Abstract
Background
Craniosynostosis is treated with endoscopic, open, and/or distraction surgical techniques. We assessed institutional variation in the use these techniques for craniosynostosis and compared hospital resource use.
Methods
Retrospective analysis of 5249 infants age <18 months old undergoing surgical procedures for all types of craniosynostosis in 2016–2020 in 39 freestanding children's hospitals in the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database. Endoscopic vs. open cranial vault surgery (with and without distraction osteogenesis) was identified using ICD-10-CM codes. Inpatient cost and length of stay (LOS) were compared by surgery type with Wilcoxon Rank Sum.
Results
There was significant (p < .001) variation in the percentage of infants who underwent endoscopic repair across hospitals [median 23.6% (interquartile range (IQR): 7.6%–37.5%), range: 0% to 80.4%] and across regions [range: 22.1% (southeast) to 42.5% (northeast)]. For endoscopic procedures, median LOS and inpatient cost were lower (p < .001) without vs. with distraction [1 day (IQR 1–1) vs. 2 days (IQR 2–2); $14,617 (IQR 11,823–22178) vs. $33,599 (IQR 22,800–38,619)]. For open interventions, median LOS and inpatient cost were also lower (p < .001) without vs. with distraction [3 days (IQR 2–4) vs. 5 days (IQR 4–6) and $37,251 (IQR 27,114–50.320) vs. $62,247 (IQR 42,124–91,620)].
Conclusions
Substantial variation in the surgical approach for craniosynostosis exists across hospitals and regions. Endoscopic repair without distraction had the lowest hospital resource use, while open repair with distraction had the highest hospital resource. Subsequent analysis of short- and long-term outcomes as well as patient-and-family costs is necessary to assess the true cost-effectiveness of each approach.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
