insurance in China, which is in line with the direction of national reform to reduce medical expenditure. It is a surgical method worthy of wide promotion and has a good application prospect.
