Search

Background Traditional measures of evaluating scholarly output do not capture the impact social media can provide in disseminating and promoting research. We sought to better understand the level of online attention that high-quality hand research received. Methods Scientific manuscripts published from 2017 in Journal of Hand Surgery (American Volume) ( JHS-A), Journal of Hand Surgery ( European Volume) ( JHS-E), and HAND were recorded. Manuscript characteristics were determined, including the number of citations. Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), a measure of a manuscript’s online attention and impact, was determined, as well as Twitter mentions, Facebook mentions, and news outlet mentions. Spearman rho (ρ) correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the relationship between the number of citations and AAS. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to determine which manuscript factors were associated with AAS. Results A total of 323 manuscripts were identified. There was a weak positive correlation between the number of citations and AAS; however, this relationship did not exist for each individual journal. Publication in HAND and JHS-E were associated with lower average manuscript AAS when using JHS-A as the reference group. Two additional factors were also associated with increased manuscript AAS: (1) being a clinical study focused on a specific upper extremity anatomical location; and (2) increasing number of institutions on a study. Conclusions Publication in HAND and JHS-E were associated with lower manuscript AAS when using JHS-A as the reference group, suggesting that HAND and JHS-E have room for improvement in using social media to share their high-quality hand surgery scientific articles.

Health care delivery is broken. The cost of care continues to skyrocket and the outcomes most important to patients are often a mystery. Further, care is often delivered via a fee-for-service model where surgeons are rewarded for the quantity, not the quality, of services provided. Such a health care delivery system is not sustainable and does not incentivize stakeholders to focus on the most important element of the health care delivery "puzzle": the patient. Fortunately, we are in the midst of transforming our health care delivery system, with a focus on optimizing the value of care delivery (ie, health outcomes achieved per dollar spent across a full care cycle). In hand surgery, progress has been made as part of this health system evolution. However, there remains much to accomplish. In this article, the authors review the 6 components of a strategic agenda for moving to a high-value health care delivery system for hand surgery, focusing on where we are today and where we need to go from here.

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can help predict clinical outcomes and improve shared clinical decision-making discussions. There remains a paucity of research assessing how the use of PROMs may drive improved patient experience and patient activation. Methods: New foot and ankle patients completed PROMIS physical function (PF), pain interference (PI), and depression assessments. Patients were then randomized to viewing and discussing their PROMIS scores with their surgeon or not. Following the clinic visit, patients completed a series of Clinician & Group Survey–Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) questions and the Patient Activation Measure (PAM). Responses to the CG-CAHPS questions and PAM were compared between the 2 groups and after clustering on surgeon. Potential interaction effects by social deprivation were also explored. Results: After enrolling patients but removing those lost to follow-up or with missing data, 97 and 116 patients remained in the intervention control cohorts, respectively. No difference was found in CG-CAHPS responses nor PAM scores between the 2 groups ( P > .05). All surgeons were highly rated by all patients. When clustered by surgeon, intervention subjects were less likely to indicate “top box” scores for the understanding domain of the CG-CAHPS question (OR 0.51, P Conclusion: Highly rated foot and ankle surgeons who show and discuss PROM results may not improve patient experience or activation and may, in fact, decrease understanding or patient activation in select populations. Future work is needed to determine when PROM discussions are most beneficial and how best to present PROMs data, as we suspect that how the information was presented—and not the use of PROMs—resulted in our findings. Health literacy tools and/or communication training may better engage different patient groups regarding PROMs. Level of Evidence: Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Background: There is a paucity of research examining the impact of social deprivation on the level of symptom severity at presentation, including in common hand conditions like carpal tunnel syndrome. We aimed to determine whether patient deprivation is associated with worse Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression scores. Methods: Patients presenting to an academic hand clinic from December 2016 to December 2018 for a new patient visit for carpal tunnel syndrome completed PROMIS UE, PF, PI, and Depression Computer Adaptive Tests. Bivariate analyses were done to compare patient variables between the least and most deprived thirds, as measured by Area Deprivation Index (ADI), at the state (New York) and national levels. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine whether there was an association between social deprivation and PROMIS UE, PF, PI, and Depression scores. Results: All PROMIS domain scores were significantly worse in the most deprived cohort at the national level ( P < .05) but not at the state level ( P > .05). In multivariable regression at the national level, ADI values were associated with PROMIS UE (β = −0.06, P < .01) and PROMIS PI (β = .05, P < .01) but not PROMIS PF or PROMIS Depression. In multivariable regression at the state level, ADI values were associated with PROMIS UE (β = −0.79, P = .03) and PROMIS PI (β = 0.58, P < .05) but not PROMIS PF or PROMIS Depression. Conclusions: Higher levels of social deprivation are associated with worse PROMIS UE and PROMIS PI scores on both the state and national levels when initially seeking care for carpal tunnel syndrome.

Cross-sectional prospective study.To evaluate the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression domains in comparison to the Spine Oncology Study Group-Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSG-OQ) in patients with metastatic spine disease.While there remains a significant movement toward incorporating patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into clinical care, there are few validated PROMs for patients with metastatic spine disease. The SOSG-OQ was designed and validated for metastatic spine tumor patients. However, the use of general symptom-based PROMs, such as PROMIS domains, may reduce both patient and physician burden and improve interdisciplinary care if shown to be concurrently valid.Metastatic spine tumor patients from January 2017 to July 2021 at a single academic medical center were asked to complete PROMIS PF, PI, and Depression domains and the SOSG-OQ. Spearman correlation (p) coefficients were calculated.A total of 103 unique visits, representing 79 patients met our inclusion criteria. A majority were men (59; 57%) and Caucasian (93; 90%), and the average age was 64-years-old (range: 34-87). There were 13 different types of histologies reported, with multiple myeloma, breast cancer, and prostate cancer representing 28 (27%), 26 (25%), and 13 (13%), respectively. Additional cancers included renal cell carcinoma, lung cancer, colon cancer, thyroid cancer, large B-cell lymphoma, nonHodgkin lymphoma, esophageal cancer, plasmacytoma, metastatic paraganglioma, and metastatic spindle cell sarcoma. SOSG-OQ was strongly correlated with PROMIS PI (ρ = 0.78) and PROMIS PF (ρ = 0.71), and moderately correlated with PROMIS Depression (ρ = 0.58).PROMIS PF, PI, and Depression appear to capture similar clinical insight as the SOSG-OQ. Spine surgeons can consider using these PROMIS domains in lieu of the SOSG-OQ in metastatic spine tumor patients.Level of Evidence: NA.

Background: Ganglion cysts are common soft tissue masses of the hand and wrist. It is unclear why some patients pursue surgical excision and others do not. The objective of this study is to compare Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Systems (PROMIS) scores between patients with ganglion cysts undergoing surgical versus non-surgical treatment. Methods: Patients presenting to a tertiary, academic hand clinic diagnosed with a wrist ganglion cyst, based on clinical exam, were identified. PROMIS Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression scores at the time of diagnosis were reviewed. Data were then stratified according to surgical or non-surgical intervention, with subgroup analysis of dorsal versus volar ganglions and patients that chose to trial cyst aspiration. All results were compared utilizing the appropriate statistical methods. Results: Of 757 ganglion cyst patients, 264 underwent surgical excision and 493 were treated non-surgically. No difference was noted in PROMIS PF or Depression scores. However, the surgical cohort reported significantly increased preoperative PI scores (Table 2). A higher percentage of patients treated non-surgically received an aspiration attempt compared to those who ultimately received surgery (Table 3). Finally, patients with volar ganglion cysts had significantly increased PI and depression scores, as well as lower PF scores (Table 4). Conclusions: Presenting PROMIS PI may indicate an increased tendency to pursue surgical treatments and aid in the identification of ganglion cyst patients who are more likely to pursue surgical excision. Further research should focus on correlating absolute differences in PROMIS values with clinical significance.

BACKGROUND: The goal of bundled payments-lump monetary sums designed to cover the full set of services needed to provide care for a condition or medical event-is to provide a reimbursement structure that incentivizes improved value for patients. There is concern that such a payment mechanism may lead to patient screening and denying or providing orthopaedic care to patients based on the number and severity of comorbid conditions present associated with complications after surgery. Currently, however, there is no clear consensus about whether such an association exists. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this systematic review, we asked: (1) Is the implementation of a bundled payment model associated with a change in the sociodemographic characteristics of patients undergoing an orthopaedic procedure? (2) Is the implementation of a bundled payment model associated with a change in the comorbidities and/or case-complexity characteristics of patients undergoing an orthopaedic procedure? (3) Is the implementation of a bundled payment model associated with a change in the recent use of healthcare resources characteristics of patients undergoing an orthopaedic procedure? METHODS: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO before data collection (CRD42020189416). Our systematic review included scientific manuscripts published in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Econlit, Policyfile, and Google Scholar through March 2020. Of the 30 studies undergoing full-text review, 20 were excluded because they did not evaluate the outcome of interest (patient selection) (n = 8); were editorial, commentary, or review articles (n = 5); did not evaluate the appropriate intervention (introduction of a bundled payment program) (n = 4); or assessed the wrong patient population (not orthopaedic surgery patients) (n = 3). This led to 10 studies included in this systematic review. For each study, patient factors analyzed in the included studies were grouped into the following three categories: sociodemographics, comorbidities and/or case complexity, or recent use of healthcare resources characteristics. Next, each patient factor falling into one of these three categories was examined to evaluate for changes from before to after implementation of a bundled payment initiative. In most cases, studies utilized a difference-in-difference (DID) statistical technique to assess for changes. Determination of whether the bundled payment initiative required mandatory participation or not was also noted. Scientific quality using the Adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale had a median (range) score of 8 (7 to 8; highest possible score: 9), and the quality of the total body of evidence for each patient characteristic group was found to be low using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. We could not assess the likelihood of publication using funnel plots because of the variation of patient factors analyzed in each study and the heterogeneity of data precluded a meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of the nine included studies that reported on the sociodemographic characteristics of patients selected for care, seven showed no change with the implementation of bundled payments, and two demonstrated a difference. Most notably, the studies identified a decrease in the percentage of patients undergoing an orthopaedic operative intervention who were dual-eligible (range DID estimate -0.4% [95% CI -0.75% to -0.1%]; p < 0.05 to DID estimate -1.0% [95% CI -1.7% to -0.2%]; p = 0.01), which means they qualified for both Medicare and Medicaid insurance coverage. Of the 10 included studies that reported on comorbidities and case-complexity characteristics, six reported no change in such characteristics with the implementation of bundled payments, and four studies noted differences. Most notably, one study showed a decrease in the number of treated patients with disabilities (DID estimate -0.6% [95% CI -0.97% to -0.18%]; p < 0.05) compared with before bundled payment implementation, while another demonstrated a lower number of Elixhauser comorbidities for those treated as part of a bundled payment program (before: score of 0-1 in 63.6%, 2-3 in 27.9%, > 3 in 8.5% versus after: score of 0-1 in 50.1%, 2-3 in 38.7%, > 3 in 11.2%; p = 0.033). Of the three included studies that reported on the recent use of healthcare resources of patients, one study found no difference in the use of healthcare resources with the implementation of bundled payments, and two studies did find differences. Both studies found a decrease in patients undergoing operative management who recently received care at a skilled nursing facility (range DID estimate -0.50% [95% CI -1.0% to 0.0%]; p = 0.04 to DID estimate: -0.53% [95% CI -0.96% to -0.10%]; p = 0.01), while one of the studies also found a decrease in patients undergoing operative management who recently received care at an acute care hospital (DID estimate -0.8% [95% CI -1.6% to -0.1%]; p = 0.03) or as part of home healthcare (DID estimate -1.3% [95% CI -2.0% to -0.6%]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In six of 10 studies in which differences in patient characteristics were detected among those undergoing operative orthopaedic intervention once a bundled payment program was initiated, the effect was found to be minimal (approximately 1% or less). However, our findings still suggest some level of adverse patient selection, potentially worsening health inequities when considered on a large scale. It is also possible that our findings reflect better care, whereby the financial incentives lead to fewer patients with a high risk of complications undergoing surgical intervention and vice versa for patients with a low risk of complications postoperatively. However, this is a fine line, and it may also be that patients with a high risk of complications postoperatively are not being offered surgery enough, while patients at low risk of complications postoperatively are being offered surgery too frequently. Evaluation of the longer-term effect of these preliminary bundled payment programs on patient selection is warranted to determine whether adverse patient selection changes over time as health systems and orthopaedic surgeons become accustomed to such reimbursement models.

Injury to the flexor pronator mass is a common condition that is especially prevalent in overhead throwing athletes. The increasing incidence of these injuries has promoted considerable efforts in research to better understand the pathology, risk factors, and potential mechanisms to prevent injury in these athletes. While there are numerous intrinsic and extrinsic factors associated with injury, a common theme involves chronic overuse and microtrauma with inadequate resting intervals between performances. The purpose of this review is to discuss medial elbow injuries in young athletes with a particular focus on the flexor pronator mass.

MINI Telemedicine in spine care is evolving; patient valuation of virtual care is critical to its utility and longevity. Our mixed methods investigation revealed that patients prefer in person care, particularly for first time visits. However, patients also envision the effective integration of telemedicine and in person care. STUDY DESIGN Survey-based study. OBJECTIVE We performed a mixed methods study involving patients using telemedicine for spine care. We sought to understand factors influencing the utilization and evaluation of this modality. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Telemedicine has been integrated into routine spine care; its long-term viability will depend not only on optimizing its safety, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness, but also on understanding patient valuation of its benefits and limitations. METHODS We used a clinical registry to identify spine patients seen virtually by providers at our tertiary academic medical center between March and September of 2020. We distributed an online survey that queried patients' experiences with telemedicine. We performed statistical analyses of Likert-scale questions and a thematic analysis of free-form responses. Sociodemographic data were abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS Overall, we evaluated 139 patient surveys. High levels of patient-rated care and patient-rated experience were observed for both in-person and telemedicine visits; however, in-person visits were rated significantly higher in both respects (9.3/10 vs. 8.7/10 for patient-rated care, p

The purpose of the current study was to (1) determine the percentage of new orthopedic patients reporting their symptoms to be acceptable at presentation, as measured by the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) question, and (2) evaluate whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) or Upper Extremity, Pain Interference (PI), and Depression (D), or sociodemographic factors are associated with acceptable symptoms at presentation.Between February 7, 2020, and March 16, 2020, new orthopedic patients who completed PROMs were identified. Patient records were reviewed for those who also completed the PASS question, a yes/no question about whether a patient's current symptom state is satisfactory. Bivariate analysis was conducted to compare patient characteristics, such as area deprivation index (ADI), between those reporting acceptable symptoms and those who did not. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine factors associated with acceptable symptoms at presentation.A total of 570 patients were included, with one-fourth (n = 143 [25%]) reporting acceptable symptoms at presentation. In multivariable regression analysis, only pain, as measured by the PROMIS PI, was associated with acceptable symptoms at presentation (non-upper extremity patient regression: PROMIS PI: odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.90, P.01; upper extremity patient regression: PROMIS PI: OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98, P.01). In both multivariable regression analyses, insurance type (private, Medicare, Medicaid, other), visit subspecialty (sports, hand, joints, foot and ankle, spine, other), PROMIS PF, PROMIS D, and national ADI were not associated with acceptable symptoms at presentation (all P.05).One-fourth of new orthopedic patients reported their symptoms to be acceptable at presentation. Of those who considered their symptom state unsatisfactory, pain-not functional status, mental health, or sociodemographic factors-was the primary determinant.Level III, diagnostic.

Background: Return to sport is essential information when an athlete contemplates surgical intervention. Young athletes, Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if athletes are able to return to the same level of vigorous and moderate sports after fixed-bearing intramedullary nonrobotic UKA and the specific sports activities that these athletes continued to participate in at a minimum of 5 years. We hypothesized that UKA in the appropriately selected middle-aged/older athlete would yield high return to sport after UKA with high patient satisfaction. We also hypothesized that UKA would allow athletes to return to their sports of choice. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We identified 245 patients who underwent a UKA by a single surgeon between 2003 and 2017. Athletes were included if they participated in vigorous or moderate sports, as defined by the American College of Sports Medicine, and had minimum 5-year follow-up. The primary outcome was return to vigorous or moderate sports after UKA. Secondary outcomes included the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Activities of Daily Living score, KOOS Sport and Recreation score, Lysholm score, Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) analysis, and radiographic analysis. Results: An overall 169 athletes met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated for return to sports. A total of 98% (165/169) returned to vigorous or moderate sports participation. The mean ± SD time to return to sport was 5.2 ± 2.3 months in the 39- to 50-year-old cohort, 5.8 ± 3.2 months in athletes aged 51 to 64 years, and 5.2 ± 3.0 months in athletes aged ≥65 years. A total of 143 athletes had minimum 5-year clinical and radiographic follow-up (mean, 10 years; range, 5-19 years). Maintenance of vigorous and moderate sport was seen in 99% (142/143) of athletes at a mean 10 years. In athletes who participated in vigorous sports, the mean Lysholm score was 85 ± 17, and 83% reached the PASS for KOOS Sport and Recreation. Radiographic analysis revealed no evidence of implant loosening (ie, subsidence, radiolucency) or osteolysis, and limb alignment and posterior slope of the implant were within normal limits. Conclusion: Athletes returned to sport at a mean 5 months after UKA implantation, with 98% (165/169) participating in vigorous or moderate sports. UKA is recommended as an alternative procedure in middle-aged and older athletes with single-compartment osteoarthritis who are contemplating a return to vigorous or moderate sport.

Study design Retrospective, Observational Study. Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the return on investment (ROI) of the Cervical Spine Research Society (CSRS), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) and North America Spine Society (NASS) grants as quantified by the number of publications generated and federal grants obtained (National Institute of Health [NIH], Department of Defense [DOD]). Summary of background data The CSR, SRS and NASS, have awarded numerous research grants over the past three decades. Methods Through publicly available data we identified grants awarded by the Spine Societies. We collected the type of grant awarded, the Principal Investigator information, dollar amount of the grant, number of publications in PubMed from each grant, number of citations, and the publication journal. The NIH and DOD website were queried to determine which grantees subsequently received either NIH or DoD funding. Results From 1989 to 2016: 81 (CSRS), 126 (SRS), and 93 (NASS) grants were awarded. From these grants 206 publications acknowledged receiving financial support from the spine societies. The SRS funded 100 papers, NASS 62 papers and CSRS 44 papers. A total of 32 NIH grants and 4 DOD grants were subsequently awarded. The conversion rate to NIH grants was 15% (n = 12 CSRS), 7.9% (n = 10 SRS), and 11% (n = 10 NASS). The conversion rate to DOD grants was 3.7% (n = 3 CSRS), 0.8% (n = 1 SRS), and 0% (n = 0 NASS). ROI of spine society grant dollars per future NIH and DoD grants were the lowest for CSRS (Dollars Per NIH Grant: $207,434; Dollars Per DoD Grant: $829,734). Male investigators received 85% of CSRS grants, 75% of SRS grants and 83% of NASS grants. Conclusion CSRS grants appear to have the highest ROI of all spine society grants when evaluating subsequent NIH and DOD funding. However, the overall conversion rate to NIH and DOD grants remains low.Level of Evidence: 3.

Purpose We sought to determine whether subjective clinical improvement immediately after carpal tunnel release (CTR) was captured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression. Methods Between September 2018 and January 2020, patients presenting to a single academic medical center hand clinic were asked to complete PROMIS UE, PF, PI, and Depression computer adaptive tests. In addition, patients who had CTR were asked to answer the following at their first postoperative clinic visit: “Since my last clinic visit, my condition is: (1) much better; (2) mildly better; (3) no change; (4) mildly worse; (5) much worse.” For each patient, the last clinic visit was the final preoperative visit. The PROMIS domain scores were compared before and after surgery using paired t tests. The percentage of patients subjectively reporting better symptoms was calculated. Results A total of 156 patients fit our inclusion criteria. The average number of days between the final preoperative visit and CTR was 7 (range, 0–30), and the average number of days between CTR and the first postoperative visit was 9 (range, 3–21). A total of 116 patients (74%) reported their carpal tunnel syndrome was better at their first postoperative visit. However, PROMIS UE, PF, and PI scores were significantly worse at the first postoperative visit, although not at clinically appreciable levels. There was no statistical or clinical difference in PROMIS Depression scores from pre- to postoperative time points. Conclusions Nearly 75% of patients subjectively report their carpal tunnel syndrome is better at their first follow-up visit within 3 weeks of CTR; however, PROMIS does not capture this improvement. Clinical relevance Hand surgeons evaluating patients shortly following CTR should be aware of the potential limitation of PROMIS to accurately capture immediate postoperative clinical outcomes. Disease-specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures, such as the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire , may be preferred during this immediate postoperative timeframe.

Context In response to growing concerns over rising costs and major variation in quality, improving value for patients has been proposed as a fundamentally new strategy for how healthcare should be delivered, measured, and remunerated. Objective To systematically review the literature regarding the implementation and impact of value-based healthcare in urology. Evidence acquisition A systematic review was performed to identify studies that described the implementation of one or more elements of value-based healthcare in urologic settings and in which the associated change in healthcare value had been measured. Twenty-two publications were selected for inclusion. Evidence synthesis Reorganization of urologic care around medical conditions was associated with increased use of guidelines-compliant care for men with prostate cancer, and improved outcomes for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Measuring outcomes for every patient was associated with improved prostate cancer outcomes, while the measurement of costs using time-driven activity-based costing was associated with reduced resource utilization in a pediatric multidisciplinary clinic. Centralization of urologic cancer care in the UK, Denmark, and Canada was associated with overall improved outcomes, although systems integration in the USA yielded mixed results among urologic cancer patients. No studies have yet examined bundled payments for episodes of care, expanding the geographic reach for centers of excellence, or building enabling information technology platforms. Conclusions Few studies have critically assessed the actual or simulated implementation of value-based healthcare in urology, but the available literature suggests promising early results. In order to effectively redesign care, there is a need for further research to both evaluate the potential results of proposed value-based healthcare interventions and measure their effects where already implemented. Patient summary While few studies have evaluated the implementation of value-based healthcare in urology, the available literature suggests promising early results.

Impact factor, citation rate, and other traditional measures of scholarly impact do not account for the role that social media has in the dissemination of research. The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) quantifies the active online presence of individual articles on various platforms (eg, Twitter, Facebook).We sought to better understand the factors associated with greater online attention and AAS in seven spine journals.Cross-sectional study.No patients were included in this study. We analyzed 380 articles in seven major spine journals.Extracted manuscript characteristics included AAS; number of Twitter, Facebook, and news outlet mentions; number of citations, references, academic institutions, and authors; and sample size, geographic region, subject of study, and level of evidence.All original scientific manuscripts published in the official January, February, and March 2017 issues of Spine, The Spine Journal, Spine Deformity, Journal of Neurosurgery-Spine, Clinical Spine Surgery, Global Spine Journal, and European Spine Journal were identified. The correlation of AAS and number of citations was determined by Spearman's Rho (ρ) correlation coefficient. Manuscript factors associated with AAS were determined by a multivariable linear regression analysis.A total of 380 manuscripts were included in the analysis. The average AAS across all seven journals was 4.9 (SD: 19.4; Range: 0-356), with the highest average AAS reported for The Spine Journal at 8.0 (SD: 13; Range: 0-60). There was a weak, positive correlation between AAS and number of citations (ρ = .32; p.05); this relationship was individually present for four out of the seven included journals. In addition, number of references was associated with higher average manuscript AAS (β: 0.16 [95% CI: 0.002-0.32]; p.05). No manuscript characteristics were associated with lower AAS.Our analysis of seven spine journals revealed a weak, positive correlation between AAS and number of citations. Number of references was associated with higher AAS. We believe these findings may be useful to authors seeking ways to maximize the impact of their research.

Background There is a paucity of literature describing the recovery trajectory after surgery for upper extremity ischemia. Using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF), Upper Extremity (UE), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression domains, we aimed to describe the postoperative recovery of such patients. Methods We queried our PROMIS database for patients undergoing surgery for vasospastic or occlusive disease over a 4.5-year period. Inclusion criteria were preoperative, early (average 3 weeks) and late (average 6 months) postoperative PROMIS PF and/or UE, PI, and Depression scores. The change in PROMIS scores was calculated for each time point. Changes in PROMIS scores were compared with minimal clinically important difference estimates. Results We identified 13 patients undergoing 13 surgical interventions that met inclusion criteria. More than one-half of our patients were men (n = 7 [54%]), and more than one-half of the surgeries (n = 7 [54%]) were for isolated occlusive diagnoses, with the remainder for vasospastic disease. At short-term postoperative follow-up, the change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores was −6.34 (SD: 9.13), −6.81 (SD: 9.61), 3.16 (SD: 5.78), and −3.05 (SD: 8.37), respectively. At mid-term postoperative follow-up, the change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores was 4.45 (SD: 10.33), 8.04 (SD: 13.84), −7.03 (SD: 7.06), and −12.27 (SD: 10.85), respectively. Conclusions Our findings suggest patients undergoing surgical treatment for upper extremity ischemia experience a worsening of functional symptoms initially, as expected, followed by notable improvement.

Background The early recovery trajectory of patients undergoing ulnar shortening for ulnar impaction syndrome using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is unknown. Questions/Purposes Using PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression, we asked (1) do patients undergoing operative management for ulnar impaction syndrome present at their preoperative visit with notable impairment?; (2) At immediate follow-up, do patients present with a clinically appreciable change in symptom severity?; and (3) At short-term follow-up, do patients present with a clinically appreciable change in symptom severity? Materials and Methods We identified patients from 01/2017 to 12/2019 at our institution undergoing ulnar shortening for ulnar impaction syndrome who completed all PROMIS domains at a preoperative visit and at least one postoperative time point (i.e., less than 4 weeks and/or greater than 12 weeks). Distribution- and anchor-based minimal clinically important difference estimates were used to evaluate clinically appreciable changes in symptoms over time. Results A total of 38 patients met our inclusion criteria. The average change in PROMIS UE, PF, PI, and Depression scores from preoperative to immediate postoperative follow-up were –3.8, –4.3, 3.2, and 0.5, respectively. However, by short-term follow-up, the average change in PROMIS UE, PF, PI, and Depression scores were 3.7, 3.2, –4.7, and –3.9, respectively. Conclusions Patients have worsening function at the immediate postoperative follow-up. By short-term postoperative follow-up, functional status and PI levels improve. Our findings can help hand surgeons provide evidence-based guidance on expected initial recovery following operative management for ulnar impaction syndrome. Level of Evidence This is a level II, prognostic study.

Study Design: Retrospective observational study. Objective: To establish occipital condyle dimensions (length, width, height), as well as the medialization angle necessary for safe occipital condyle screw placement in occipitocervical fixation. Methods: Between 1/2014-6/2014, patients who presented to a single level 1 academic trauma center emergency room and received computed tomography (CT) imaging of the cervical spine as part of routine clinical care were identified. After excluding patients with cervical fractures, neoplastic disease, or infection, 500 condyles representing 250 patients were analyzed. Condyle length, height, and width (all reported in millimeters [mm]) were evaluated on the sagittal, coronal, and axial series, respectively. Medialization angle (reported in degrees) was evaluated on the axial series of CT imaging. Measurements were compared by sex and age. Results: The average condyle length, width, and height were 18.6 millimeters (mm) (range, 14.5-23.0 mm), 10.5 mm (range, 7.4-13.8 mm), and 11.3 mm (7.1-15.3 mm), respectively. Additionally, the average occipital condyle medialization angle was 23° (range, 14-32°). Occipital condyles of men were significantly longer, wider, and taller (all comparisons, p < 0.05). The medialization angle was significantly steeper for women than men (p < 0.05). No measurement differences were appreciated by age. Conclusion: Our findings are similar to previous studies in the field; however, length appears slightly shorter. Further, measurement differences were appreciated by sex but not age. Thus, our measurement findings emphasize the importance of preoperative planning utilizing individual patient anatomy to ensure safe placement of occipital condyle screws for optimal outcomes.

Purpose There is a paucity of literature examining the trajectory of meaningful clinical improvement after distal radius fracture (DRF) fixation. We sought to answer the following questions: (1) When do patients meet the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in the Quick–Disabilities in Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH) score change after DRF fixation? (2) What gains in terms of number of MCIDs achieved (as measured by QuickDASH) do patients make as they recover from DRF fixation? (3) What patient and injury factors are characteristic of patients who meet or do not meet the average recovery trajectory? Methods We performed a retrospective review of an institutional database of DRF patients treated with operative fixation. The change in QuickDASH scores from before surgery to approximate follow-up intervals of 0 to 2 months, 3 to 6 months, and a minimum of 9 of 12 months was assessed, in which a delta of 14 reflected the MCID. The change in QuickDASH score from before surgery to each follow-up interval was divided by 14 to determine the number of MCIDs, representing appreciable clinical improvement. Patient characteristics were compared between those who did and did not reach average levels of clinical improvement. Results The study included 173 patients. Mean QuickDASH score before surgery was 74 (SD, 19; range, 0–100). After surgery, this improved to 50 (SD, 24; range, 0–100) by 0 to 2 months, 22 (SD, 22; range, 0–98) by 3 to 6 months, and 9.8 (SD, 15; range, 0–75) by a minimum of 9 to 12 months. Overall, 96% of patients reached the MCID by 1 year. Mean cumulative number of MCIDs achieved (ie, number of 14-point decreases in QuickDASH score) at each interval was 1.57, 3.64, and 4.43, respectively. Assuming 4.43 represents maximum average improvement at 1 year, patients achieved 35% (1.57 of 4.43) of recovery from 0 to 2 months after surgery and 82% (3.64 of 4.43) of recovery by 3 to 6 months after surgery. There appeared to be no difference in terms of age, sex, or body mass index with respect to these findings. Conclusions Overall, 96% of patients undergoing DRF fixation will achieve one QuickDASH MCID by 1 year after surgery. Patients achieved over 80% of total expected functional improvement by 3 to 6 months after surgery, which appeared to be irrespective of age, sex, or body mass index. Type of study/level of evidence Therapeutic IV.

Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a powerful set of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that are gaining popularity throughout orthopaedic surgery. The use of both adult and pediatric PROMIS questionnaires in orthopaedic sports medicine limits the value of the PROMIS in routine sports medicine clinical care, research, and quality improvement. Because orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons see patients across a wide age range, simplifying the collection of PROMIS computer adaptive tests (CATs) to a single set of questionnaires, regardless of age, is of notable value. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to determine the strength of the correlation between the pediatric and adult PROMIS questionnaires. We hypothesized that there would be a high correlation between the adult and pediatric versions for each PROMIS domain, thereby justifying the use of only the adult version for most sports medicine providers, regardless of patient age. Study Design: Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Between December 2018 and December 2019, all pediatric sports medicine patients presenting to a single, academic, orthopaedic sports medicine clinic were asked to participate in the present study with their parents’ consent. Patients were asked to complete a set of adult PROMIS domains (Physical Function and/or Upper Extremity, Pain Interference, and Depression) as well as a set of pediatric PROMIS domains (Mobility and/or Upper Extremity, Pain Interference, and Depressive Symptoms). Concurrent validity was assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients ( r). Ceiling and floor effects were determined. Results: A total of 188 patients met our inclusion criteria. The correlation between the adult and pediatric PROMIS Upper Extremity, Physical Function and Mobility, Pain Interference, and Depression and Depressive Symptoms forms were high-moderate ( r = 0.68; P < .01), high-moderate ( r = 0.69; P < .01), high ( r = 0.78; P < .01), and high ( r = 0.85; P < .01), respectively. Both adult and pediatric depression-related PROMIS domains demonstrated notable floor effects (adult: 38%; pediatric: 24%). The pediatric PROMIS Upper Extremity domain demonstrated a ceiling effect (20%). Conclusion: Adult PROMIS CATs may be used in an orthopaedic sports medicine clinic for both adult and pediatric patients. Our findings will help decrease the amount of resources needed for the implementation and use of PROMs for patient care, research, and quality improvement in orthopaedic sports medicine clinics.

BACKGROUND: Given the high volume of user traffic to YouTube, it is important that the medical information disseminated on this platform is of high quality. Unfortunately, previous studies have demonstrated this to not be the case. We aimed to evaluate the quality and educational content of YouTube videos concerning spine tumors using 2 previously validated assessment tools. METHODS: The first 50 videos returned by the keyword search “spine tumor” were included in the study. The JAMA benchmark criteria (range: 0–4) were used to assess video reliability, whereas the Global Quality Score (GQS) (range: 0–5) was used to determine educational quality and content. RESULTS: Videos were primarily authored by academic medical groups (80%), while content was primarily related to disease-specific information (44%) or the patient experience (24%). Surgical treatment options and nonsurgical management were discussed in 66% and 50% of all videos, respectively. Sixty percent of videos reported benefits of treatment, while 44% reported potential risks or complications. The average JAMA score and GQS were 3.1 ± 0.27 (range: 3–4) and 2.6 ± 1.3 (range: 1–5), respectively. Multivariate linear regression analyses revealed that video duration (β = 0.00697, P = 0.04) and number of views (β = 0.000018, P = 0.001) were positively associated with JAMA score. Video duration and number of dislikes were associated with higher GQS (β = 0.041, P = 0.025) and lower GQS (β = −0.189, P = 0.04), respectively. Lastly, number of days since upload was associated with lower Video Power Index (β = −0.003, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The reliability, quality, and educational content of YouTube videos were poor to suboptimal. Physicians should be wary of the education provided by YouTube on spine tumors and guide patients in seeking out additional sources of information. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: YouTube videos are commonly viewed by patients seeking health information on spine tumors. While certain videos may provide useful information, the absence of an editorial process allows videos with poor reliability and low quality to be uploaded. We believe these findings may be useful to physicians seeking ways to better guide their patients with the most appropriate educational tools throughout their disease management.

Introduction The numeric score for the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 is one of the only universal, objective, scaled criteria for comparing the many students who apply to orthopaedic surgery residency. However, on February 12, 2020, it was announced that Step 1 would be transitioning to pass/fail scoring. The purpose of this study was to (1) determine the most important factors used for interview and resident selection after this change and (2) to assess how these factors have changed compared with a previous report on resident selection. Methods A survey was distributed to the program directors (PDs) of all 179 orthopaedic surgery programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Questions focused on current resident selection practices and the impact of the Step 1 score transition on expected future practices. Results A total of 78 PDs (44%) responded to the survey. Over half of PDs (59%) responded that United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 clinical knowledge (CK) score is the factor that will increase most in importance after Step 1 transitions to pass/fail, and 90% will encourage applicants to include their Step 2 CK score on their applications. The factors rated most important in resident selection from zero to 10 were subinternship performance (9.05), various aspects of interview performance (7.49 to 9.01), rank in medical school (7.95), letters of recommendation (7.90), and Step 2 CK score (7.27). Compared with a 2002 report, performance on manual skills testing, subinternship performance, published research, letters of recommendations, and telephone call on applicants' behalf showed notable increases in importance. Discussion As Step 2 CK is expected to become more important in the residency application process, current applicant stress on Step 1 scores may simply move to Step 2 CK scores. Performance on subinternships will remain a critical aspect of residency application, as it was viewed as the most important resident selection factor and has grown in importance compared with a previous report.

On December 31, 2019, Chinese health officials reported to the World Health Organization (WHO) Country Office (World Health Organization 2020) growing concern regarding an increasing number of case...

BACKGROUND: Depression symptoms are prevalent in the general population, and as many as one in eight patients seeing a hand surgeon may have undiagnosed major depression. It is not clear to what degree lower mood is the consequence or cause of greater symptoms and limitations. If depressive symptoms are a consequence of functional limitations, they might be expected to improve when pathophysiology and impairment are ameliorated. Because surgical treatment is often disease-modifying or salvage, surgery might have a greater impact than nonoperative treatment, which is more often palliative (symptom relieving) than disease-modifying. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) For which hand or wrist conditions are depression symptoms lower after operative compared with nonoperative treatment? (2) Among the subset of patients with the highest depression scores, are depression symptoms lower after operative treatment compared with nonoperative treatment? (3) Among the subset of patients who had nonoperative treatment, are depression symptoms lower after a corticosteroid injection compared with no specific biomedical intervention? METHODS: At an academic orthopaedic department, 4452 patients had a new office visit for carpal tunnel syndrome, benign neoplasm, primary hand osteoarthritis, de Quervain's tendinopathy, or trigger digit. We analyzed the 1652 patients (37%) who had a return visit at least 3 months later for the same diagnosis. Patients completed the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression computerized adaptive test at every office visit (higher scores indicate more depression symptoms) and PROMIS Pain Interference (higher scores indicates greater hindrance in daily life owing to pain). Patients with a return visit were more likely to have surgical treatment and had greater Pain Interference scores at the first visit. Thirteen percent of patients (221 of 1652) had incomplete or missing scores at the initial visit and 33% (550 of 1652) had incomplete or missing scores at the final return visit. We used multiple imputations to account for missing or incomplete data (imputations = 50). In a multivariable linear regression analysis, we compared the mean change in Depression scores between patients treated operatively and those treated nonoperatively, accounting for PROMIS Pain Interference scores at the first visit, age, gender diagnosis, provider, and treatment duration. A post-hoc power analysis demonstrated that the smallest patient cohort (benign lump, n = 176) provided 99% power (α = 0.05) with eight predictor variables to detect a change of 2 points in the PROMIS Depression score (minimally important difference = 3.5). RESULTS: After controlling for potentially confounding variables such as pain interference and age, only carpal tunnel release was associated with a slightly greater decrease in depression symptoms compared with nonoperative treatment (regression coefficient [RC] = -3 [95% confidence interval -6 to -1]; p = 0.006). In patients with the highest PROMIS Depression scores for each diagnosis, operative treatment was not associated with an improvement in depression symptoms (carpal tunnel release: RC = 5 [95% CI -7 to 16]; p = 0.44). Moreover, a corticosteroid injection was not associated with fewer depression symptoms than no biomedical treatment (carpal tunnel release: RC = -3 [95% CI -8 to 3]; p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: Given that operative treatment of hand pathology is not generally associated with a decrease in depression symptoms, our results support treating comorbid depression as a separate illness rather than as a secondary effect of pain or physical limitations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of literature examining surgical trends and outcomes in both child and adult cerebral palsy (CP) patients. We aimed to evaluate surgical trends, complications, length of stay, and charges for spinal deformity surgery in CP patients. METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2001 to 2013, patients with CP scoliosis who underwent spinal fusion surgery were identified. Patient characteristics and comorbidities were recorded. Trends in spinal fusion approaches were grouped as anterior (ASF), posterior (PSF), or combined anterior-posterior (ASF/PSF). Complication rates, length of stay, and charges for each approach were analyzed. Bivariate analyses using adjusted Wald tests and multivariate analyses using linear (logarithmic transformation) and logistic regressions were performed. RESULTS: Of the 5191 adult CP patients who underwent spinal fusion the majority underwent PSF (86.5%), followed by the ASF/PSF approach (9.3%). The rate of PSF for cerebral palsy patients with spinal deformity increased significantly per 1 million people in the US population (0.90 to 1.30; P = .048). Complication rate, hospital length of stay, and charges were higher for patients undergoing ASF/PSF (P

Study design Literature review. Objective To determine characteristics and trends in published spine research over a recent decade in a high impact, general orthopedic surgery journal. Summary of background data Recent trends in published spine research in a high-impact orthopedic surgery journal are unknown. Such knowledge could guide future research in the field. Methods A comprehensive literature review of clinical and basic science spine articles published in The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery from 2006 to 2015 was conducted. Articles were assessed for: title, year of publication, authorship, academic degrees of the authors, number of citations, institution of origin, and spine topic. Clinical articles were evaluated for: sex and race/ethnicity of the human subjects, level of evidence, and inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Basic science articles were evaluated for: type of study (animal, cadaver, cell-based), sex of the animals, cadavers or cells studied (male, female, or male and female), and presence of sex-based reporting (defined as reporting of results by sex). Results A total of 203 spine articles were evaluated from the 10-year study period. At least 35 validated or nonvalidated patient-reported outcome measures were utilized in clinical spine research. The most commonly reported PROMs were the Oswestry Disability Index (24.4%), Short Form-36 Health Survey (23.7%), and Visual Analog Scale for Pain (19.3%). The average level of evidence improved from 3.25 in 2006 to 2.60 in 2015. Only 13.2% of clinical spine articles reported the race/ethnicity of the subjects. Conclusion A consensus regarding validated PROMs in spine research would be valuable. From 2006 to 2015, the level of evidence of spine articles in The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery improved. Accurate and complete reporting of patient demographics is an area for improvement in spine research in light of studies demonstrating sex and race/ethnicity-related differences in clinical outcome after spine surgery. Level of evidence 5.

STUDY DESIGN Correlational study. OBJECTIVE In spine trauma patients, we aimed to assess the correlation of patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) physical function (PF), pain interference (PI), and Depression scores with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) ODI/NDI scores. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA The ODI and NDI were intended as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients seeking spine care. To date, the PROMIS has not been studied in the spine trauma population. METHODS Between January 1, 2015 and December 13, 2017, patients presenting to a single, level 1 trauma center spine clinic with known spine trauma were identified. A total of 56 patients (52 operative, 4 nonoperative) representing 181 encounters were identified. PROMIS PF, PI, and Depression, as well as the ODI or NDI, were administered to patients. Spearman rho (ρ) were calculated between PROMs. RESULTS A strong correlation exists between PROMIS PI and the ODI (ρ = 0.79, P

Study design Case control series. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of methods to decrease surgical site infections (SSIs) following spine tumor surgery. Summary of background data With the aging population of the United States, the prevalence of cancer and associated metastatic spine disease is increasing. The most common complication of spine tumor surgery is SSI. Methods This a single-institution case-control series of patients undergoing spine tumor surgery from June 2003 to October 2018. Patients were grouped into the following groups: Betadine irrigation and intrawound vancomycin powder (BIVP), intrawound vancomycin powder only (IVP), and patients receiving neither (NONE). The primary outcome was SSIs/wound complications. Results One hundred fifty-one spine tumor patients undergoing 174 procedures meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. The BIVP group had 60 patients (73 procedures); the IVP group had 46 patients (47 procedures); and the NONE group had 45 patients (54 procedures). The overall infection rate was 8.6% of all procedures (15/174) and 9.9% (15/151) of all patients. Bivariate analysis comparing patients with and without infections noted the patients with SSIs had significantly higher rates of preoperative radiation treatment (53.3% in infection group vs. 25.5% in noninfection group), P = 0.02. Patients undergoing procedures in the BIVP group had a significantly lower rate of infections (2.7%) than the patients in the IVP (12.8%) and NONE (13%) groups, P = 0.04. Stepwise regression analysis was used to evaluate further factors associated with SSIs. Elevated BMI was significantly associated with SSIs in the model [P = 0.02, odds ratio (OR) 1.14]. BIVP was also protective against infections as compared to the IVP and NONE groups, P = 0.02, OR 0.02. Conclusion BIVP led to a significant decrease in SSI rates following spine tumor surgery. Administration of BIVP is not time consuming and decreased SSI rates. Level of evidence 3.

Study Design: Retrospective study. Objective: To evaluate outcomes and complications following operative and nonoperative management of hyperostotic spine fractures. Methods: Patients presenting between 2008 and 2017 to a single level 1 trauma center with hyperostotic spine fractures had their information and fracture characteristics reviewed. Bivariate analyses were conducted to compare patients across a number of characteristics and outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression models for complication and mortality were done in a stepwise fashion. Results: Sixty-five ankylosing spondylitis (AS) or diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) patients with a spine fracture met our inclusion criteria. DISH was slightly more prevalent (55% vs 45%). Overall delayed diagnosis, reoperation, mortality (at 1 year), and complication rates were high at 32%, 13%, 23%, and 57%, respectively. In multivariate logistic regression models, patients undergoing operative management had significantly increased odds of having a complication (odds ratio [OR] = 23.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.24-236.45, P = .008), while increasing age was associated with increased odds of death (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.06-1.31, P = .003). Conclusions: Patients with AS or DISH who fracture their spine are at high risk of complication and death. However, neither operative nor nonoperative treatment increases the odds of mortality. This study helps add to a growing, but still limited, body of literature on the characteristics of patients with spine fractures in the setting of AS or DISH.

Introduction Methods Ethical Approval Results Discussion and Conclusion The COVID‐19 pandemic severely impacted musculoskeletal care. To better triage the notable backlog of patients, we assessed whether a digital medical history (DMH), a summary of health information and concerns completed by the patient prior to a clinic visit, could be routinely collected and utilised.We analysed 640 patients using a rapid cycle, semi‐randomised A/B testing approach. Four rapid cycles of different randomised interventions were conducted across five unique patient groups. Descriptive statistics were used to report DMH completion rates by cycle/patient group and intervention. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether age or anatomic injury location was associated DMH completion. (Quality Improvement Project)Across all patients, the DMH completion rate was 48% (307/640). Phone calls were time consuming and resource intensive without an increased completion rate. The highest rate of DMH completion was among patients who were referred and called the clinic themselves (78% of patients [63 out of 81 patients]). Across all patients, increasing age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.985 (95% CI: 0.976–0.995), p = 0.002), patients with back concerns (OR: 0.395 (95% CI: 0.234–0.666), p = 0.001), and patients with non‐specific/other musculoskeletal concerns (OR: 0.331 (95% CI: 0.176–0.623), p = 0.001) were associated with decreased odds of DMH completion.DMHs can be valuable in helping triage orthopaedic patients in resource‐strapped settings, times of crisis, or as we transition towards value‐based health care delivery. However, further work is needed to continue to increase the completion rate about 50%. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Musculoskeletal Care is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

BACKGROUND: The utilization of outpatient shoulder arthroplasty has been increasing. With increasing pressure to reduce costs, further underscored by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, many health-care organizations will move toward outpatient interventions to conserve inpatient resources. Although abundant literature has shown the advantages of outpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), there is a relative paucity describing outpatient shoulder arthroplasty. Thus, the purpose of this study was to summarize the peer-reviewed literature of outpatient shoulder arthroplasty with particular attention to patient selection, patient outcomes, and cost benefits. METHODS: The PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Embase databases were queried according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. All articles on outpatient shoulder arthroplasty were included. Data on patient selection, patient outcomes, and cost analyses were recorded. Patient outcomes, including complications, reoperations, and readmissions, were analyzed by weighted average. RESULTS: Twenty-three articles were included for analysis. There were 3 review articles and 20 studies with Level-III or IV evidence as assessed per The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery Level of Evidence criteria. Patient selection was most often predicated on age

Objectives: Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has emerged as an effective tool in assessing post-operative outcomes in rotator cuff repair. PROMIS employs computer adaptive testing (CAT) in order to select specific items from a standard question bank based on previous patient responses. In turn, domain-specific PROMIS forms allow optimal tracking of outcomes in specific areas of patient recovery, such as upper extremity function (PROMIS-UE) for rotator cuff repair patients. The objective of this investigation is to analyze the PROMIS-UE CAT question bank to determine the point in recovery at which a patient is able to reach certain milestones and to elucidate the number of days – in increments of 30 (i.e., monthly) – it takes for patients who undergo rotator cuff repair to answer “with some difficulty” or “without any difficulty” for the five most frequently asked questions in the PROMIS-UE CAT questionnaire. Understanding these timepoints will improve clinical monitoring and counseling following surgery and provide standardized measures for appropriate activity progression and restriction. Methods: All patients who underwent rotator cuff repair by one of two sports medicine fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons between 2/16/17 and 7/13/19 were included in this study. Post-operative PROMIS-UE CAT scores were reviewed with respect to individual item, response, and timing of response (with respect to number of days following surgery using 30-day increments). For each PROMIS-UE CAT item, the following five answer choices were available: “Without any difficulty”, “With a little difficulty”, “With some difficulty”, “With much difficulty”, and “Unable to do”. A task was considered achievable if the patient answered any answer with “Without any difficulty” or “With a little difficulty”. The percentage of patients in each 30-day group who answered with either of these responses was recorded. Chi-square tests were run between the number of days postoperatively the surveys were administered and patient responses to determine whether or not there were statistically significant differences between groups. Results: A total of 1,143 patient responses were included in the final analysis. The five most frequently asked questions in the PROMIS-UE CAT item bank, which were as follows: “Are you able to carry a heavy object (over 10 pounds /5 kg)?” (n=1143), “Are you able to put on and take off a coat or jacket?” (n=932), “Are you able to carry a shopping bag or briefcase?” (n=453), “Are you able to pour liquid from a bottle into a glass?” (n=675), and “Are you able to put on a shirt or blouse?” (n=578). The times at which greater than 50% of respondents answered either “Without any difficulty” or “With a little difficulty” are shown in Table 1. All five questions showed statistically significant associations between number of days postoperatively and patient responses (pConclusions: On average, patients undergoing rotator cuff repair achieved milestones measured by the five most commonly asked questions on the PROMIS-UE CAT by 1-4 months postoperatively. Patients also showed significant improvements in upper extremity function in the same time period. These findings can be utilized in post-operative monitoring, and patients who do not meet these milestones in the appropriate timepoints may require additional supportive care or treatment.

To compare the different interventions described in the literature for the surgical treatment of small and medium complete rotator cuff tears.A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of small-medium, full-thickness rotator cuff tears published since 2000 was performed. Clinical characteristics, re-tear rates, range of motion (ROM), and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data were collected. Interventions were compared via arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis in a random-effects model. Interventions were ranked for each domain (re-tear risk, pain, ROM, and PROs) via surface under the cumulative ranking curves.A total of 18 studies comprising 2046 shoulders (47% females, mean age 61 ± 3 years, mean follow-up 21 ± 5 months) were included. Interventions that ranked highest for minimizing re-tear risk included arthroscopic single-row repair (A+SR) or double-row repair (A+DR) with or without platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Open repair and A+SR repair with acromioplasty (ACP) ranked highest for pain relief. Interventions that ranked highest for ROM improvement included open repair, PT, and A+DR with or without ACP. Interventions that ranked highest for PROs included arthroscopic footprint microfracture with or without SR, open repair, and A+SR with or without ACP.Based on a network meta-analysis of level 1 studies, arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with a SR or DR construct demonstrates similar retear rates, PROs, and clinical outcomes. The highest-ranking treatment for minimizing retears was arthroscopic repair with DR constructs and PRP augmentation, although open repair and arthroscopic SR remain reliable options with excellent clinical outcomes. Addition of PRP to DR constructs trended toward a 56% decreased risk of retear as compared to DR repair alone. Although no single treatment emerged superior, several interventions offered excellent clinical improvements in pain, ROM, and PROs that exceeded minimal clinically important difference thresholds.I, systematic review and meta-analysis of level I studies.

Patient engagement is a comprehensive approach to health care where the physician inspires confidence in the patient to be involved in their own care. Most research studies of patient engagement in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) have come in the past 5 years (2015-2020), with no reviews investigating the different patient engagement methods in TJA. The primary purpose of this review is to examine patient engagement methods in TJA. The search identified 31 studies aimed at patient engagement methods in TJA. Based on our review, the conclusions therein strongly suggest that patient engagement methods in TJA demonstrate benefits throughout care delivery through tools focused on promoting involvement in decision making and accessible care delivery (eg, virtual rehabilitation, remote monitoring). Future work should understand the influence of social determinants on patient involvement in care, and overall cost (or savings) of engagement methods to patients and society.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in outcomes after orthopaedic surgery have been well-documented in the fields of arthroplasty, trauma, and spine surgery; however, little research has assessed differences in outcomes after surgery for oncologic musculoskeletal disease. If racial disparities exist in the treatment of patients with pathologic long bone fractures, then they should be identified and addressed to promote equity in patient care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How do wait times between hospital admission and operative fixation for pathologic fractures of long bones differ between Black and non-Hispanic white patients, after controlling for confounding variables using propensity score matching? (2) How does the proportion of patients with 30-day postoperative complication differ between these groups after controlling for confounding variables using propensity score matching? METHODS: Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we analyzed 828 patients who underwent fixation for pathologic fractures from 2012 to 2018. This database not only provides a large enough sample of pathologic long bone fracture patients to conduct the present study, but also it contains variables such as time from hospitalization to surgery that other national databases do not. After excluding patients with incomplete data (4% of the initial cohort), 775 patients were grouped by self-reported race as Black (12% [94]) or white (88% [681]). Propensity score matching using a 1:1 nearest-neighbor match was then used to match 94 Black patients with 94 white patients according to age, gender, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, anemia, endstage renal disease, independence in performing activities of daily living, congestive heart failure, and pulmonary disease. The primary outcome of interest was the number of days between hospital admission and operative fixation, which we assessed using a Poisson regression and report as an incidence risk ratio. The secondary outcomes were the occurrences of major 30-day postoperative adverse events (failure to wean off mechanical ventilation, cerebrovascular events, renal failure, cardiovascular events, reoperation, death), minor 30-day adverse events (reintubation, wound complications, pneumonia, and thromboembolic events), and any 30-day adverse events (defined as the pooling of all adverse events, including readmissions). These outcomes were analyzed using a bivariate analysis and logistic regression with robust estimates of variance and are reported as odds ratios. Because any results on disparities rely on rigorous control of other baseline demographics, we performed this multivariable approach to ensure we were controlling for confounding variables as much as possible. RESULTS: After controlling for potentially confounding variables such as age and gender, we found that Black patients had a longer mean wait time (incidence risk ratio 1.5 [95% CI 1.1 to 2.1]; p = 0.01) than white patients. After controlling for confounding variables, Black patients also had greater odds of having any postoperative adverse event (OR 2.1 [95% CI 1.1 to 3.8]; p = 0.02), including readmission (OR 3.3 [95% CI 1.5 to 7.6]; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The racial disparities in pathologic long bone fracture care found in our study may be attributed to fundamental racial biases, as well as systemic socioeconomic disparities in the US healthcare system. Identifying and eliminating the racial, socioeconomic, and sociocultural biases that drive these disparities would improve care for patients with orthopaedic oncologic conditions. One possible way to reduce these disparities would be to implement standardized surgical care pathways for pathological long bone fractures across different institutions to minimize variation in important aspects of care, such as time to surgical fixation. Further insight is needed on the types of standardized care pathways and the implementation mechanisms that are most effective. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.