Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Postoperative delirium is a frequent complication with negative consequences for neurosurgical patients. Recorded music has been shown to reduce the incidence of delirium, however its economic benefit remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of perioperative music in preventing postoperative delirium. Methods This study used data from a randomized controlled trial (Clinical Trials.gov; NCT04649450) that compared the effect of perioperative music with standard of clinical care on the occurrence of postoperative delirium in patients undergoing craniotomy at the Erasmus Medical Centre. The primary outcome of this study is the cost-effectiveness of the music intervention. A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was conducted from a societal perspective. Mean costs were calculated using bootstrapping with 95% confidence intervals. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, mortality, cognitive functioning, and quality of life. Costs and patient outcomes were assessed separately for the initial hospital admission and long-term follow-up until 6 months after discharge. Results This study included 91 patients in the intervention group and 93 in the control group. On average, medical costs during initial admission were lower, albeit not statistically significant, in the music group compared to the control group (€ 11,819 vs. € 13,106), mostly due to a shorter length of stay. Total costs over the 6-month period were nearly identical between the groups, at € 18,587 and € 18,571 in the music and control group, respectively. Conclusions Pre-recorded perioperative music may be a cost-effective intervention for reducing postoperative delirium in neurosurgical patients, possibly by decreasing healthcare utilization and costs during primary admission. Further studies are needed to confirm its potential as a cost-effective intervention.

ObjectiveTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of craniotomy, compared with decompressive craniectomy (DC) in UK patients undergoing evacuation of acute subdural haematoma (ASDH).DesignEconomic evaluation undertaken using health resource use and outcome data from the 12-month multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised, Randomised Evaluation of Surgery with Craniectomy for Patients Undergoing Evacuation-ASDH trial.SettingUK secondary care.Participants248 UK patients undergoing surgery for traumatic ASDH were randomised to craniotomy (N=126) or DC (N=122).InterventionsSurgical evacuation via craniotomy (bone flap replaced) or DC (bone flap left out with a view to replace later: cranioplasty surgery).Main outcome measuresIn the base-case analysis, costs were estimated from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Outcomes were assessed via the quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) derived from the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire (cost-utility analysis) and the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) (cost-effectiveness analysis). Multiple imputation and regression analyses were conducted to estimate the mean incremental cost and effect of craniotomy compared with DC. The most cost-effective option was selected, irrespective of the level of statistical significance as is argued by economists.ResultsIn the cost-utility analysis, the mean incremental cost of craniotomy compared with DC was estimated to be −£5520 (95% CI −£18 060 to £7020) with a mean QALY gain of 0.093 (95% CI 0.029 to 0.156). In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the mean incremental cost was estimated to be −£4536 (95% CI −£17 374 to £8301) with an OR of 1.682 (95% CI 0.995 to 2.842) for a favourable outcome on the GOSE.ConclusionsIn a UK population with traumatic ASDH, craniotomy was estimated to be cost-effective compared with DC: craniotomy was estimated to have a lower mean cost, higher mean QALY gain and higher probability of a more favourable outcome on the GOSE (though not all estimated differences between the two approaches were statistically significant).EthicsEthical approval for the trial was obtained from the North West—Haydock Research Ethics Committee in the UK on 17 July 2014 (14/NW/1076).Trial registration numberISRCTN87370545.

Background Chronic subdural haematoma (CSDH) is a common neurological disease with a rapidly rising incidence due to increasing age and widespread use of anticoagulants. Surgical intervention by burr-hole craniotomy (BHC) is the current standard practice for symptomatic patients, but associated with complications, a recurrence rate of up to 30% and increased mortality. Dexamethasone (DXM) therapy is, therefore, used as a non-surgical alternative but considered to achieve a lower success rate. Furthermore, the benefit of DXM therapy appears much more deliberate than the immediate relief from BHC. Lack of evidence and clinical equipoise among caregivers prompts the need for a head-to-head randomised controlled trial. The objective of this study is to compare the effect of primary DXM therapy versus primary BHC on functional outcome and cost-effectiveness in symptomatic patients with CSDH. Methods/Design This study is a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Consecutive patients with a CSDH with a Markwalder Grading Scale (MGS) grade 1 to 3 will be randomised to treatment with DXM or BHC. The DXM treatment scheme will be 16 mg DXM per day (8 mg twice daily, days 1 to 4) which is then halved every 3 days until a dosage of 0.5 mg a day on day 19 and stopped on day 20. If the treatment response is insufficient (i.e. persistent or progressive symptomatology due to insufficient haematoma resolution), additional surgery can be performed. The primary outcomes are the functional outcome by means of the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 3 months and cost-effectiveness at 12 months. Secondary outcomes are quality of life at 3 and 12 months using the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Quality of Life after Brain Injury Overall Scale (QOLIBRI), haematoma thickness after 2 weeks on follow–up computed tomography (CT), haematoma recurrence during the first 12 months, complications and drug-related adverse events, failure of therapy within 12 months after randomisation and requiring intervention, mortality during the first 3 and 12 months, duration of hospital stay and overall healthcare and productivity costs. To test non-inferiority of DXM therapy compared to BHC, 210 patients in each treatment arm are required (assumed adjusted common odds ratio DXM compared to BHC 1.15, limit for inferiority < 0.9). The aim is to include a total of 420 patients in 3 years with an enrolment rate of 60%. Discussion The present study should demonstrate whether treatment with DXM is as effective as BHC on functional outcome, at lower costs. Trial registration EUCTR 2015-001563-39 . Date of registration: 29 March 2015.

The aim of the current study was to prospectively analyze complication rates and costs associated with dural closure in patients undergoing supratentorial craniotomies, randomized for watertight and adaptive dural closures. One hundred fifty consecutive patients with supratentorial lesions who were between 18 and 70 years of age were prospectively included. A watertight dural closure was the primary goal (Group A). Whenever this goal could not be achieved, patients were intraoperatively randomized for secondary watertight (Group B) or adaptive dural closure (Group C). Within a follow-up period of 4 weeks, study end points were the occurrence of complications such as subcutaneous fluid collections, impaired wound healing with and without cerebrospinal fluid leakage, and infection. Moreover, we analyzed costs for dural closure for each group separately. Of 150 eligible patients, 13 were excluded according to predefined criteria (Group A, n = 3; Group B, n = 7; Group C, n = 3). From those patients, a primary watertight dural closure could be obtained in 44 (29.4%) patients. A secondary watertight dural closure was performed in 53 (35.3%) patients, and an adaptive dural closure was performed in 53 (35.3%) patients. Complications that were related to dural closure or wound closure were found in 7 patients in Group A, 6 patients in Group B, and 12 patients in Group C (all not significant). The mean total costs, based on time and additional material required in Group A (US $436 +/- 119) or Group B (US $681 +/- 286) were significantly greater compared with adaptive dural closure in Group C (US $213 +/- 142, P < 0.05). In supratentorial craniotomies, an adaptive dural closure may represent a safe and cost-effective alternative to watertight dural closure.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Intrawound vancomycin powder has been studied extensively in spinal fusion surgeries and been found to reduce rates of surgical site infections (SSIs) significantly. Despite its success in spinal surgeries, topical vancomycin has not been extensively studied with respect to cranial neurosurgery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of intrawound topical vancomycin for prevention of SSIs following open craniotomies. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a large series of 350 patients from 2011 to 2015 in a pre/postintervention study of use of topical vancomycin to reduce postoperative craniotomy infection rates. We had a preintervention control group of 225 patients and a postintervention group of 125 patients that received intrawound topical vancomycin. RESULTS: Our preintervention incidence of SSI was 2.2% and this was significantly reduced to 0% following introduction of topical vancomycin (P < .5). An ad hoc cost analysis suggested a cost savings of ${\\$}$ 59 965 with the use of topical vancomycin for craniotomies. CONCLUSION: Our study found a significant reduction in SSI rates after introduction of topical vancomycin. Thus, this simple intervention should be considered in all open craniotomy patients as both infection prophylaxis and a potential cost saving intervention.

Purpose There has been mounting interest in understanding the impact of financial toxicity (FT) in various cancer types; however, it remains poorly understood and understudied within neuro-oncology—especially as it relates to neurosurgical components of patient care. Methods Retrospective, single-center study of patients who underwent craniotomy for resection of glioblastoma from 2020 to 2022. OIBEE™ (Austin, Texas) software was queried to identify the subset of these patients who had a bad debt charged to their account. These patients were deemed to qualify as experiencing FT. Chi Square analysis was conducted between FT and non-FT patient groups. Additionally, survival analyses were performed to determine predictors of progression free and overall survival. Results 74 patients were included in this sample. 33/74 (44%) met criteria for FT. The average bad debt amount was $7,476.76 and the median debt amount was $2,015.96, with the average time to financial toxicity after surgery being approximately 127 days. FT patients were significantly younger at diagnosis than those who were not FT (64.6 years- non-FT vs. 59.0 years- FT, p  = 0.0344). FT patients were more likely to have undergone subtotal resections rather than a gross total resection compared to non-FT patients (FT GTR 27.3%, non-FT GTR 52.4%, p  = 0.028). Hospital length of stay was significantly longer for FT patients compared to non-FT patients (LOS FT 9.5 days, non-FT 6.5 days, p  = 0.0312). Conclusion Glioblastoma patients are at high risk of experiencing FT with our series showing no significant impact on overall survival. Larger studies are needed to understand the impact of FT on patient outcomes.

Abstract BACKGROUND Episode-based bundled payments were introduced by Medicare in 2013 as the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) in order to improve care coordination and cost efficiency. BPCI has not yet been applied to cranial neurosurgical procedures. OBJECTIVE To determine projected values of episode-based bundled payments when applied to common cranial neurosurgical procedures using retrospective data from a large database. METHODS We performed a large retrospective observational study using the MarketScan administrative database to project bundled payment payments for 4 groups of common cranial neurosurgical procedures. RESULTS We identified 15 276 procedures that met our inclusion criteria. We observed significant variability between groups, with 90-d bundle projected payments ranging from $ 58,200 for craniotomy for meningioma to $ 102,073 for craniotomy for malignant glioma. We also found significant variability in projected bundled payments within each class of operation. On average, payment for the index hospitalization accounted for 85% of projected payments for a 30-d bundle and 70.5% of projected payments for a 90-d bundle. Multivariable analysis showed that hospital readmission, discharge to postacute care facilities, venous-thrombo-embolism, medical comorbidities, adjuvant therapies, and payer status significantly contributed to projected cranial bundle payments. CONCLUSION For the first time, to our knowledge, we project the values of episode-based bundled payments for common vascular and tumor cranial operations. As previously identified in orthopedic procedures, there is significant variability in total bundle payments within each cranial procedure. Compared to spine and orthopedic procedures, postdischarge care significantly impacts total bundle payments in cranial neurosurgery.

Chronic subdural hematomas (CSDH), which are frequently encountered in neurosurgical practice, are, in the majority of cases, ideally treated with surgical drainage. Despite this common practice, there is still controversy surrounding the best surgical procedure. With lack of clear evidence of a superior technique, surgeons are free to base the decision on other factors that are not related to patient care. A retrospective chart review of 119 patients requiring surgical drainage of CSDH was conducted at a large tertiary care center over a three-year period. Of the cases reviewed, 58 patients underwent craniotomy, while 61 patients underwent burr hole washout. The study focused on re-operation rates, mortality, and morbidity, as measured by Glasgow coma scores (GCS), discharge Rankin disability scores, and discharge disposition. Secondary endpoints included length of stay and cost of procedure. Burr hole washout was superior to craniotomy with respect to patient outcome, length of stay and recurrence rates. In both study groups, patients required additional surgical procedures (6.6% of burr hole patients and 24.1% of craniotomy patients) (P = 0.0156). Of the patients treated with craniotomy, 51.7% were discharged home, whereas 65.6% of the burr hole patients were discharged home. Patients who underwent burr hole washout spent a mean of 78.8 minutes in the operating suite while the patients undergoing craniotomy spent 129.4 minutes (P < 0.001). The difference in mean cost per patient, based solely on operating time, was $2,828 (P < 0.001). This does not include the further cost due to additional procedures and hospital stay. The mean length of stay after surgical intervention was 3 days longer for the craniotomy group (P = 0.0465). Based on this retrospective study, burr hole washout is superior for both patients' clinical and financial outcome; however, prospective long-term multicenter clinical studies are required to verify these findings.

Background and objectives Neurosurgical procedures can be associated with significant post-operative pain and diminished ability to ambulate or transfer, frequently requiring evaluation by physical / occupational therapy (PT/OT) to ensure appropriate discharge disposition. Owing to high demand for PT/OT services across surgical subspecialities, PT/OT evaluation often bottlenecks disposition. Through our established cranial Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway, Neurosurgery Enhanced Recovery Value and Safety (NERVS), our institution employs a nurse-driven mobilization component during post-operative recovery. Here, we report our eight-year experience with a unique institutional NERVS program. Methods This is a retrospective observational cohort study. We created a database of elective cranial tumor resections from 2017–2024. Patient demographics, hospitalization metrics, pain levels, and medications were extracted via chart review. Patients discharged home were selected for accurate comparison of outcomes. Analyses were performed in MATLAB. Results We identified 1,594 elective craniotomy patients for analysis: 1,059 (66%) entered NERVS, 834 (52%) passed NERVS, 225 (14%) failed NERVS, and 535 (34%) did not enter. Among propensity-matched patients with a post-operative ICU LOS < 1 day, NERVS and no-NERVS groups did not differ in age (53.7 vs 55.1 years, p  = 0.82), procedure duration (3.9 vs 3.6 h, p  = 0.08), racial composition ( p  = 0.24–1), or tumor type ( p  = 0.23–0.89). Hospital LOS was significantly shorter among NERVS vs non-NERVS patients (2.9 vs 4.6 days, p  < 0.001); this was associated with a reduction in total hospital charges on a per-patient basis (-$26,040, p  < 0.001). Pain levels, morphine equivalents, and 30-day surgical readmission rate did not differ between home-discharge passed-NERVS and non-NERVS groups. Conclusion Our data demonstrates that nurse-driven mobilization in lieu of indiscriminate PT/OT evaluation after cranial tumor resection is associated with reduced hospitalization lengths-of-stay and total hospital charges among propensity-matched individuals, without an increase surgical readmission rate. Future mechanistic studies are necessary to determine if neurosurgical patients requiring less intensive post-operative rehabilitation assessment causally benefit from accelerated nurse-driven mobilization protocol.

Abstract BACKGROUND There is a significant increase and large variation in craniotomy costs. However, the causes of cost differences in craniotomies remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE To examine the patient and hospital factors that underlie the cost variation in tumor craniotomies using 2 national databases: the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) and Vizient, Inc. (Irving, Texas). METHODS For 41 483 patients who underwent primary surgery for supratentorial brain tumors from 2001 to 2013 in the NIS, we created univariate and multivariate models to evaluate the effect of several patient factors and hospital factors on total hospital cost. Similarly, we performed multivariate analysis with 15 087 cases in the Vizient 2012 to 2015 database. RESULTS In the NIS, the mean inflation-adjusted cost per tumor craniotomy increased 30%, from $23 021 in 2001 to $29 971 in 2013. In 2001, the highest cost region was the Northeast ($24 486 ± $1184), and by 2013 the western United States was the highest cost region ($36 058 ± $1684). Multivariate analyses with NIS data showed that male gender, white race, private insurance, higher mortality risk, higher severity of illness, longer length of stay, elective admissions, higher wage index, urban teaching hospitals, and hospitals in the western United States were associated with higher tumor craniotomy costs (all P < .05). Multivariate analyses with Vizient data confirmed that longer length of stay and the western United States were significantly associated with higher costs (P < .001). CONCLUSION After controlling for patient/clinical factors, hospital type, bed size, and wage index, hospitals in the western United States had higher costs than those in other parts of the country, based on analyses from 2 separate national databases.