Wagner Christoph J, Lindena Gabriele, Ayyad Grit, Otzdorff Andrea, Marnitz Ulf, Bienek Karen, von Pickardt Björn, Sehlen Stephanie, Wyrwich Werner
AOK Nordost, Wilhelmstraße 1, 10963, Berlin, Deutschland.
CLARA Clinical Analysis Research and Application, Clara-Zetkin-Straße 34, 14532, Kleinmachnow, Deutschland.
Schmerz. 2023 Apr;37(2):123-133. doi: 10.1007/s00482-022-00624-2. Epub 2022 Feb 22.
There is no evidence of effectiveness for interdisciplinary second opinion procedures (ISOP) for recommended back surgery (BS). Since 2015, AOK Nordost has been offering the care program RückenSPEZIAL comprising a preliminary examination, ISOP, and optional interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT). The objective of this study is to determine the effectiveness of RückenSPEZIAL to reduce BS and back pain-related costs (BPRC) compared to patients who likewise received a recommendation for back surgery but not RückenSPEZIAL.
Insured persons in the AOK Nordost consulted the AOK service center, presented a BS hospital admission slip and received advice to participate in RückenSPEZIAL. Following a 1:1 "matched pairs" selection, patients who participated in RückenSPEZIAL (intervention group [IG]) after this consultation (reference date) where compared with patients who did not participate after this consultation (comparison group [CG]). Patient characteristics, BS and BPRC were operationalised from AOK Nordost claims data.
Of 108 IG patients and 108 CG patients, 34 (42%) fewer IG patients had one or more BS in 365 following days (relative risk [RR] 0.58; p < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed for 21 IG patients with ISOP and IMPT an RR of 0.13 (p < 0.001), and for 67 IG patients with solely ISOP without IMPT an RR of 0.59 (p < 0.001). The increase in RBC from the previous year to the following year was 50.2 percentage points lower for IG patients compared to CG patients (p = 0.088).
The differences in BS were significant (p < 0.05) and in favor of RückenSPEZIAL. For the specific population it can be expected that mainly savings on BS can cover the intervention costs of RückenSPEZIAL (approximately significant, small case number). Bias due to self-selection needs to be assumed.
对于推荐的脊柱手术(BS),尚无证据表明跨学科第二意见程序(ISOP)有效。自2015年以来,德国东北健康保险公司(AOK Nordost)一直在提供“脊柱专项”护理计划,包括初步检查、ISOP以及可选的跨学科多模式疼痛治疗(IMPT)。本研究的目的是确定与同样收到脊柱手术推荐但未接受“脊柱专项”护理计划的患者相比,“脊柱专项”护理计划在降低脊柱手术和背痛相关成本(BPRC)方面的有效性。
德国东北健康保险公司的参保人员咨询了该公司的服务中心,提交了脊柱手术住院通知单,并收到了参加“脊柱专项”护理计划的建议。经过1:1的“配对”选择,将咨询后参加“脊柱专项”护理计划的患者(干预组[IG])与咨询后未参加的患者(对照组[CG])进行比较。患者特征、脊柱手术情况和背痛相关成本从德国东北健康保险公司的理赔数据中提取。
在108名干预组患者和108名对照组患者中,干预组患者在接下来的365天内进行一次或多次脊柱手术的人数少34名(42%)(相对风险[RR]0.58;p<0.001)。亚组分析显示,21名接受ISOP和IMPT的干预组患者的RR为0.13(p<0.001),67名仅接受ISOP而未接受IMPT的干预组患者的RR为0.59(p<0.001)。与对照组患者相比,干预组患者从上年到下一年的背痛相关成本增加幅度低50.2个百分点(p=0.088)。
脊柱手术方面的差异具有显著性(p<0.05),且有利于“脊柱专项”护理计划。对于特定人群,可以预期主要是脊柱手术费用的节省能够覆盖“脊柱专项”护理计划的干预成本(近似显著,病例数少)。需要假定存在自我选择导致的偏差。