ArticleThe spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society2025
Ambulatory surgery center versus outpatient hospitals: a comparison of reimbursements for patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
Article in The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background contextWhile some studies have demonstrated that ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) are associated with reduced costs of orthopedic procedures, there is no consensus in the current literature as to the impact of ASCs versus hospital-based outpatient departments (HOPDs) on anterior cervical discectomies and fusions (ACDFs). PURPOSE: This study sought to (1) compare immediate procedure reimbursements, patient out-of-pocket expenditures, and surgeon reimbursements for ACDFs performed at ASCs versus HOPDs and (2) identify factors predicting facility utilization. STUDY
designRetrospective cross-sectional study. PATIENT SAMPLE: We identified ACDF procedures performed at an ASC or HOPD in commercially-insured patients aged 18 to 64. OUTCOME MEASURES: Payment variables were calculated from claims within 3 days preoperatively and postoperatively.
methodsMultivariable regression models assessed (1) associations between the surgery setting and payment variables and (2) factors associated with the surgery setting.
resultsWe included 18,191 ACDFs (14.8% ASC, 85.2% HOPD). In multivariable analyses, ACDFs performed in an ASC (versus HOPD) were associated with 9.8% higher immediate procedure reimbursements (95% CI:7.5%-12.2%), 17.2% higher patient out-of-pocket expenditures (95% CI:11.8-22.8), and 11.7% higher surgeon reimbursements (95% CI:9.18-14.2; all p<.01) (all p<.001). Surgery setting utilization varied by region, insurance-related factors, comorbidities, and procedural complexity.
conclusionsWe found that ASCs had significantly higher reimbursements compared to HOPDs. Regional variations in ASC utilization imply there are opportunities for standardization of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.