Impact of Hospital Volume Status on Postoperative Outcomes and Cost following Deep Brain Stimulation for Movement Disorders

Background and Objectives Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has emerged as a transformative neurosurgical intervention for refractory movement disorders, including Parkinson's disease (PD), essential tremor (ET), and dystonia. While clinical efficacy is well-established, significant variability exists in procedural outcomes across hospitals. This nationwide study investigated the impact of hospital procedural volume on short-term postoperative outcomes and cost following DBS across 234 US hospitals from 2015-2020. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of 6,964 DBS procedures (2015-2020) using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Hospitals were categorized by six-year DBS volume: high-volume centers (HVCs, ≥450), medium-volume (50-449), and low-volume (<50). Multivariable regression assessed outcomes including prolonged length of stay (pLOS >75th percentile), non-routine discharge (NRD), high charge (>90th percentile), and complications, controlling for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics. Results HVCs showed superior outcomes compared with low-volume centers, with lower rates of pLOS (4.1% vs 8.9%, p<0.001), high charges (6.7% vs 15.3%, p<0.001), and NRD (11.0% vs 16.5%, p<0.001). PD patients had 45% greater odds of pLOS (OR=1.45, 95% CI 1.12-1.88, p=0.004) but 36% lower odds of NRD (OR=0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.83, p=0.001) compared with ET patients. Dystonia patients had 2.4 times higher odds of pLOS (OR=2.39, 95% CI 1.76-3.25, p<0.001) and 65% higher odds of incurring high charges (OR=1.65, 95% CI 1.22-2.23, p=0.001). In multivariate models, HVCs were significantly associated with reduced risk of NRD, high charge, and pLOS. Conclusion Despite a 6% decline in DBS volume due to fewer PD cases, inflation-adjusted charges rose >30% across centers. The volume-outcome relationship persists, with HVCs showing better efficiency but challenges in discharge disposition, highlighting the need for standardized care pathways for dystonia and closer evaluation of socioeconomic barriers to DBS access and outcomes.