Geographic Variations in the Cost of Spine Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: To define the geographic variation in costs of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterolateral fusion (PLF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: ACDF and lumbar PLF are common procedures that are used in the treatment of spinal pathologies. To optimize value, both the benefits and costs of an intervention must be quantified. Data on costs are scarce in comparison with data on total charges. This study aims at defining the costs of ACDF and PLF and describing the geographic variation within the United States. METHODS: Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment data were used to investigate the costs associated with ACDF, PLF, and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Average total costs of the procedures were compared by state and geographic region. RESULTS: Combined professional and facility costs for a single-level ACDF had a national mean of $13,899. Total costs for a single-level PLF had a mean of $25,858. Total costs for a primary TKA had a national mean of $13,039. The cost increased to an average of $22,138 for TKA with major comorbidities. Analysis of geographic trends showed statistically significant differences in total costs of PLF, TKA, and TKA, with major complications or comorbidities between geographic regions (P < 0.01 for all). CONCLUSION: Three of the 4 procedures (PLF, TKA, and TKA with major complications or comorbidities) showed statistically significant variation in cost between geographic regions. The Midwest provided the lowest cost for all procedures. Similar geographic trends in the cost of spinal fusions and TKAs suggest that these trends may not be limited to spine-related procedures. Surgical costs were found to correlate with cost of living but were not associated with the population of the state. These data shed light on the actual cost of common surgical procedures throughout the United States and will allow further progress toward the development of cost-effective, value-driven care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".