The DOI matches its Crossref record.
United States Trends in Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Conditions
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using national sample administrative data. OBJECTIVES: To determine if lumbar fusion rates increased in the 1990s and to compare lumbar fusion rates with those of other major musculoskeletal procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies found that lumbar fusion rates rose more rapidly during the 1980s than did other types of lumbar surgery. METHODS: We used the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1988 through 2001 to examine trends. U.S. Census data were used for calculating age and sex-adjusted population-based rates. We excluded patients with vertebral fractures, cancer, or infection. RESULTS: In 2001, over 122,000 lumbar fusions were performed nationwide for degenerative conditions. This represented a 220% increase from 1990 in fusions per 100,000. The increase accelerated after 1996, when fusion cages were approved. From 1996 to 2001, the number of lumbar fusions increased 113%, compared with 13 to 15% for hip replacement and knee arthroplasty. Rates of lumbar fusion rose most rapidly among patients aged 60 and above. The proportion of lumbar operations involving a fusion increased for all diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar fusion rates rose even more rapidly in the 90s than in the 80s. The most rapid increases followed the approval of new surgical implants and were much greater than increases in other major orthopedic procedures. The most rapid increases in fusion rates were among adults aged 60 and above. These increases were not associated with reports of clarified indications or improved efficacy, suggesting a need for better data on the efficacy of various fusion techniques for various indications.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Expenditures and health status among adults with back and neck problems
Martin, B. I. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.299.6.656 · Cited by 1,531
Self-citationThe Rising Prevalence of Chronic Low Back Pain
Freburger, J. K., Holmes, G. M., Agans, R. P., Jackman, A. M., Darter, J. D., Wallace, A. S., Castel, L. D., Kalsbeek, W. D., & Carey, T. S. (2009) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2008.543 · Cited by 1,507
Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis
Weinstein, J. N., Tosteson, T. D., Lurie, J. D., Tosteson, A. N. A., Blood, E., Hanscom, B., Herkowitz, H., Cammisa, F., Albert, T., Boden, S. D., et al. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0707136 · Cited by 1,229
Spinal Fusion in the United States: Analysis of Trends From 1998 to 2008
Rajaee, S. S., Bae, H. W., Kanim, L. E. A., & Delamarter, R. B. (2012) · Spine · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e31820cccfb · Cited by 1,041
Martin, B. I., Mirza, S. K., Spina, N., Spiker, W. R., Lawrence, B., & Brodke, D. S. (2019) · Spine · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000002822 · Cited by 917
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Deyo, R. A., Gray, D. T., Kreuter, W., Mirza, S., & Martin, B. I.
- Venue
- Spine
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1441-1445
- ISSN
- 0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2079826869
- Cited by
- 1,000
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: United States Trends in Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Conditions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.brs.0000166503.37969.8a
- The paper
- Deyo, R. A., Gray, D. T., Kreuter, W., Mirza, S., & Martin, B. I. (2005). United States Trends in Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Conditions. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000166503.37969.8a
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.