[Treatment of clavicle fracture: Interpretation of the 2023 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Clinical Practice Guidelines].

Clavicle fracture is a common orthopedic injury, accounting for approximately 2.6%-4% of all adult skeletal fractures. In 2023, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) developed evidence-based treatment guidelines for clavicle fractures, which include 4 recommendations and 10 options. This article, based on a thorough review of the guidelines, discusses the clinical treatment of clavicle fractures, aiming to share advancements and the latest diagnostic and therapeutic considerations with orthopedic colleagues to enhance treatment outcomes.

Informed consent form for platelet rich plasma injections: evidence-based and legally guide for orthopaedic surgeons.

Regarding medico-legal malpractice suits, lawyers and insurers focus on informed consent documentation. Unfortunately, there is no standard protocol for obtaining informed consent for platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections. The objective of the present study was to create a pre-designed, evidence-based informed consent form specifically for PRP injections. The current evidence on the medico-legal implications of PRP injections was accessed, as well as informed consent in general and specifically informed consent in PRP injections. Additionally, we interviewed orthopaedic surgeons and patients who had undergone PRP injections in the past year using a semi-structured approach. A legally valid and evidence-based informed consent form for PRP injections ensures rights, encouraging open communication and transparency between the patient and surgeon. Moreover, if a lawsuit arose, informed consent would be a critical document in surgeons' defence and would withstand scrutiny from lawyers and the judiciary. An evidence-based informed consent form for PRP injections was elaborated and reviewed by a legal expert to ensure adherence to legal proprieties. The final form of the informed consent for PRP injection was administered for one year and validated at our institution.

Peri-Arthroscopic Management of Immunosuppressive Medications in Patients with Rheumatic Disease A Survey of Practice Trends Among Rheumatologists and Sports Medicine Orthopedic Surgeons.

PURPOSE: Rheumatologists and orthopedic surgeons frequently collaborate on difficult decisions regarding perioperative management of immunosuppression in rheumatic disease patients, balancing risk of postoperative infection with risk of disease flares. Current evidence-based guidelines pertain specifically to arthroplasty, thus we sought to understand the trends and common practices regarding peri-arthroscopic use of immunosuppression. METHODS: Rheumatologists and sports medicine surgeons, from a variety of New York hospitals and serving a broad range of demographics, were surveyed on immunosuppressive medication management in rheumatic disease patients undergoing arthroscopic surgeries. Physicians' preferences were elicited regarding the use of common anti-rheumatic medications with the lower risk meniscectomies and the higher risk anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions and allografts. Physicians were asked specifically about peri-arthroscopic use of conventional synthetic diseasemodifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biologics, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. RESULTS: During the survey period, 25 rheumatologists and 19 sports medicine fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons completed the questionnaire. For lower-risk arthroscopies, rheumatologists favored continuing various csDMARDs (72% to 100%), biologics (50% to 64%) and JAK inhibitors (57%), while a majority of surgeons concurred for all three drug classes (csDMARDs 63%; biologics 53%; and JAK inhibitors 58%). For higher-risk arthroscopies, most rheumatologists preferred that patients continue csDMARDs (63% to 100%) but fewer supported the use of biologics (28% to 39%) or JAK inhibitors (22%). Surgeons were more hesitant to endorse any class of immunosuppressive antirheumatic medications (22% to 27%) around these higher risk surgeries. The rheumatologists were most concerned about surgeries taking place too soon after the last dose of rituximab, recommending these higher risk surgeries not take place for 7.7 ± 8.8 weeks following the last infusion. CONCLUSION: For lower-risk arthroscopies, most rheumatologists but only about half of orthopedic surgeons preferred patients continuing csDMARDs. Approximately half of both groups preferred patients hold biologics and JAK inhibitors. In more involved arthroscopies, most rheumatologists but few orthopedists supported the continued use of csDMARDs, and the consensus was to hold all other immunosuppression when possible. While the duration medications were held perioperatively were somewhat reflective of the current guidelines for arthroplasty, there is a need for evidencebased guidelines specifically regarding peri-arthroscopy immunosuppression in rheumatic disease patients.

Therapeutic Interventions for Prevention of Musculoskeletal Pain Among Orthopedic Surgeons.

Orthopedic surgery is a physically demanding specialty. The factors contributing to musculoskeletal injury among surgeons often stem from positioning the patient, using non-ergonomic instruments, maintaining static postures, and performing repetitive movements. This article focuses on exercise techniques intended to combat the most common problematic static postures held during procedures. Each exercise explained in this article is organized into "preop," "intraop," and "postop" components. Preop includes strengthening movements, intraop provides postural recommendations, and postop focuses on mobilization and recovery. This article aims for efficient body conditioning, targeting the muscular posterior chain and supporting elements. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(4):e214-e216.].

Analysis of the diversity pipeline for the orthopedic trauma surgeon workforce in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of research on the state of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce. The purpose of this study was to analyze the training pathway for diverse candidates in orthopedic trauma as it relates to race, ethnicity, and sex. METHODS: Self-reported demographic data were compared among allopathic medical students, orthopedic surgery residents, orthopedic trauma fellows, and the general population in the United States (2013-2022). Race categories consisted of White, Asian, Black, and Native American/Alaskan Native (NA/AN), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NH/PI). Ethnicity categories were Hispanic/Latino or non-Hispanic/Latino. Sex categories were male and female. Representation was calculated at each stage of accredited training. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) quantified the equitable representation of demographic groups in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce relative to the US population. PPR thresholds were used to classify representation as overrepresented (PPR > 1.2), equitable (PPR = 0.8-1.2), and underrepresented (PPR < 0.8). RESULTS: Relative to medical school and orthopedic surgery residency, fewer female (48.5 % vs 16.7 % vs 18.7 %, P < 0.001), Hispanic (6.1 % vs 4.5 % vs 2.6 %, P < 0.001), Black (6.9 % vs 5.0 % vs 3.1 %, P < 0.001), and Asian (24.0 % vs 14.3 % vs 12.2 %, P < 0.001) trainees existed in orthopedic trauma fellowship training. In contrast, more male (51.5 % vs 83.3 % vs 81.3 %, P < 0.001) and White (62.8 % vs 79.1 % vs 84.0 %, P < 0.001) trainees existed in orthopedic trauma fellowship relative to earlier training stages. There were zero NA/AN or NH/PI trainees in orthopedic trauma (PPR = 0). Relative to the US population, Hispanic (PPR = 0.14), Black (PPR = 0.25), and female (PPR = 0.37) trainees were underrepresented in orthopedic trauma. In contrast, Asian (PPR = 2.04), male (PPR = 1.64), and White (PPR = 1.36) trainees were overrepresented in orthopedic trauma. CONCLUSION: Women, racial, and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce relative to the US population, and earlier stages of training. Targeted recruitment and guided mentorship of these groups may lead to greater interest, engagement, and diversity in orthopedic trauma.

Is Program Director Gender Associated With Gender Diversity Among Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs?

BACKGROUND: Women remain underrepresented in leadership roles, faculty roles, and among residents in orthopaedic surgery. It has been suggested that having women in leadership positions in orthopaedic surgery may help to increase the gender diversity of residency programs. However, to our knowledge, no study has explored the relationship, if any, between the gender of the residency program director and the percentage of women in the residency program. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is the program director's gender associated with differences in the percentage of women orthopaedic surgery residents? (2) Do women and men differ in the time to appointment of program director? METHODS: A list of 207 orthopaedic surgery residencies was obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website for the academic year 2021 to 2022. The study excluded 6% (13) of programs; 4% (8) were those without ACGME accreditation and those with initial accreditation, and 2% (5) did not have updated 2021 to 2022 resident lists. Descriptive information on 194 programs was obtained from publicly accessible resources from July 2021 through July 2022. The institution's website and the American Medical Association's (AMA) Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) was used to collect residency program characteristics and resident demographics [ 2 ]. Doximity, Healthgrades, and LinkedIn were used to further collect current orthopaedic surgery residency program director demographics, including gender, age, and education/training history. To determine gender, photographs and pronouns (she/her/hers or he/him/hers) used in their biographies were used first. To confirm this, secondary sources were used including their NPI profile, which lists gender; Doximity; and their LinkedIn profile. Scopus was used to analyze research output by the program directors-using the Hirsch index (h-index) as the primary bibliometric metric. A total of 194 program directors were identified, of whom of 12% (23) were women and 88% (171) were men. Of the 4421 total residents among these programs, 20% (887) were women and 80% (3534) were men. A univariate analysis comparing program directors was conducted, with continuous variables analyzed using an independent-sample t-test and categorical variables analyzed using a Pearson chi-square test. With the numbers available, a post hoc statistical power calculation indicated that we could detect an 32% difference in the percentage of women in a program as significant with 80% power at the p < 0.05 level, whereas we might have been underpowered to discern smaller differences than that. RESULTS: With the numbers available, we found no difference in the percentage of women in residency programs run by women program directors than in programs in which the program director was a man (22% [125 of 558] versus 20% [762 of 3863], mean difference 2% [95% CI -1.24% to 7.58%]; p = 0.08). Comparing women to men program directors, women had fewer years between residency completion and appointment to the position of program director (8 ± 2 years versus 12 ± 7 years, mean difference 4 years [95% CI 2.01 to 7.93 years]; p = 0.02) and had a lower mean h-index (7 ± 4 versus 11 ± 11, mean difference 4 [95% CI 1.70 to 6.56]; p = 0.03) and number of publications (24 ± 23 versus 41 ± 62, mean difference 17 [95% CI 3.98 to 31.05]; p = 0.01), although they did not differ in terms of their advanced degrees, duration of training, or likelihood of having taken a fellowship. CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic residency programs that were run by women did not contain a higher percentage of women residents, suggesting that the gender of the individual in that role may not be as important as has been speculated by others. Future studies should investigate the intersectionality of gender, race, and ethnicity of residents, program directors, and current faculty. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The fact that women were placed in program director roles earlier in career may also carry special jeopardy for them. Those roles are difficult and can impair a faculty member's ability to conduct individual research, which often is key to further academic promotions. Given that and the fact that the gender of the program director was not associated with differences in gender composition of residency programs, we believe that increasing mentorship and access to pipeline programs will help promote diversity in residency programs.

What Is the Representation of Sexual and Gender Minority Identities Among Orthopaedic Professionals in the United States?

BACKGROUND: There is substantial corroborating evidence that orthopaedic surgery has historically been the least diverse of all medical and surgical specialties in terms of race, ethnicity, and sex. Growing recognition of this deficit and the benefits of a diverse healthcare workforce has motivated policy changes to improve diversity. To measure progress with these efforts, it is important to understand the existing representation of sexual and gender minorities among orthopaedic professionals. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What proportion of American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) members reported their identity as a sexual or gender minority? (2) What demographic factors are associated with the self-reporting of one's sexual orientation and gender identity? METHODS: The AAOS published the updated membership questionnaire in January 2022 to collect information from new and existing society members regarding age and race or ethnicity and newly added categories of gender identity, sexual orientation, and pronouns. The questionnaire was updated with input from a committee of orthopaedic surgeons and researchers to ensure face validity. The AAOS provided a deidentified dataset that included the variables of interest: membership type, gender identity, sexual orientation, pronouns, age, race, and ethnicity. Of 35,427 active AAOS members, 47% (16,652) updated their membership questionnaire. To answer our first study question, we calculated the prevalence of participants who self-reported as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or another sexual or gender minority identity (LGBTQ+) and other demographic characteristics of the 16,652 respondents. Categorical demographic data are described using frequencies and proportions. Median and IQR were used to describe the central tendency and variability. To answer our second study question, we conducted a stratified analysis to compare demographic characteristics between those who self-reported LGBTQ+ identity and those who did not. Visual methods (quantile-quantile plots) and statistical tests (Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro Wilk) confirmed that the age of AAOS member was not normally distributed. Therefore, a Kruskal Wallis test was used to determine the statistical associations between age and self-reported LGBTQ+ status. Chi-square tests were used to determine bivariate statistical associations between categorical demographic characteristics and self-reported LGBTQ+ status. A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to identify the independent demographic characteristics associated with respondents who self-reported LGBTQ+ identity. Further stratified analyses were not conducted to protect the anonymity of AAOS members. An alpha level of 5% was established a priori to define statistical significance. RESULTS: Overall, 3% (109 of 3679) and fewer than 1% (3 of 16,182) of the AAOS members (surgeons, clinicians, allied healthcare providers, and researchers) who updated their membership profiles reported identifying as a sexual (lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer) or gender minority (nonbinary or transgender), respectively. No individual self-identified as transgender. Five percent (33 of 603) of women and 3% (80 of 3042) of men self-identified as a sexual minority (such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or queer). AAOS members who self-identified as LGBTQ+ were younger (OR 0.99 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 0.99]; p < 0.001), less likely to self-identify as women (OR 0.86 [95% CI 0.767 to 0.954]; p < 0.001), less likely to be underrepresented in medicine (OR 0.49 [95% CI 0.405 to 0.599]; p < 0.001), and less likely to be an emeritus or honorary member (OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.641 to 0.883]; p < 0.003). CONCLUSION: The proportion of self-reported LGBTQ+ AAOS members is lower than the 7% of the general US population. The greater proportion of younger AAOS members reporting this information suggests progress in the pursuit of a more-diverse field. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The study findings support standardized collection of sexual orientation and gender identity data to better identify and address diversity gaps. As orthopaedic surgery continues to transform to reflect the diversity of musculoskeletal patients, all orthopaedic professionals (surgeons, clinicians, allied healthcare providers, and researchers), regardless of their identities, are essential in the mission to provide equitable and informed orthopaedic care. Sexual and gender minority individuals may serve as important mentors to the next generations of orthopaedic professionals; individuals from nonminority groups should serve as important allies in achieving this goal.

Influence of Training Background on Elbow Arthroplasty Case Numbers: An Analysis of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Oral Examination Case List Database.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of training background on the frequency and indications of elbow arthroplasty performed by early-career surgeons. METHODS: A review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Oral Examination Case List database from 2010 to 2021 was completed. The number of cases performed by surgeons from each individual training background were calculated and compared with the total number of surgeons who completed each fellowship during the study period. RESULTS: Hand surgeons performed the most elbow arthroplasty cases (132, 44%), but a higher percentage of shoulder/elbow surgeons performed elbow arthroplasty in comparison (15% vs. 7%). The mean number of TEA cases performed by shoulder/elbow surgeons was significantly higher than in other subspecialties (P < 0.01). However, when comparing only surgeons who performed elbow arthroplasty during the board collection period, there was no significant difference between training backgrounds (P = 0.20). DISCUSSION: While hand surgeons performed the most elbow arthroplasty cases, a higher percentage of shoulder/elbow surgeons performed elbow arthroplasty during the study period. The high prevalence of distal humerus fracture as an indication for arthroplasty reflected a shift in indications and was not related to training background.

Diversity on the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons National Meeting Podium: Changes Over Two Decades.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increase in diversity initiatives regarding selecting speakers for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) annual meeting and courses. The purpose of this study was to determine the percentage of female or underrepresented minority (URM) speakers for instructional course lectures (ICLs) and AAOS courses over the past 2 decades including a surrogate for expertise. METHODS: For 2002, 2012, and 2022, the academic and demographic information of speakers and the number of publications at the time of their speaking role were obtained and compared by sex and URM status. Owing to the unequal sample sizes between male versus female cohorts and URM versus non-URM cohorts, the Welch t -test was used. RESULTS: The percentage of ICL and AAOS course speakers who were female increased over time (ICL, AAOS courses): 2002 (2.6%, 3.3%), 2012 (3.9%, 6.3%), and 2022 (11.8%, 15.5%) ( P < 0.001, P < 0.001). The percentage of female AAOS fellows in these years was 2.9%, 4.7%, and 7.4%, respectively. For ICLs and AAOS course speakers, female presenters had fewer publications than male counterparts (ICL, AAOS courses): 2002 ( P < 0.001, P = 0.048), 2012 ( P = 0.003, P < 0.001), and 2022 ( P < 0.001, P < 0.001). For ICLs in 2022, URM speakers had a similar number of publications compared with non-URM speakers. In 2022, URMs comprised 6.9% of ICL speakers and 4% of AAOS fellows. For 2022 ICLs, there were no significant differences in academic institution, position, or region when compared by sex or URM status. For AAOS courses, the percentage of URM speakers increased over time: 2002 (1.1%), 2012 (4.5%), and 2022 (8.6%). For AAOS courses, URM presenters had similar publications compared with non-URM presenters in 2002 and 2022 but less in 2012 ( P = 0.027). DISCUSSION: The percentage of women and URMs presenting ICLs and AAOS courses has increased over the past 2 decades and exceeded the percentage they represent in the AAOS by over 50%. The female cohort has fewer publications, on average, than the male cohort for all years evaluated, indicating no institutional bias against female speakers.

The Effect of Adverse Events on Orthopaedic Surgeons: A Review.

The purpose of this review was to evaluate the effect of adverse events (AEs) on orthopaedic surgeons, illustrate common ways orthopaedic surgeons deal with AEs, and describe solutions to reduce the negative effect of AEs and prevent them from recurring. AEs are common in orthopaedic surgery and increase the risk of depression, anxiety, and suicide. Orthopaedic surgeons may experience negative effects after AEs even when they are not at fault. AEs are linked to moral injury, second victim syndrome, burnout, and disruptive physician behaviors. Many surgeons deal with AEs in isolation out of fear of a negative effect on their professional reputation, potentially leading to increased psychological distress and unhealthy coping mechanisms. Healthy ways to address AEs and improve the well-being of surgeons include destigmatizing psychological stress after AEs and creating a culture of receptivity and peer support.

Pain Self-Efficacy Can Improve During a Visit With an Orthopedic Surgeon.

BACKGROUND: Greater pain self-efficacy (PSE) is associated with reduced pain, fewer limitations, and increased quality of life after treatment for orthopedic conditions. The aims of this study were to (1) assess if PSE improves during a visit with an orthopedic surgeon and (2) identify modifiable visit factors that are associated with an increase in PSE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study of orthopedic clinic visits at a multispecialty clinic from February to May 2022. New patients who presented to one of six orthopedic surgeons were approached for the study. Patients who provided consent completed a pre-visit questionnaire including the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) and demographic questions. A trained research member recorded the five-item Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making Instrument (OPTION-5) score, number of questions asked, and visit duration. Immediately after the visit, patients completed a post-visit questionnaire consisting of the PSEQ and Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS). RESULTS: Of 132 patients enrolled, 61 (46%) had improved PSE after the orthopedic visit, with 38 (29%) having improvement above a clinically significant threshold. There were no significant differences between patients with increased PSE and those without increased PSE when comparing the PICS, OPTION-5, questions asked, or visit duration. CONCLUSION: Almost half of the patients had improvement in PSE during an orthopedic visit. The causal pathway to how to improve PSE and the durability of the improved PSE have implications in strategies to improve patient outcomes in orthopedic surgery, such as communication methods and shared decision-making. Future research can focus on studying different interventions that facilitate improving PSE. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(4):e197-e203.].

What outcomes do patients value after orthopaedic trauma: A best-worst scaling choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-centered treatment and research should focus on the outcomes that matter to patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the outcome preferences of patients after musculoskeletal trauma. The secondary aim was to identify discrepancies between outcome preferences of surgeons and patients. METHODS: A Best-worst scaling choice experiment survey was administered to patients with operative lower extremity injuries and orthopaedic surgeons who take trauma call. Participants completed 13 choice sets of 3 randomly-ordered outcomes, including: a full recovery (back to normal) without any problems; a problem that requires additional surgery or hospital stay versus medication or treatment in clinic/emergency department; minimal to moderate versus severe pain for 6 weeks; need for crutches/walker versus wheelchair for 6-12 weeks; being unable to work for 6-12 weeks; requiring 2-4 weeks in a facility; a perfect versus poor or worst-possible EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) score at 1 year; and death. Within each set, participants ranked their "most-preferred" to "least-preferred" outcomes. Responses were aggregated to calculate the relative importance, or marginal utility, of each outcome stratified by respondent type. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients and 65 surgeons participated. The most preferred outcome for patients and surgeons was a full recovery (back to normal) without any problems, followed by minimal to moderate pain for 6 weeks and a perfect EQ-5D score. The least preferred outcomes were death and the worst EQ-5D score, which had similar marginal utility, followed by a poor EQ-5D score and a problem that needs another surgery or stay at a hospital, which also had similar marginal utility. Surgeons, in comparison to patients, assigned a higher marginal utility to perfect EQ-5D scores at one year (3.55 vs. 2.03; p < 0.0001) and a 2-4 week stay in a facility (0.52 vs. -0.21; p = 0.001), and a lower marginal utility to severe pain for 6 weeks (-0.58 vs. -0.08; p = 0.04) and a poor EQ-5D score (-1.88 vs. -1.03; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: A full recovery (back to normal) without any problems was the most-preferred outcome for both patients and surgeons. Patient-centered care and research should focus on both patients' return to baseline and the avoidance of complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Telling the truth to patients before hip fracture surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture repair surgery carries a certain mortality risk, yet evidence suggests that orthopedic surgeons often refrain from discussing this issue with patients prior to surgery. AIM: This study aims to examine whether orthopedic surgeons raise the issue of one-year post-surgery mortality before hip fracture repair surgery and to explore factors influencing this decision. METHOD: The study employs a cross-sectional design, administering validated digital questionnaires to 150 orthopedic surgeons. RESULTS: A minority of orthopedic surgeons reported always informing patients about the risk of mortality in the year following hip fracture surgery. The main reasons for not discussing this risk were a desire to avoid frightening patients, time constraints, and concerns about undermining patient hope. Orthopedic surgeons reported a medium-high level of perceived self-efficacy, with higher self-efficacy associated with a reduced likelihood of discussing one-year mortality risk. Conversely, older age and holding a specialist status in orthopedic surgery were associated with an increased likelihood of discussing this risk with patients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest a need for interventions to address communication barriers and ensure consistent provision of essential information to patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Additionally, they highlight the importance of considering individual factors such as self-efficacy, age, and expertise in designing strategies to improve patient-provider communication in orthopedic care settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study doesn`t report the results of a health care intervention.

Surgeon Recommendations for Physical Activity in Patients With Pediatric Hip Conditions.

BACKGROUND: While physical activity (PA) is important during youth, it is unclear if children and adolescents with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease (LCPD), or slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) are expected or encouraged to return to PA once they have healed. This study examines the orthopaedic surgeons' role in advising pediatric hip patients on the PA they should engage in, assessing their practice, opinions, and consensus when making recommendations. METHODS: Orthopaedic surgeons were invited from member lists of 4 hip study groups. The survey included demographics, opinions regarding PA, and 10 case scenarios that queried respondents on the duration and intensity of PA as well as the restrictions on activity type that they would recommend for DDH, LCPD, or SCFE patients. Consensus was evaluated on a scale ranging from 0 to 1, with a value of 0 indicating no agreement among respondents and a value of 1 indicating complete agreement. RESULTS: A total of 51 orthopaedic surgeons responded. While 94% agreed that it is important for school-aged hip patients to return to PA after they have healed, 53% believed that PA may compromise the hip and contribute to the development of osteoarthritis. Average standardized consensus was 0.92 for suggesting the patient engage in some amount of PA, 0.44 for suggesting the recommended daily minimum of 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and 0.33 for suggesting restrictions on activity type. The most frequently selected restrictions included avoiding impact activities (93%, 235/254) and contact activities (58%, 147/254), followed by weight-bearing activities (24%, 62/254). Respondents were not aware of existing PA guidelines, although 57% expressed interest in following guidelines and 39% were uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: While there is consensus among orthopaedic surgeons that children with chronic hip conditions should engage in PA, there is considerable variation when recommending the recommended daily MVPA minimum and placing restrictions on activity type. This study suggests interest among orthopaedic surgeons in developing PA guidelines that optimize outcomes for pediatric hip patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II-Survey study.