Minimally invasive technique for acute fixation and subtalar fusion of displaced intra-articular calcaneus fractures.

Displaced intra-articular calcaneus fractures (DIACFs) are difficult injuries to treat and are often encountered by orthopedic surgeons. For DIACFs treated nonoperatively or with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), a common complication is painful subtalar arthritis and the need for a secondary subtalar fusion, which prolongs the overall recovery time. One treatment option to address this sequela involves ORIF with subtalar fusion as the primary treatment. We describe a reproducible, minimally invasive surgical technique for primary ORIF with subtalar fusion when the calcaneal tuberosity is amendable to cannulated screw fixation to treat these complex calcaneal fractures. Our technique offers advantages compared to other techniques in that it avoids screw traffic, allows easy bony compression of the subtalar joint, and minimizes soft tissue damage via percutaneous screw fixation. Fourteen fractured calcanei in 12 patients underwent our technique and all achieved bony union with a median time to fusion of 107.5 days (range, 54-530 days). Eight patients returned to work with the remaining 4 patients having an unknown work status at last follow-up, although 2 of these 4 patients resumed normal activities. Only 1 patient experienced a complication, which was an infection after achieving bony union, and was treated with successful hardware removal and our infection protocol. Overall, we conclude our surgical technique offers a successful option in the treatment of DIACFs when the calcaneal tuberosity is amendable to cannulated screw fixation.

Suspected gluteal compartment syndrome: Etiology predicts clinical course, outcomes and resource utilization.

Background: Gluteal Compartment Syndrome (GCS) is a rare subtype of acute compartment syndrome (ACS), complex to diagnose and potentially fatal if left untreated. The incidence of ACS is estimated to be 7.3 per 100,000 in males and 0.7 per 100,000 in females [1-3]. Given its rare occurrence, the incidence of GCS is not well reported. In the case of GCS, the most common etiologies are surgical positioning, prolonged immobilization secondary to substance use or loss of consciousness, and traumatic injury. Clinical findings are pulselessness, pallor, parasthesia, paralysis, and most notably pain out of proportion. Swift diagnosis and treatment are imperative to reduce morbidity and mortality, however the ideal management of GCS is difficult to ascertain given the rare occurrence and variable presentation. Methods: Orthopaedic trauma database at a level 1 trauma center was reviewed to identify patients for whom the orthopaedic service was consulted due to suspicion of gluteal compartment syndrome. This yielded 11 patients between 2011 and 2019. Patients with a measured ΔP greater than 30 upon initial consultation and with a concerning exam requiring monitoring were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, GCS etiology, laboratory values, physical exam findings, pain scores (0-10) and patient outcomes were collected via chart review. Patient demographic and injury characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics. Results: Prolonged immobilization patients had worse outcomes including longer hospital stays (40.5 days) compared to trauma patients (4.5 days). All adverse medical outcomes recorded including acute renal failure, prolonged neuropathic pain, cardiopulmonary dysfunction were exclusively experienced by prolonged immobilization patients. Conclusions: Our descriptive study demonstrates the bimodal distribution of GCS patients based on etiology. Prolonged immobilization patients have a longer hospital course and more complications. Our study confirms prior reports and provides information that can be used to counsel patients and families appropriately about treatment and recovery following GCS. Level of evidence: IV. Study type: Epidemiological.

Opioid Prescribing Rate for Nonoperative Distal Radius Fractures and Clinician Response to a Clinical Decision Support Alert.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are commonly prescribed for the management of acute orthopedic trauma pain, including nonoperative distal radius fractures. OBJECTIVES: This prospective study aimed to determine if a clinical decision support intervention influenced prescribing decisions for patients with known risk factors. We sought to quantify frequency of opioid prescriptions for acute nonoperative distal radius fractures treated. METHODS: We performed a prospective study at one large health care system. Utilizing umbrella code S52.5, we identified all distal radius fractures treated nonoperatively, and the encounters were merged with the Prescription Reporting with Immediate Medication Mapping (PRIMUM) database to identify encounters with opioid prescriptions and patients with risk factors for opioid use disorder. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine patient characteristics associated with the prescription of an opioid. Among encounters that triggered the PRIMUM alert, we calculated the percentage of encounters where the PRIMUM alert influenced the prescribing decision. RESULTS: Of 2984 encounters, 1244 (41.7%) included an opioid prescription. Age increment is a significant factor to more likely receive opioid prescriptions (p < 0.0001) after adjusting for other factors. Among encounters where the physician received an alert, those that triggered the alert for early refill were more likely to influence physicians' opioid prescribing when compared with other risk factors (p = 0.0088). CONCLUSION: Over 90% of patients (106/118) continued to receive an opioid medication despite having a known risk factor for abuse. Additionally, we found older patients were more likely to be prescribed opioids for nonoperatively managed distal radius fractures.

Lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis osseointegrated transfemoral versus socket prosthesis using Markov modelling.

Aims: Prior cost-effectiveness analyses on osseointegrated prosthesis for transfemoral unilateral amputees have analyzed outcomes in non-USA countries using generic quality of life instruments, which may not be appropriate when evaluating disease-specific quality of life. These prior analyses have also focused only on patients who had failed a socket-based prosthesis. The aim of the current study is to use a disease-specific quality of life instrument, which can more accurately reflect a patient's quality of life with this condition in order to evaluate cost-effectiveness, examining both treatment-naïve and socket refractory patients. Methods: Lifetime Markov models were developed evaluating active healthy middle-aged male amputees. Costs of the prostheses, associated complications, use/non-use, and annual costs of arthroplasty parts and service for both a socket and osseointegrated (OPRA) prosthesis were included. Effectiveness was evaluated using the questionnaire for persons with a transfemoral amputation (Q-TFA) until death. All costs and Q-TFA were discounted at 3% annually. Sensitivity analyses on those cost variables which affected a change in treatment (OPRA to socket, or socket to OPRA) were evaluated to determine threshold values. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Results: For treatment-naïve patients, the lifetime ICER for OPRA was $279/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). For treatment-refractory patients the ICER was $273/QALY. In sensitivity analysis, the variable thresholds that would affect a change in the course of treatment based on cost (from socket to OPRA), included the following for the treatment-naïve group: yearly replacement components for socket > $8,511; cost yearly replacement parts OPRA < $1,758; and for treatment-refractory group: yearly replacement component for socket of > $12,467. Conclusion: The use of the OPRA prosthesis in physically active transfemoral amputees should be considered as a cost-effective alternative in both treatment-naïve and treatment-refractory socket prosthesis patients. Disease-specific quality of life assessments such as Q-TFA are more sensitive when evaluating cost-effectiveness.

Perioperative nutritional status thought to be important, but poorly understood.

OBJECTIVES: Malnutrition has been shown to increase complications and leads to poor outcomes in surgical patients, but it has not been studied extensively in orthopedic trauma. This study's purpose is to determine the perspective and assessment of nutrition by orthopedic traumatologists. METHODS: A survey was created and distributed via REDCap to orthopedic traumatologists at 60 U.S. trauma centers. Out of 183 distributed surveys, 130 surgeons completed the survey (71%). The survey focused on the importance of nutrition and practice patterns in orthopedic trauma. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of surgeons thought that nutritional status was "very important" to the final outcome of patients with orthopedic trauma injuries, 24% responded "somewhat important" and 1% responded "not important." Furthermore, 88% perform nutritional assessments; most surgeons (77%) utilize nutritional laboratory markers, with the most common markers being albumin, pre-albumin, transferrin and CRP. Additionally, 42% think trending the laboratory markers is important, and 50% are not sure if nutrition markers should be tested at multiple time points. Despite 75% of surgeons believing that nutrition is very important, only 8% discuss it with patients routinely. When asked what is more important for outcomes, nutrition or Vitamin D, almost three times as many surgeons thought nutrition was more important (29% vs 11%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: While orthopedic traumatologists believe nutrition is an important determinant of patient outcomes, this study shows a clear lack of consensus and variability in practice regarding nutrition among surgeons. Orthopedic trauma surgeons need specific guidelines on how to assess and treat malnutrition in trauma patients.

Are Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons Appropriately Compensated for Treating Acetabular Fractures? An Analysis of Operative Times and Relative Value Units.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the work relative value units (RVUs) attributed per minute of operative time (wRVU/min) in fixation of acetabular fractures, evaluate surgical factors that influence wRVU/min, and compare wRVU/min with other procedures. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Level 1 academic center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Two hundred fifty-one operative acetabular fractures (62 A, B, C) from 2015 to 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Work relative value unit per minute of operative time for each acetabular current procedural terminology (CPT) code. Surgical approach, patient positioning, total room time, and surgeon experience were collected. Comparison wRVU/min were collected from the literature. RESULTS: The mean wRVU per surgical minute for each CPT code was (1) CPT 27226 (isolated wall fracture): 0.091 wRVU/min, (2) CPT 27227 (isolated column or transverse fracture): 0.120 wRVU/min, and (3) CPT 27228 (associated fracture types): 0.120 wRVU/min. Of fractures with single approaches, anterior approaches generated the least wRVU/min (0.091 wRVU/min, P = 0.0001). Average nonsurgical room time was 82.1 minutes. Surgeon experience ranged from 3 to 26 years with operative time decreasing as surgeon experience increased ( P = 0.03). As a comparison, the wRVU/min for primary and revision hip arthroplasty have been reported as 0.26 and 0.249 wRVU/min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The wRVUs allocated per minute of operative time for acetabular fractures is less than half of other reported hip procedures and lowest for isolated wall fractures. There was a significant amount of nonsurgical room time that should be accounted for in compensation models. This information should be used to ensure that orthopaedic trauma surgeons are being appropriately supported for managing these fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Outcomes of Humerus Nonunion Surgery in Patients With Initial Operative Fracture Fixation.

OBJECTIVES: To describe outcomes following humerus aseptic nonunion surgery in patients whose initial fracture was treated operatively and to identify risk factors for nonunion surgery failure in the same population. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Eight, academic, level 1 trauma centers. PATIENTS SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients with aseptic humerus nonunion (OTA/AO 11 and 12) after the initial operative management between 1998 and 2019. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Success rate of nonunion surgery. RESULTS: Ninety patients were included (56% female; median age 50 years; mean follow-up 21.2 months). Of 90 aseptic humerus nonunions, 71 (78.9%) united following nonunion surgery. Thirty patients (33.3%) experienced 1 or more postoperative complications, including infection, failure of fixation, and readmission. Multivariate analysis found that not performing revision internal fixation during nonunion surgery (n = 8; P = 0.002) and postoperative de novo infection (n = 9; P = 0.005) were associated with an increased risk of recalcitrant nonunion. Patient smoking status and the use of bone graft were not associated with differences in the nonunion repair success rate. CONCLUSIONS: This series of previously operated aseptic humerus nonunions found that more than 1 in 5 patients failed nonunion repair. De novo postoperative infection and failure to perform revision internal fixation during nonunion surgery were associated with recalcitrant nonunion. Smoking and use of bone graft did not influence the success rate of nonunion surgery. These findings can be used to give patients a realistic expectation of results and complications following humerus nonunion surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patients with glenohumeral arthritis are more likely to be prescribed opioids in the emergency department or urgent care setting.

OBJECTIVE: The objective is to quantify the rate of opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing for the diagnosis of shoulder osteoarthritis across a large healthcare system and to describe the impact of a clinical decision support intervention on prescribing patterns. DESIGN: A prospective observational study. SETTING: One large healthcare system. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients presenting with shoulder osteoarthritis. INTERVENTIONS: A clinical decision support intervention that presents an alert to prescribers when patients meet criteria for increased risk of opioid use disorder. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The percentage of patients receiving an opioid or benzodiazepine, the percentage who had at least one risk factor for misuse, and the percent of encounters in which the prescribing decision was influenced by the alert were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 5,380 outpatient encounters with a diagnosis of shoulder osteoarthritis were included. Twenty-nine percent (n = 1,548) of these encounters resulted in an opioid or benzodiazepine prescription. One-third of those who received a prescription had at least one risk factor for prescription misuse. Patients were more likely to receive opioids from the emergency department or urgent care facilities (40 percent of encounters) compared to outpatient facilities (28 percent) (p < .0001). Forty-four percent of the opioid prescriptions were for "potent opioids" (morphine milliequivalent conversion factor > 1). Of the 612 encounters triggering an alert, the prescribing decision was influenced (modified or not prescribed) in 53 encounters (8.7 percent). All but four (0.65 percent) of these encounters resulted in an opioid prescription. CONCLUSION: Despite evidence against routine opioid use for osteoarthritis, one-third of patients with a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis received an opioid prescription. Of those who received a prescription, over one-third had a risk factor for opioid misuse. An electronic clinic decision support tool influenced the prescription in less than 10 percent of encounters.