Day Care Spine Surgery Versus Conventional Spine Surgery: A Comparative Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36552/pjns.v28i3.997Keywords:
Daycare spine surgery, conventional spine surgery, cervical prolapsed intervertebral discAbstract
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and patient benefits of daycare spine surgery as compared to traditional spine surgery.
Materials & Methods: This study was conducted at the neurosurgery department of Bakhtawar Amin Trust and Teaching Hospital Multan from January 2022 to October 2023. This was a prospective study involving 103 patients diagnosed with cervical PIVD, lumbar PIVD, IDEM, and extradural spinal tumors. Participants were equally split into two groups, one undergoing daycare and another with conventional spine surgery. They were analyzed by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Neck Disability Index (ODI), time of operation, duration of hospitalization, cost of surgery, and follow-up duration.
Results: Results showed that daycare spine surgery had significantly less hospital stay duration (p-value
< 0.01), low costs (p-value < 0.01), and low post-operative VAS scores (p-value < 0.05) relative to traditional spine surgery. Additionally, improvements in ODI and NDI scores were more in the daycare group (p-value
< 0.01). The duration of surgery and blood loss was also less than the conventional surgery.
Conclusion: Daycare spine surgery has proved to be a better replacement for conventional surgery, having decreased resource use, enhanced cost-effectiveness, and better patient outcomes.
References
Thounaojam, Chandra Kumar; Borkar, Sachin A.; Sharma, Ravi; Phalak, Manoj; Sharma, Rajeev; Sharad Kale, Shashank. A Prospective Comparative Study between Day Care Spine Surgery and Conventional Spine Surgery. Indian Spine Journal. 2021;4(1):99-104. Doi: 10.4103/ISJ.ISJ_45_19
Agarwal N, Feghhi DP, Gupta R, Hansberry DR, Quinn JC, Heary RF, Goldstein IM. A comparative analysis of minimally invasive and open spine surgery patient education resources. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21(3):468-74.
Doi: 10.3171/2014.5.SPINE13600. Epub 2014 Jun 13. PMID: 24926930.
Momin AA, Steinmetz MP. Evolution of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spine Surgery. World Neurosurg. 2020;140:622-626.
Doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.05.071. Epub 2020 May 17. PMID: 32434014.
Park SM, Song KS, Kim HJ, Park SY, Kang T, Kang MS, Heo DH, Park CK, Lee DG, Hwang JS, Jang JW, Kim JY, Kim JS, Lee HJ, You KH, Park HJ. Comparing the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive biportal endoscopic spine surgery versus conventional microscopic discectomy in single-level lumbar herniated intervertebral disc (ENDO-BH Trial): a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled equivalence trial study protocol. Trials. 2022;23(1):172. Doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06094-2. PMID: 35193640; PMCID: PMC8864786.
Zhang T, Guo N, Wang K, Gao G, Li Y, Gao F, Yang W, Wang Y, Wang Y. Comparison of outcomes between tubular microdiscectomy and conventional microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Orthop Surg Res. 2023;18(1):479. Doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-03962-8. PMID: 37400862; PMCID: PMC10318734.
Simpson AK, Lightsey HM 4th, Xiong GX, Crawford AM, Minamide A, Schoenfeld AJ. Spinal endoscopy: evidence, techniques, global trends, and future projections. Spine J. 2022;22(1):64-74. Doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.07.004. Epub 2021 Jul 13. PMID: 34271213.
Cheng I, Stienen MN, Medress ZA, Varshneya K, Ho AL, Ratliff JK, Veeravagu A. Single- versus dual-attending strategy for spinal deformity surgery: 2-year experience and systematic review of the literature. J Neurosurg Spine. 202;33(5):560-571. Doi: 10.3171/2020.3.SPINE2016. PMID: 32650315.
Katz AD, Song J, Hasan S, Galina JM, Virk S, Silber
JS, Essig D, Sarwahi V. Navigated versus conventional pediatric spinal deformity surgery: Navigation independently predicts reoperation and infectious complications. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2023;14(2):165-174.
Doi: 10.4103/jcvjs.jcvjs_28_23. Epub 2023 Jun 13. PMID: 37448507; PMCID: PMC10336894.
Pennington Z, Ahmed AK, Molina CA, Ehresman J, Laufer I, Sciubba DM. Minimally invasive versus conventional spine surgery for vertebral metastases: a systematic review of the evidence. Ann Transl Med. 2018;6(6):103.
Doi: 10.21037/atm.2018.01.28. PMID: 29707552; PMCID: PMC5900071.
Elgamal, S. M., Abdelhalim, A. A., Arida, E. A., Elhabashy, A. M., & Sabra, R. A. E. Enhanced recovery after spinal surgery protocol versus conventional care in non- insulin diabetic patients: A prospective randomized trial. Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia, 2023;39(1),:13–321.
https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2023.2196113
Malik AT, Drain JP, Jones J, Karnes J, Brewster J, Ryu R, Singh V, Kim J, Khan SN, Yu E. Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Posterior Lumbar Fusion-An Analysis of 90-Day Complications and Readmissions. World Neurosurg. 2021;152:e168-e174. Doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.05.072. Epub 2021 May 27. PMID: 34052447.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Waqas Noor Chughtai, Muhammad Usama, Hafiz Muhammad Ayyaz Afzal, Muhammad Habib Hassan, Nauman Ahmed, Tahira FatimaThe work published by PJNS is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). Copyrights on any open access article published by Pakistan Journal of Neurological Surgery are retained by the author(s).
