Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleMinimally Invasive Surgery

Current Trends and Socioeconomic Disparities in the Utilization of Spine Augmentation for Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis From 2012 to 2016

Saavan Patel, Ryan G. Chiu, Anisse N. Chaker, Clayton L. Rosinski, Ravi S. Nunna, Mandana Behbahani and Ankit I. Mehta
International Journal of Spine Surgery June 2022, 16 (3) 490-497; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8262
Saavan Patel
1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ryan G. Chiu
1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anisse N. Chaker
1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Clayton L. Rosinski
1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ravi S. Nunna
1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mandana Behbahani
1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ankit I. Mehta
1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Regional geographical distribution of ORs (95% CIs) for receiving spinal augmentation for management of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture in the Midwest, Northwest, South, and West regions of the United States.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Annual rate of spinal augmentation procedure utilization for the management of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture from 2012 to 2016.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Total study cohort characteristics.

    CharacteristicsTotal Patients
    (N = 35,199)
    Age, y, mean (SD)78.7 (11.1)
    Sex, female, n (%)28,902 (82.1)
    Race, n (%)
     White/Caucasian28,901 (82.1)
     Black/African American869 (2.5)
     Hispanic/Latino1885 (5.4)
     Asian/Pacific Islander1063 (3.0)
     Native American118 (0.3)
     Unknown/other653 (1.9)
    Insurance coverage, n (%)
     Medicare30,732 (87.3)
     Medicaid1033 (2.9)
     Private insurance2851 (8.1)
     Self-pay225 (0.6)
     No charge20 (0.1)
     Other327 (0.9)
    Income quartile, n (%)
     First (poorest)7569 (21.5)
     Second9067 (25.8)
     Third9121 (25.9)
     Fourth (wealthiest)8908 (25.3)
    Hospital location/teaching status, n (%)
     Rural3907 (11.1)
     Urban, nonteaching12,116 (34.4)
     Urban, teaching19,176 (54.5)
    Hospital control, n (%)
     Public2981 (8.5)
     Private, nonprofit28,321 (80.5)
     Private, for-profit3897 (11.1)
    Geographical region, n (%)
     Northeast7240 (20.6)
     Midwest9474 (26.9)
     South10,427 (29.6)
     West8058 (22.9)
    • View popup
    Table 2

    Analysis of socioeconomic predictors.

    CharacteristicsSurgical
    (N = 7900)
    Conservative
    (N = 27,299)
    RR for Spine AugmentationAdjusted P Value
    Unadjusted RR (95% CI)Adjusted RR (95% CI)
    Age, y, mean (SD)78.5 (11.4)78.6 (11.4)----0.543
    Sex, female, n (%)6331 (80.1)22,571 (82.7) 0.88 (0.84–0.92) 0.90 (0.87–0.94) <0.001
    Race, n (%)
     White/Caucasian6794 (89.1)22,107 (85.5)RefRef
     Black/African American158 (2.1)711 (2.7) 0.77 (0.67–0.89) 0.79 (0.70–0.89) <0.001
     Hispanic/Latino332 (4.4)1553 (6.0) 0.75 (0.68–0.83) 0.82 (0.76–0.90) <0.001
     Asian/Pacific Islander190 (2.5)873 (3.4) 0.76 (0.67–0.87) 0.90 (0.81–0.99) 0.048
     Native American22 (0.3)96 (0.4)0.79 (0.54–1.16)0.91 (0.67–1.23)0.518
     Unknown/other132 (1.7)521 (2.0)0.86 (0.74–1.00) 0.88 (0.78–0.99) 0.037
    Insurance coverage, n (%)
     Medicare6993 (88.6)23,739 (87.0)RefRef
     Medicaid138 (1.7)895 (3.3) 0.59 (0.50–0.69) 0.76 (0.66–0.87) <0.001
     Private insurance663 (8.4)2188 (8.0)1.02 (0.95–1.10) 1.06 (1.00–1.12) 0.042
     Self-pay41 (0.5)184 (0.7)0.80 (0.61–1.06)0.99 (0.79–1.23)0.901
     No charge3 (0.0)17 (0.1)0.66 (0.23–1.87)0.60 (0.23–1.54)0.204
     Other55 (0.7)248 (0.9)0.80 (0.63–1.01)0.91 (0.75–1.10)0.311
    Income quartile, n (%)
     First (poorest)1734 (22.2)5835 (21.7)RefRef
     Second2065 (26.5)7002 (26.1)0.99 (0.94–1.05)0.98 (0.94–1.02)0.367
     Third2079 (26.7)7042 (26.2)0.99 (0.94–1.05)0.97 (0.92–1.00)0.248
     Fourth (wealthiest)1916 (24.6)6992 (26.0) 0.94 (0.89–0.99) 0.95 (0.91–0.99) 0.031
    Hospital location/teaching status, n (%)
     Rural486 (6.1)3421 (12.5)RefRef
     Urban, nonteaching2886 (36.5)9230 (33.8) 1.91 (1.75–2.09) 1.56 (1.45–1.69) <0.001
     Urban, teaching4528 (57.3)14,648 (53.7) 1.90 (1.74–2.07) 1.59 (1.47–1.72) <0.001
    Hospital control, n (%)
     Public428 (5.4)2553 (9.4)RefRef
     Private, nonprofit6418 (81.2)21,903 (80.2) 1.58 (1.44–1.73) 1.35 (1.26–1.47) <0.001
     Private, for-profit1054 (13.3)2843 (10.4) 1.88 (1.70–2.09) 1.51 (1.39–1.65) <0.001
    Geographical region, n (%)
     Northeast1189 (15.1)6051 (22.2)RefRef
     Midwest2735 (34.6)6739 (24.7) 1.76 (1.65–1.87) 1.52 (1.44–1.60) <0.001
     South2983 (37.8)7444 (27.3) 1.74 (1.64–1.85) 1.49 (1.42–1.57) <0.001
     West993 (12.6)7065 (25.9) 0.75 (0.69 to 0.81) 0.90 (0.84 to 0.96) <0.001
    • Boldface indicates statistically significant findings.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 16, Issue 3
1 Jun 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Current Trends and Socioeconomic Disparities in the Utilization of Spine Augmentation for Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis From 2012 to 2016
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Current Trends and Socioeconomic Disparities in the Utilization of Spine Augmentation for Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis From 2012 to 2016
Saavan Patel, Ryan G. Chiu, Anisse N. Chaker, Clayton L. Rosinski, Ravi S. Nunna, Mandana Behbahani, Ankit I. Mehta
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2022, 16 (3) 490-497; DOI: 10.14444/8262

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Current Trends and Socioeconomic Disparities in the Utilization of Spine Augmentation for Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis From 2012 to 2016
Saavan Patel, Ryan G. Chiu, Anisse N. Chaker, Clayton L. Rosinski, Ravi S. Nunna, Mandana Behbahani, Ankit I. Mehta
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2022, 16 (3) 490-497; DOI: 10.14444/8262
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Comparative Review of Lateral and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technique, Outcomes, and Complications
  • Key Considerations in Surgical Decision-Making on the Side of Approach for Lumbar Lateral Transpsoas Interbody Fusion Techniques
  • A Spine Surgeon’s Learning Curve With the Minimally Invasive L5 to S1 Lateral ALIF Surgical Approach: Perioperative Outcomes and Technical Considerations
Show more Minimally Invasive Surgery

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • osteoporosis
  • vertebral
  • fracture
  • kyphoplasty
  • vertebroplasty
  • spine
  • augmentation
  • socioeconomic
  • disparities
  • race

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire