Will cost transparency in the operating theatre cause surgeons to change their practice?

Surgeons may not have a thorough knowledge about the costs of devices or surgical equipment. The main reason for this in many systems is price insensitivity. The purpose of this study was to determine whether spine surgical procedural expenses change once physicians are aware of the costs for surgical implants and the total associated costs with the procedure. A thorough bottom up case costing methodology was used to capture the costs of admission for three comparable spine surgical procedures at a large tertiary care center. Costs were collected for an initial 5-month period where surgeons were not aware of costs, followed by another 5-month period with detailed cost information. Instrumental costs, procedural costs and costs of admission were captured as well as health related quality of life (HRQOL) measures at 3 months. Statistical analysis was undertaken with STATA software. Costs decreased by $478 for instrumentation once actual prices were known (p = 0.069). Only ACDF procedures demonstrated statistically significant instrumental cost savings of $754 (p = 0.009). Total procedural costs were also less ($297, p = 0.194) but the total overall costs of admission increased ($401, p = 0.228). There were no differences in VAS, EQ-5D, or SF-12 scores. Although costs decrease for implants in surgery when prices are known, this appears to have little or no effect on overall costs of care. Length of stay and operating room time have greater effects on global costs. Future efforts to encourage efficient cost savings should focus on practice patterns/pathways for similar conditions rather than limiting the use of certain implants.