How Did Black and Hispanic Orthopaedic Applicants and Residents Compare to General Surgery Between 2015 and 2022?

BACKGROUND: Despite the heavy demand for and knowledge of the benefits of diversity, there is a persistent lack of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity in orthopaedic surgery. Since the implementation of diversity initiatives, data have shown that general surgery has been one of the top competitive surgical fields and has demonstrated growth in racial, ethnic, and gender diversity, making general surgery a good point of reference and comparison when analyzing racial and ethnic growth in orthopaedic surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What were the growth rates for Black and Hispanic orthopaedic residency applicants and residents between 2015 and 2022? (2) How did the growth rates of Black and Hispanic individuals in orthopaedic surgery compare with those of general surgery? (3) How did applicant recruitment and resident acceptance differ between Black and Hispanic people in orthopaedic surgery? METHODS: Applicant data were obtained from historical specialty-specific data from the Association of American Medical Colleges Electronic Residency Application Service Statistics database between 2018 and 2022, and resident data were obtained from the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education Data Resource Book between 2015 and 2021. Between 2018 and 2022, the number of residency applicants totaled 216,677, with 17,912 Black residency applicants and 20,413 Hispanic residency applicants. Between 2015 and 2021, the number of active residents totaled 977,877, with 48,600 Black residents and 62,605 Hispanic residents. Because the applicant and resident data do not overlap throughout all years of observation, a sensitivity analysis of overlapping years (between 2018 and 2021) was conducted to ensure observed trends were consistent and valid throughout the study. All datasets obtained were used to establish the different racial and ethnic proportions of Black and Hispanic residency applicants and residents in four nonsurgical primary care specialties and four surgical subspecialties. A reference slope was created using data from the Association of American Medical Colleges and Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education to represent the growth rate for total residency applicants and residents, independently, across all residency specialties reported in each database. This slope was used for comparison among the resident and applicant growth rates for all eight selected specialties. Datapoints were placed into a scatterplot with regression lines, using slope equations to depict rate of growth and R 2 values to depict linear fit. Applicant growth corresponded to applicant recruitment and resident growth corresponded to resident acceptance. Chi-square tests were used to compare residents and residency applicants for the Black and Hispanic populations, separately. Two-way analysis of variance with a time-by-specialty interaction term (F-test) was conducted to determine differences between growth slopes. RESULTS: There was no difference in the growth rate of Black orthopaedic surgery applicants between 2018 and 2022, and there was no difference in the growth rate of Hispanic orthopaedic surgery applicants (R 2 = 0.43; p = 0.23 and R 2 = 0.63; p = 0.11, respectively). However, there was a very slight increase in the growth rate of Black orthopaedic surgery residents between 2015 and 2021, and a very slight increase in the growth rate of Hispanic orthopaedic surgery residents (R 2 = 0.73; p = 0.02 and R 2 = 0.79; p = 0.01, respectively). There were no differences in orthopaedic and general surgery rates of growth for Black applicants between 2018 and 2022 (0.004 applicants/year versus -0.001 applicants/year; p = 0.22), and no differences were found in orthopaedic and general surgery rates of growth for Black residents between 2015 and 2021 (0.003 residents/year versus 0.002 residents/year; p = 0.59). Likewise, Hispanic orthopaedic applicant growth rates did not differ between 2018 and 2022 from the rates of general surgery (0.004 applicants/year versus 0.005 applicants/year; p = 0.68), and there were no differences in orthopaedic and general surgery rates of growth for Hispanic residents (0.007 residents/year versus 0.01 residents/year; p = 0.35). Furthermore, growth rate comparisons between Black orthopaedic applicants and residents between 2018 and 2021 showed applicant growth was larger than resident growth, illustrating that the recruitment of Black applicants increased slightly more rapidly than resident acceptance. Growth rate comparisons between Hispanic applicants and residents showed a larger rate of resident growth, illustrating Hispanic resident acceptance increased slightly faster than applicant recruitment during that time. CONCLUSION: We found low acceptance of Black residents compared with the higher recruitment of Black applicants, as well as overall low proportions of Black and Hispanic applicants and residents. Future studies might explore the factors contributing to the higher acceptances of Hispanic orthopaedic residents than Black orthopaedic residents. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We recommend that more emphasis should be placed on increasing Black and Hispanic representation at the department level to ensure cultural considerations remain at the forefront of applicant recruitment. Internal or external reviews of residency selection processes should be considered, and more immersive, longitudinal orthopaedic surgery clerkships and research mentorship experiences should be targeted toward Black and Hispanic students. Holistic reviews of applications and selection processes should be implemented to produce an increased racially and ethnically diverse applicant pool and a diverse residency work force, and implicit bias training should be implemented to address potential biases and diversity barriers that are present in residency programs and leadership.

Telemedicine in orthopaedics during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative landscape.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive analysis on observed trends regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on telemedicine application in orthopaedics compared to other procedural, non-emergent specialties. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of all telemedicine and in-person visits at a large single institution from January to December 2020. The number of patient visits, visit type, location, and provider specifics were collected. Comparisons were made between subspecialties (orthopaedic surgery, oncology, family medicine, rheumatology) for analyses. RESULTS: All specialties included were not conducting virtual visits at the beginning of 2020. By April 2020, orthopaedic virtual visits spiked to an all-time high of 33.5% of all patient visits as compared to oncology at 25.5%, rheumatology at 92.9%, and family medicine at 94%. By the end of the study period, orthopaedic virtual visits decreased back down to 6.5% of patient visits compared to oncology at 7.0%, and family medicine (17.4%) and rheumatology (26.2%). Orthopaedic providers practicing greater than 20 years had the highest average virtual visit rates. CONCLUSION: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has posed unique challenges for healthcare providers, there was a great advancement in the rollout and application of telemedicine. To mitigate the spread of infection from coronavirus and given the recent adjustments to reimbursement policies and HIPAA regulations, orthopaedics saw a dramatic expansion of telemedicine since April 2020. The pandemic may have served as a catalyst to adopt telehealth into clinical practice. However, telehealth saw a downtrend trend by December 2020, particularly in procedure-based fields like orthopaedics and oncology.

Occupational injuries in orthopedic and trauma surgeons in Austria.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency and type of injuries during the career of orthopedic and trauma surgeons in Austria. The hypothesis was that the percentage of occupational injuries among orthopedic and trauma surgeons aligns with the incidence reported in the United States, thus indicating the need for a workplace prevention program. METHODS: A web-based survey was created to collect all necessary data and was sent to all orthopedic and trauma surgeons in Austria via e-mail. Relevant parameters included the surgeons' age, work experience, severity of pain, type of injury, and current pain. Descriptive and explorative statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: A web-based survey was sent to 1122 board-certified orthopedic surgeons and residents in Austria via e-mail. In total, the response rate was 135 (12%). Seventy-two surgeons (54%) had suffered from one or more occupational injuries during their career. We detected a significant raise of occupational injuries related to the work life duration in which operations were performed and the prevalence of injuries. Most injuries of surgeons were reported between 21 and 30 years of their professional life. According to the frequency at different locations, the distribution in descending order was 25% with injuries of the hand, 22% of finger(s), 12% of the foot, 10% of the spine, 2% of the neck, 3% of the head, and 2% of the abdomen. A causality of incapacity to work through injuries at the workplace was given as 4%. Four percent stated a sick leave of at least 3 weeks. In 7% of the facilities, there was no optimization of preventive measures following an occupational injury. We found no correlation of injuries and resident status. CONCLUSION: Orthopedic surgeons in Austria show a high incidence of occupational injuries in line with the findings of colleagues from the United States. The impact on the health system consists of absenteeism in the workplace of highly specialized health service providers as well as the incapacity to work of a high quality, highly trained workforce of at least 4%. With more preventive measures and more attention and care in the rehabilitation phase after such injuries, a positive effect could be achieved. We believe that residents should be specifically trained on how to avoid such injuries.

[Exercise-Based Prehabilitation In Orthopaedics, Cardiology And Oncology]. / Trainingsbasierte Prähabilitation in der Orthopädie, Kardiologie und Onkologie.

Prehabilitation (prehab) aims to prepare patients for surgery, to reduce perioperative complications and to improve postoperative recovery. Pre-operative interventions depend on the indication and the specific patient characteristics and life circumstances. In orthopaedics, the focus is on preoperative improvement of physical performance, function and muscle strength through specific strength, mobility and sensomotoric training. In cardiology, endurance training and respiratory therapy are used in the preoperative phase, as well as coordination and strengthening exercises and occupational therapy to improve physical fitness and performance and reduce cardiovascular risk factors. In oncology, prehab is used preoperatively and also in addition to chemotherapy or radiotherapy to reduce medical side effects and to increase tolerance to cancer therapies (e. g. surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy). Exercise interventions in oncology differ according to the type of cancer (e. g. combined strength and endurance training, respiratory therapy, high-intensity interval training and walking). Study results often show positive effects on health resources using prehab. However, further high-quality clinical intervention studies are needed to confirm the clinical benefits of prehab for implementation in routine care.

Characterization and Reach of Orthopaedic Research Posted to Preprint Servers: Are We "Undercooking" Our Science?

BACKGROUND: Although biomedical preprint servers have grown rapidly over the past several years, the harm to patient health and safety remains a major concern among several scientific communities. Despite previous studies examining the role of preprints during the Coronavirus-19 pandemic, there is limited information characterizing their impact on scientific communication in orthopaedic surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the characteristics (subspecialty, study design, geographic origin, and proportion of publications) of orthopaedic articles on three preprint servers? (2) What are the citation counts, abstract views, tweets, and Altmetric score per preprinted article and per corresponding publication? METHODS: Three of the largest preprint servers (medRxiv, bioRxiv, and Research Square) with a focus on biomedical topics were queried for all preprinted articles published between July 26, 2014, and September 1, 2021, using the following search terms: "orthopaedic," "orthopedic," "bone," "cartilage," "ligament," "tendon," "fracture," "dislocation," "hand," "wrist," "elbow," "shoulder," "spine," "spinal," "hip," "knee," "ankle," and "foot." Full-text articles in English related to orthopaedic surgery were included, while nonclinical studies, animal studies, duplicate studies, editorials, abstracts from conferences, and commentaries were excluded. A total of 1471 unique preprints were included and further characterized in terms of the orthopaedic subspecialty, study design, date posted, and geographic factors. Citation counts, abstract views, tweets, and Altmetric scores were collected for each preprinted article and the corresponding publication of that preprint in an accepting journal. We ascertained whether a preprinted article was published by searching title keywords and the corresponding author in three peer-reviewed article databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, and Dimensions) and confirming that the study design and research question matched. RESULTS: The number of orthopaedic preprints increased from four in 2017 to 838 in 2020. The most common orthopaedic subspecialties represented were spine, knee, and hip. From 2017 to 2020, the cumulative counts of preprinted article citations, abstract views, and Altmetric scores increased. A corresponding publication was identified in 52% (762 of 1471) of preprints. As would be expected, because preprinting is a form of redundant publication, published articles that are also preprinted saw greater abstract views, citations, and Altmetric scores on a per-article basis. CONCLUSION: Although preprints remain an extremely small proportion of all orthopaedic research, our findings suggest that nonpeer-reviewed, preprinted orthopaedic articles are being increasingly disseminated. These preprinted articles have a smaller academic and public footprint than their published counterparts, but they still reach a substantial audience through infrequent and superficial online interactions, which are far from equivalent to the engagement facilitated by peer review. Furthermore, the sequence of preprint posting and journal submission, acceptance, and publication is unclear based on the information available on these preprint servers. Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the metrics of preprinted articles are attributable to preprinting, and studies such as the present analysis will tend to overestimate the apparent impact of preprinting. Despite the potential for preprint servers to function as a venue for thoughtful feedback on research ideas, the available metrics data for these preprinted articles do not demonstrate the meaningful engagement that is achieved by peer review in terms of the frequency or depth of audience feedback. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings highlight the need for safeguards to regulate research dissemination through preprint media, which has never been shown to benefit patients and should not be considered as evidence by clinicians. Clinician-scientists and researchers have the most important responsibility of protecting patients from the harm of potentially inaccurate biomedical science and therefore must prioritize patient needs first by uncovering scientific truths through the evidence-based processes of peer review, not preprinting. We recommend all journals publishing clinical research adopt the same policy as Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® , The Bone & Joint Journal, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, and the Journal of Orthopaedic Research , removing any papers posted to preprint servers from consideration.

Do Americans Lacking a Local Orthopaedic Surgeon Have Adequate Broadband for Telehealth?

BACKGROUND: Although telehealth holds promise in expanding access to orthopaedic surgical care, high-speed internet connectivity remains a major limiting factor for many communities. Despite persistent federal efforts to study and address the health information technology needs of patients, there is limited information regarding the current high-speed internet landscape as it relates to access to orthopaedic surgical care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the distribution of practicing orthopaedic surgeons in the United States relative to the presence of broadband internet access? (2) What geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic factors are associated with the absence of high-speed internet and access to a local orthopaedic surgeon? METHODS: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Mapping Broadband in America interactive tool was used to determine the proportion of county residents with access to broadband-speed internet for all 3141 US counties. Data regarding the geographic distribution of orthopaedic surgeons and county-level characteristics were obtained from the 2015 Physician Compare National Downloadable File and the Area Health Resource File, respectively. The FCC mapping broadband public use files are considered the most comprehensive datasets describing high-speed internet infrastructure within the United States. The year 2015 represents the most recently available FCC data for which county-level broadband penetration estimates are available. Third-party audits of the FCC data have shown that broadband expansion has been slow over the past decade and that many large improvements have been driven by changes in the reporting methodology. Therefore, we believe the 2015 FCC data still hold relevance. The primary outcome measure was the simultaneous absence of at least 50% broadband penetration and at least one orthopaedic surgeon practicing in county limits. Statistical analyses using Kruskal-Wallis tests and multivariable logistic regression were conducted to assess for factors associated with inaccessibility to orthopaedic telehealth. All statistical tests were two-sided with a significance threshold of p < 0.05. RESULTS: In 2015, 14% (448 of 3141) of counties were considered "low access" in that they both had no orthopaedic surgeons and possessed less than 50% broadband access. A total of 4,660,559 people lived within these low-access counties, representing approximately 1.4% (4.6 million of 320.7 million) of the US population. After controlling for potential confounding variables, such as the age, sex, income level, and educational attainment, lower population density per square mile (OR 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 0.94]; p < 0.01), a lower number of primary care physicians per 100,000 (OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81 to 0.97]; p < 0.01), a higher unemployment level (OR 1.3 [95% CI 1.2 to 1.4]; p < 0.01), and greater number preventable hospital stays per 100,000 (OR 1.01 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.02]; p < 0.01) were associated with increased odds of being a low-access county (though the effect size of the finding was small for population density and number of primary care physicians). Stated another way, each additional person per square mile was associated with an 8% (95% CI 6% to 10%; p < 0.01) decrease in the odds of being a low-access county, and each additional percentage point of unemployment was associated with a 30% (95% CI 20% to 40%) increase in the odds of being a low-access county. CONCLUSION: Despite the potential for telehealth programs to improve the delivery of high-quality orthopaedic surgical care, broadband internet access remains a major barrier to implementation. Until targeted investments are made to expand broadband infrastructure across the country, health systems, policymakers, and surgeon leaders must capitalize on existing federal subsidy programs, such as the lifeline or affordability connectivity initiatives, to reach unemployed patients living in economically depressed regions. The incorporation of internet access questions into clinic-based social determinants screening may facilitate the development of alternative follow-up protocols for patients unable to participate in synchronous videoconferencing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Some orthopaedic patients lack the broadband capacity necessary for telehealth visits, in which case surgeons may pursue alternative methods of follow-up such as mobile phone-based surveillance of postoperative wounds, surgical sites, and clinical symptoms.

Telemedicine in orthopaedics and trauma surgery during the first year of COVID pandemic: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine in orthopaedics and trauma surgery had mostly developed for joint arthroplasty, fracture management, and general pre- and postoperative care including teleradiology. With the corona-outbreak, telemedicine was applied on a broad scale to prevent assemblage and to guarantee access to medical care protecting critical areas. The purpose of the present study was to give an overview of the spectrum of clinical applications and the efficacy of telemedicine in orthopaedic and trauma surgery as published in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: All published studies investigating the application of telemedicine related to orthopaedics and trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic were accessed and screened for suitability. The primary outcome of interest was the efficacy of telemedicine in various clinical applications. The secondary outcome of interest was the spectrum of different applications in which telemedicine applications were investigated. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 1047 articles. After the removal of duplicates, 894 articles were screened of which 31 finally met the inclusion criteria. Dimensions that were described by studies in the literature to have positive effects were preoperative patient optimisation, the usefulness of telemedicine to correctly diagnose a condition, conservative treatment, willingness to and feasibility for telemedicine in patients and doctors, and postoperative/post-trauma care improvement. The efficacy of telemedicine applications or interventions thereby strongly varied and seemed to depend on the exact study design and the research question addressed. CONCLUSION: Various successful applications of telemedicine have already been reported in orthopaedics and trauma surgery, with a strong increase in scientific output during the COVID-19 years 2020-2021. Whether the advantages of such an approach will lead to a relevant implementation of telemedicine in everyday clinical practice should be monitored after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Digitization of Follow-Up Care in Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery With Video Consultations: Health Economic Evaluation Study From a Health Provider's Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for health care digitization as issued with the Riyadh Declaration led to an uptake in telemedicine to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Evaluations based on clinical data are needed to support stakeholders' decision-making on the long-term implementation of digital health. OBJECTIVE: This health economic evaluation aims to provide the first German analysis of the suitability of video consultations in the follow-up care of patients in orthopedic and trauma surgery, investigate the financial impact on hospital operations and personnel costs, and provide a basis for decisions on digitizing outpatient care. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial that evaluated video consultations versus face-to-face consultations in the follow-up care of patients in orthopedic and trauma surgery at a German university hospital. We recruited 60 patients who had previously been treated conservatively or surgically for various knee or shoulder injuries. A digital health app and a browser-based software were used to conduct video consultations. The suitability of telemedicine was assessed using the Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire and the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Economic analyses included average time spent by physician per consultation, associated personnel costs and capacities for additional treatable patients, and the break-even point for video consultation software fees. RESULTS: After 4 withdrawals in each arm, data from a total of 52 patients (telemedicine group: n=26; control group: n=26) were used for our analyses. In the telemedicine group, 77% (20/26) of all patients agreed that telemedicine provided for their health care needs, and 69% (18/26) found telemedicine an acceptable way to receive health care services. In addition, no significant difference was found in the change of patient utility between groups after 3 months (mean 0.02, SD 0.06 vs mean 0.07, SD 0.17; P=.35). Treatment duration was significantly shorter in the intervention group (mean 8.23, SD 4.45 minutes vs mean 10.92, SD 5.58 minutes; P=.02). The use of telemedicine saved 25% (€2.14 [US $2.35]/€8.67 [US $9.53]) in personnel costs and increased the number of treatable patients by 172 annually, assuming 2 hours of video consultations per week. Sensitivity analysis for scaling up video consultations to 10% of the hospital's outpatient cases resulted in personnel cost savings of €73,056 (US $ 80,275.39) for a senior physician. A total of 23 video consultations per month were required to recoup the software fees of telemedicine through reduced personnel costs (break-even point ranging from 12-38 in the sensitivity analysis). CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports stakeholders' decision-making on the long-term implementation of digital health by demonstrating that video consultations in the follow-up care of patients in orthopedic and trauma surgery result in cost savings and productivity gains for clinics with no negative impact on patient utility. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00023445; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00023445.

Gender Disparities Among Professional Team Sports Medicine Physicians.

OBJECTIVE: Although recent trends from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) present encouraging growth of female representation in sports medicine, the field is still lagging behind other specialties. This study investigates gender disparities among physicians providing care for professional sports teams in male and female sports leagues. DESIGN: Information regarding physicians providing sports medicine care to professional teams obtained by database queries (May 2021). Chi-square analysis compared gender data of orthopaedic team physicians with American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) and American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) membership, residency, and fellowship census data. Primary care sports medicine physicians were compared with American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) and primary-care sports medicine fellowship census data. SETTING: Professional sports health care. STUDY POPULATION: Professional league physicians. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Gender, residency, and fellowship training of professional league physicians. RESULTS: Among a total of 608 team physicians, 572 (93.5%) were male and 40 (6.5%) were female. Orthopedic surgeons comprised 64.7% of the physicians. Fourteen (3.6%) team orthopedic surgeons were female. Thirty-five percent of team physicians were primary care sports medicine physicians. Twenty-six primary care sports medicine physicians (11.6%) were female. Orthopaedic female team physician representation overall was comparable with AOSSM and AAOS membership but significantly less than orthopaedic surgery residents and sports medicine fellows ( P < 0.01). Women's National Basketball Association orthopaedic team physicians were more represented than female membership among AOSSM, AAOS, and orthopaedic sports medicine fellows ( P < 0.01). Except for the WNBA, Premiere Hockey Federation, National Women's Soccer League, and United States Football League, female primary care sports medicine physicians were underrepresented in professional sports compared with AMSSM membership and primary care sports fellows ( P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Overall, female representation is poor among orthopaedic surgeons and primary care physicians providing sports medicine care to professional teams. Leagues encompassing female athletes tend to have better representation of female physicians. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Online case-based educational meetings can increase knowledge, skills, and widen access to surgical training:The nationwideVirtualTrauma & Orthopaedic Meetingseries.

BACKGROUND: Access to surgical training is challenging for undergraduate and early postgraduate trainees due to a greater focus on developing generic knowledge and skills, and a drive to recruit greater numbers into internal medicine and primary care. COVID-19 accelerated the declining access to surgical training environments. Our aims were to: 1) establish the feasibility of an online, specialty-specific, case-based surgical training series, and 2) evaluate its suitability for meeting the needs of trainees. METHODS: A nationwide audience of undergraduate and early postgraduate trainees were invited to a series of bespoke online case-based educational meetings in Trauma & Orthopaedics (T&O) over a six month period. The six sessions, which simulated real-world clinical meetings, were constructed by Consultant sub-specialists and involved the presentation of cases by registrars, followed by structured discussion of basic principles, radiological interpretation, and management strategies. Mixed qualitative and quantitative analyses were conducted. RESULTS: There were 131 participants (59.5% male), consisting mostly of doctors in training (58%) and medical students (37.4%). The mean quality rating was 9.0/10 (SD 1.06), further supported by qualitative analysis. 98% enjoyed the sessions, 97% reported improved knowledge of T&O, and 94% reported a direct benefit to clinical practice. There was a significant improvement in knowledge of T&O conditions, management plans, and radiological interpretation (p = <0.05). CONCLUSION: Structured virtual meetings, underpinned by bespoke clinical cases, may widen access to T&O training, increase flexibility and robustness of learning opportunities, and mitigate the effects of reduced exposure on preparation for surgical careers and recruitment.

Environmental sustainability in healthcare: Time to make outpatient care in orthopaedics and rheumatology greener.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic musculoskeletal conditions affect billions of individuals and constitute the greatest contributor to disability worldwide. Climate change has a negative impact on these conditions, causing a rising number of patients seeking medical attention in outpatient orthopaedic and rheumatology clinics. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the delivery of care by these facilities tends to become more energy-intensive due to the increased usage of protective equipment and testing for the purpose of maintaining hygienic conditions. Therefore, practitioners and health bodies in the field need to take action to make their practice more environmentally sustainable and protect both the environment and their patients. METHODS: The authors searched peer reviewed and grey literature for relevant sources. RESULTS: The present review of the literature provides an overview of the environmental pollution associated with outpatient musculoskeletal care and discusses evidence-based recommendations from previous studies. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine, rationalised use of consumables and equipment, physician-led climate advocacy and patient education have a major potential to turn the tide.

A novel computerized approach to scoping reviews using Synthesis software: the first 15 years of The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Scoping reviews of innovations in health care characterized by large numbers and types of publications present a unique challenge. A novel software application, Synthesis, can efficiently scan the literature to map the evidence and inform practice. We applied Synthesis to the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), a high-quality database designed to measure risk-adjusted 30-day surgical outcomes for national and international benchmarking. The scoping review describes the breadth of studies in the NSQIP literature. We performed a comprehensive electronic literature search using PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge and Scopus to capture all NSQIP articles published between Jan. 1, 2000, and Dec. 31, 2020. Two reviewers independently reviewed articles to determine their relevance using predefined inclusion criteria. We imported references into Synthesis to semiautomate data management. Extracted data included surgical specialty, study type and year of publication. Of the 4661 NSQIP articles included, 3631 (77.9%) were published within the last 5 years. Among NSQIP-related articles, the most common study types were based on outcomes (46.7%) and association (41.7%), and the most common surgical specialties were general surgery and orthopedic surgery, representing 35.7% and 24.0% of the articles, respectively. Synthesis enabled a rapid review of thousands of NSQIP publications. The scoping review provided an overview of the articles in the NSQIP literature and suggested that the NSQIP is increasingly being described in publications of quality and safety in surgery.

News in paediatric orthopaedic surgery: an overview of the latest advances in paediatric orthopaedics and traumatology (2020-2023).

PURPOSE: We propose to survey - even if arbitrarily - the publications in paediatric orthopaedics and traumatology that have had the greatest impact on the specialty during the period extending from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in December 2020 and the end of all health restrictions in March 2023. METHODS: Only studies with a high level of evidence or clinical relevance were selected. We briefly discussed the results and conclusions of these quality articles to situate them in relation to the existing literature and current practice. RESULTS: Publications are presented by dividing traumatology and orthopaedics whose publications are further subdivided according to anatomical districts; articles concerning neuro-orthopaedics, tumours, and infections were presented separately while sports medicine is jointly presented with knee-related articles. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the difficulties encountered during the global COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2023), orthopaedic and trauma specialists, including paediatric orthopaedic surgeons, have maintained a high level of scientific output, in terms of quantity and quality of production.

A systemic review and a meta-analysis on the influences of closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery by negative pressure wound treatment compared with conventional dressings.

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the influences of closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery (OTS) by negative pressure wound treatment (NPWT) compared with conventional dressings. A systematic literature search up to March 2022 was done and 14 studies included 3935 subjects with OTS at the start of the study; 2023 of them used NPWT and 1912 were conventional dressings. They were reporting relationships between the influences of closed incisions in OTS by NPWT compared with conventional dressings. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the influences of closed incisions in OTS by NPWT compared with conventional dressings using the dichotomous methods with a random or fixed-effect model. NPWT had significantly lower deep surgical site infections (SSIs) (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.87, P = .004), superficial SSIs (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19-0.61, P < .001), and wound dehiscence (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.80, P = .009) compared with conventional dressings in subjects with closed incisions in OTS. NPWT showed a beneficial effect on deep SSIs, superficial SSIs, and wound dehiscence compared with conventional dressings in subjects with closed incisions in OTS. Further studies are required to validate these findings.

Effectiveness of nursing intervention in the operating room to prevent wound infections in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery: A meta-analysis.

Surgical site wound infection is one of the most common postoperative complications in orthopaedic clinical practice. This study employed a meta-analysis approach to comprehensively evaluate the effect of operating room nursing interventions on the prevention of surgical site wound infections in orthopaedic surgical patients. A computer search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), VIP, and Wanfang databases from the inception of each database until May 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the application of operating room nursing interventions in orthopaedic surgery. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed study quality. The meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 17.0. A total of 29 studies involving 3567 patients were included, with 1784 patients in the intervention group, and 1783 patients in the control group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared with the control group, the use of operating room nursing interventions significantly reduced the incidence of surgical site wound infection after orthopaedic surgery (2.85% vs. 13.24%; odds ratio: 0.18, 95% confidence interval: 0.14-0.25; p < 0.001). Current evidence suggests that operating room nursing interventions reduce the incidence of surgical site wound infections. However, owing to the limited number and low quality of the studies, more high-quality, large-sample RCTs are needed to further verify these findings.

[Postoperative compressive neuropathies after orthopedic surgeries]. / Neuropathies périphériques dues au positionnement opératoire en chirurgie orthopédique.

Peripheral neuropathies after orthopedic surgery are a rare complication (0.14 % on average) but with a significant impact on quality of life that requires close monitoring and physiotherapy sessions. Surgical positioning is a preventable cause responsible for about 20-30 % of the observed neuropathies. Orthopedic surgery is one of the most affected areas because of the positions maintained for long periods of time that are particularly at risk of compression or nerve stretching. The objective of this article is to list, through a narrative review of the literature, the most frequently affected nerves, the clinical presentation as well as the risk factors, and to draw general practitioner's attention to this issue.

Les neuropathies périphériques après une intervention chirurgicale orthopédique sont une complication rare (0,14 % en moyenne) mais avec un impact important sur la qualité de vie, et nécessitent un suivi rapproché et des séances de physiothérapie. Parmi les causes évitables, le positionnement opératoire est responsable d'environ 20 à 30 % des neuropathies observées. La chirurgie orthopédique représente l'un des secteurs les plus touchés en raison des positions à risque de compression ou d'étirement nerveux maintenues pendant de longues durées. L'objectif de cet article est de présenter, par une revue narrative de la littérature, les nerfs les plus fréquemment touchés, le tableau clinique ainsi que les facteurs de risques associés, afin de sensibiliser le médecin de premier recours à cette problématique.

Race, But Not Gender, Is Associated With Admissions Into Orthopaedic Residency Programs.

BACKGROUND: Orthopaedic surgery is one of the most competitive but least diverse surgical specialties, with ever-increasing academic achievements (such as test scores) shown by applicants. Prior research shows that white applicants had higher United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge scores as well as higher odds of Alpha Omega Alpha status compared with Black, Hispanic, and other applicant groups. Yet, it still remains unknown whether differences in application metrics by race/ethnicity sufficiently explain the underrepresentation of certain racial or ethnic minority groups in orthopaedic residency programs. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this study, we sought to determine (1) the relative weight of academic variables for admission into orthopaedic residency, and (2) whether race and gender are independently associated with admission into an orthopedic residency. METHODS: The Electronic Residency Application System (ERAS) data from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) of first-time MD applicants (n = 8966) for orthopaedic surgery residency positions in the United States and of admitted orthopaedic residents (n = 6218) from 2005 to 2014 were reviewed. This dataset is the first and most comprehensive of its kind to date in orthopaedic surgery. Academic metrics, such as USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge scores, number of publications, Alpha Omega Alpha status, volunteer experiences, work experience, as well as race and gender, were analyzed using hierarchical logistic regression models. The first model analyzed the association of academic metrics with admission into orthopaedic residency. In the second model, we added race and gender and controlled for metrics of academic performance. To determine how well the models simulated the actual admissions data, we computed the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) including the area under curve (AUC), which measures the model's ability to simulate which applicants were admitted or not admitted, with an AUC = 1.0 representing a perfect simulation. The odds ratio and confidence interval of each variable were computed. RESULTS: When only academic variables were analyzed in the first model, Alpha Omega Alpha status (odds ratio 2.12 [95% CI 1.80 to 2.50]; p < 0.001), the USMLE Step 1 score (OR 1.04 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.04]; p < 0.001), the USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge score (OR 1.01 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.02]; p < 0.001), publication count (OR 1.04 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.05]; p < 0.001), and volunteer experience (OR 1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.04]; p < 0.001) were associated with admissions into orthopaedics while work and research experience were not. This model yielded a good prediction of the results with an AUC of 0.755. The second model, in which the variables of race and gender were added to the academic variables, also had a good prediction of the results with an AUC of 0.759. This model indicates that applicant race, but not gender, is associated with admissions into orthopaedic residency. Applicants from Asian (OR 0.78 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.92]), Black (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.77], Hispanic (OR 0.48 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.65]), or other race groups (OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.55 to 0.77]) had lower odds of admission into residency compared with white applicants. CONCLUSION: Minority applicants, but not women, have lower odds of admission into orthopaedic surgery residency, even when accounting for academic performance metrics. Changes in the residency selection processes are needed to eliminate the lower admission probability of qualified minority applicants in orthopaedic residency and to improve the diversity and inclusion of orthopaedic surgery. Changes including increasing the diversity of the selection committee, bias training, blinding applications before review, removal of metrics with history of racial disparities from an interviewer's candidate profile before an interview, and use of holistic application review (where an applicants' experiences, attributes, and academic metrics are all considered) can improve the diversity landscape in training. In addition, cultivating an environment of inclusion will be necessary to address these long-standing trends in orthopaedic surgery. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Race, but not gender, is associated with the odds of acceptance into orthopaedic surgery residency despite equivalent academic metrics. Changes in residency selection processes are suggested to eliminate the lower admission probability of qualified minority applicants into orthopaedic residency and to improve the diversity and inclusion of orthopaedic surgery.

Strategies aimed at preventing long-term opioid use in trauma and orthopaedic surgery: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Long-term opioid use, which may have significant individual and societal impacts, has been documented in up to 20% of patients after trauma or orthopaedic surgery. The objectives of this scoping review were to systematically map the research on strategies aiming to prevent chronic opioid use in these populations and to identify knowledge gaps in this area. METHODS: This scoping review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist. We searched seven databases and websites of relevant organizations. Selected studies and guidelines were published between January 2008 and September 2021. Preventive strategies were categorized as: system-based, pharmacological, educational, multimodal, and others. We summarized findings using measures of central tendency and frequency along with p-values. We also reported the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations presented in clinical guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 391 studies met the inclusion criteria after initial screening from which 66 studies and 20 guidelines were selected. Studies mainly focused on orthopaedic surgery (62,1%), trauma (30.3%) and spine surgery (7.6%). Among system-based strategies, hospital-based individualized opioid tapering protocols, and regulation initiatives limiting the prescription of opioids were associated with statistically significant decreases in morphine equivalent doses (MEDs) at 1 to 3 months following trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Among pharmacological strategies, only the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and beta blockers led to a significant reduction in MEDs up to 12 months after orthopaedic surgery. Most studies on educational strategies, multimodal strategies and psychological strategies were associated with significant reductions in MEDs beyond 1 month. The majority of recommendations from clinical practice guidelines were of low level of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review advances knowledge on existing strategies to prevent long-term opioid use in trauma and orthopaedic surgery patients. We observed that system-based, educational, multimodal and psychological strategies are the most promising. Future research should focus on determining which strategies should be implemented particularly in trauma patients at high risk for long-term use, testing those that can promote a judicious prescription of opioids while preventing an illicit use, and evaluating their effects on relevant patient-reported and social outcomes.

Limited evidence of adjuvant biologics with bone marrow stimulation for the treatment of osteochondral lesion of the talus: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the complication rates, continuous functional outcome scores, and return to play data following bone marrow stimulation (BMS) versus biologics ± BMS for the treatment of osteochondral lesion of the talus (OLT). METHODS: A systematic review was performed. The PubMed and Embase databases were searched using specific search terms and eligibility criteria according to the PRISMA guidelines. The level of evidence was assessed using published criteria by The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, and the quality of evidence using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Continuous variables were presented as mean ± standard deviation and categorical variables as frequencies (percentages). RESULTS: BMS versus BMS + hyaluronic acid (HA): no complications in either treatment arm were reported. The mean American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score was 43.5 to 67.3 points and 44.0 to 72.4 points, respectively. The mean 10 mm Visual Analogue Scale pain score was 7.7 to 3.8 points and 7.5 to 2.5 points, respectively. BMS versus BMS + concentrated bone marrow aspirate (CBMA): the pooled overall complication rate was 17/64 (26.6%) versus 11/71 (15.5%), respectively (non-significant). The pool revision rate was 15/64 (23.4%) versus 6/71 (8.5%), respectively (p = 0.016). There has been a notable poor reporting of complication rates for the use of ADSC and PRP as adjuvant biological therapies to BMS for the treatment of OLT. CONCLUSION: There was an overall limited comparative clinical evidence of adjuvant biologics with BMS versus BMS alone for the treatment of OLT. BMS + HA and BMS + CBMA can provide superior outcomes, albeit the currently limited evidence. Further studies are warranted to establish the true clinical superiority of the various biologics ± BMS versus BMS alone. These studies must also compare the various biologics against one another to determine, if any, the optimal biologic for OLT. Clinicians should counsel patients accordingly on these findings as required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Medical student residency preferences and motivational factors: a longitudinal, single-institution perspective.

BACKGROUND: A high proportion of medical school graduates pursue specialties different from those declared at matriculation. While these choices influence the career paths, satisfaction, and potential regret students will experience, they also impact the supply and demand ratio of the shorthanded physician workforce across many specialties. In this study, we investigate how the choice of medical specialty and the factors motivating those choices change between the beginning and end of medical school training. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered annually from 2017 to 2020 to a cohort of medical students at the University of Connecticut to determine longitudinal preferences regarding residency choice, motivational factors influencing residency choice, future career path, and demographic information. RESULTS: The questionnaire respondent totals were as follows: n = 76 (Year 1), n = 54 (Year 2), n = 31 (Year 3), and n = 65 (Year 4). Amongst newly matriculated students, 25.0% were interested in primary care, which increased ~ 1.4-fold to 35.4% in the final year of medical school. In contrast, 38.2% of matriculated students expressed interest in surgical specialties, which decreased ~ 2.5-fold to 15.4% in the final year. Specialty choices in the final year that exhibited the largest absolute change from matriculation were orthopedic surgery (- 9.9%), family medicine (+ 8.1%), radiology (+ 7.9%), general surgery (- 7.2%), and anesthesiology (+ 6.2%). Newly matriculated students interested in primary care demonstrated no differences in their ranking of motivational factors compared to students interested in surgery, but many of these factors significantly deviated between the two career paths in the final year. Specifically, students interested in surgical specialties were more motivated by the rewards of salary and prestige compared to primary care students, who more highly ranked match confidence and family/location factors. CONCLUSIONS: We identified how residency choices change from the beginning to the end of medical school, how certain motivational factors change with time, how these results diverge between primary care and surgery specialty choice, and propose a new theory based on risk-reward balance regarding residency choice. Our study promotes awareness of student preferences and may help guide school curricula in developing more student-tailored training approaches. This could foster positive long-term changes regarding career satisfaction and the physician workforce.