Formal Radiologist Interpretations of Intraoperative Spine Radiographs Have Low Clinical Value

Ryan T Lin; Jonathan F Dalton; Christopher J Como; Audrey Y Chang; Melissa Yunting Tang; Anthony A Oyekan; Shaan Sadhwani; Richard A Wawrose; Joon Y Lee; Jeremy D Shaw

doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000004973

Formal Radiologist Interpretations of Intraoperative Spine Radiographs Have Low Clinical Value

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2024 Feb 26. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004973. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Ryan T Lin^{1

2}, Jonathan F Dalton^{1

2

3}, Christopher J Como^{1

2

3}, Audrey Y Chang^{1

2}, Melissa Yunting Tang^{1

2

3}, Anthony A Oyekan^{1

2

3}, Shaan Sadhwani^{1

2}, Richard A Wawrose^{1

2}, Joon Y Lee^{1

2

3}, Jeremy D Shaw^{1

2

3}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
² Pittsburgh Orthopaedic Spine Research (POSR) Group, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
³ Orland Bethel Family Musculoskeletal Research Center (BMRC), Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

PMID: 38407343
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004973

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Objective: To evaluate the clinical relevance, usefulness, and financial implications of intraoperative radiograph interpretation by radiologists in spine surgery.

Summary of background data: Due to rising healthcare costs, spine surgery is under scrutiny to maximize value-based care. Formal radiographic analysis remains a potential source of unnecessary healthcare costs, especially for intra-operative radiographs.

Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on all adult elective spine surgeries at a single institution between July 2020 and July 2021. Demographic and radiographic data was collected, including intraoperative localization and post-instrumentation radiographs. Financial data was obtained through the institution's price estimator. Radiographic characteristics included time from radiographic imaging to completion of radiologist interpretation report, completion of radiologist interpretation report prior to the conclusion of surgical procedure, clinical relevance, and clinical usefulness. Reports were considered clinically relevant if spinal level of the procedure was described and clinically useful if completed prior to conclusion of the procedure and deemed clinically relevant.

Results: 481 intraoperative localization and post-instrumentation radiographs from 360 patients revealed a median delay of 128 minutes between imaging and completion of interpretive report. Only 38.9% of reports were completed before conclusion of surgery. There were 79.4% deemed clinically relevant and only 33.5% were clinically useful. Localization reports were completed more frequently before conclusion of surgery (67.2% vs. 34.4%), but with lower clinical relevance (90.1% vs. 98.5%) and clinical usefulness (60.3% vs. 33.6%) than post-instrumentation reports. Each patient was charged $32-$34 for interpretation fee, cumulating a minimum total cost of $15,392.

Conclusion: Formal radiographic interpretation of intraoperative spine radiographs was of low clinical utility for spine surgeons. Institutions should consider optimizing radiology workflows to improve timeliness and clinical relevance or evaluate the necessity of reflexive consultation to radiology for intraoperative imaging interpretation to ensure that value-based care is maximized during spine surgeries.

Level of evidence: 3.