ObjectiveThe lifetime direct and indirect costs of spinal injury and spinal cord injury (SCI) increase as the severity of injury worsens. Despite the potential for substantial improvement in function with acute rehabilitation, the factors affecting its cost have not yet been evaluated. We used a proprietary hospital database to evaluate the direct costs of rehabilitation after spine injury.MethodsA single-center, retrospective cohort cost analysis of patients with acute, traumatic spine injury treated at a tertiary facility from 2011 to 2017 was performed.ResultsIn the 190 patients (mean age 46.1 ± 18.6 years, 76.3% males) identified, American Spinal Injury Association impairment scores on admission were 32.1% A, 14.7% B, 14.7% C, 33.2% D, and 1.1% E. Surgical treatment was performed in 179 (94.2%) cases. Most injuries were in the cervical spine (53.2%). A mean improvement of Functional Impairment Score of 30.7 ± 16.2 was seen after acute rehabilitation. Costs for care comprised facility (86.5%), pharmacy (9.2%), supplies (2.0%), laboratory (1.5%), and imaging (0.8%) categories. Injury level, injury severity, and prior inpatient surgical treatment did not affect the cost of rehabilitation. Higher injury severity (p = 0.0001, one-way ANOVA) and spinal level of injury (p = 0.001, one-way ANOVA) were associated with higher length of rehabilitation stay in univariate analysis. However, length of rehabilitation stay was the strongest independent predictor of higher-than-median cost (risk ratio = 1.56, 95% CI 1.21-2.0, p = 0.001) after adjusting for other factors.ConclusionsSpine injury has a high upfront cost of care, with greater need for rehabilitation substantially affecting cost. Improving the efficacy of rehabilitation to reduce length of stay may be effective in reducing cost.

No abstract

Background: Linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (TN) may have similar efficacy to Gamma Knife SRS (GK-SRS), but the preponderance of data comes from patients treated with GK-SRS. Our objective was to analyze the outcomes for LINAC-based treatment of TN in patients at our institution. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data for patients who underwent LINAC-based SRS for TN from 2006 to 2018. Data were collected from the patients’ medical records. Nonparametric statistics were used for the analysis. Results: Of the 41 patients treated with LINAC-based SRS (typically 90 Gy dosed using a 4 mm collimator for one fraction) during that time, follow-up data of >3 weeks post-SRS were available for 32 patients. The median pretreatment Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) pain score was 5 (range 4–5). The follow-up period ranged from 0.9 to 113.2 months (median 5 months). There was significant improvement in postradiation BNI pain score (P < 0.001), with 23 (72%) patients who improved to a BNI pain score of 1–3. One patient had bothersome hypoesthesia postradiation. Approximately 38% of patients who had initial pain control had recurrence of symptoms (BNI > 3). Survival analysis showed a median time to pain recurrence of 30 months. There was no relationship between prior microvascular decompression (MVD) surgery and change in BNI pain score pre- to posttreatment. Conclusion: The results demonstrate that LINAC-based SRS is an effective means to treat TN. Prior MVD surgery did not affect efficacy of SRS in lowering the BNI score from pre- to posttreatment in this patient cohort.