RESUMO
PURPOSE: Traumatic elbow instability (subluxation and dislocation) represents a challenging clinical entity that can be complicated by persistent intraoperative instability after attempted stabilization or recurrent postoperative instability. Both static and dynamic supplemental stabilization procedures have been described for cases where fracture fixation and ligament repair fail to restore stability. There is a paucity of prior studies involving ulnohumeral cross-pinning (UCP), which is a type of static supplemental stabilization. Our purpose was to assess complications and outcomes after UCP. METHODS: We reviewed all surgical cases involving primary and revision UCP for traumatic elbow instability at a single center from 2017-2023. Baseline demographics were recorded. Outcomes including radiographs, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures, and surgical complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Fourteen patients undergoing UCP were included with a mean follow-up of 27 months. Five cross-pinnings (36%) were performed during revision procedures. Mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH), and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores were 2.4, 34, and 69, respectively. The mean flexion-extension and pronation-supination arcs were 114° and 140°, with 85% achieving at least a 100° arc for flexion and forearm rotation. Five patients (36%) had complications, all of which required reoperation. Two complications involved postoperative instability: one radial head subluxation and one radial head dislocation. Both occurred in revision UCP cases indicated for recurrent postoperative instability. CONCLUSIONS: Ulnohumeral cross-pinning for persistent and recurrent elbow instability results in maintained ulnohumeral joint alignment, functional arcs of elbow range of motion, and acceptable patient-reported outcome measures, particularly in the setting of a primary procedure indicated for persistent intraoperative instability. Ulnohumeral cross-pinning is a reasonable supplemental stabilization procedure for complex elbow instability. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.
RESUMO
Introduction The creation of research groups and consortiums has become more common in all medical and surgical specialities. The purpose of this investigation was to assess and describe collaborative research groups and consortiums within orthopaedic surgery. In addition, we aimed to define the demographics of the research consortium members with particular attention to female and minority members. Methods Journals with a musculoskeletal/orthopaedic focus and a few medical journals were selected to identify articles published by research groups and consortiums. Articles published from 2020 to 2022 were manually reviewed. Bibliographic information, author information and level of evidence (LOE) were recorded. For identified consortium members, sex and race were defined in a binary manner. Results A total of 92 research consortiums were identified. A list of members was identified for 77 groups (83.7%), totalling 2,260 researchers. The remaining group members were not able to be identified due to the lack of information in the included publications, research group websites or after communicating with the corresponding author for respective articles. Most researchers were male (n=1,748, 77.3%) and white (n=1,694, 75%). Orthopaedic surgeons comprised 1,613 (71.4%) identified researchers. The most common fellowship training for orthopaedic surgeons was paediatrics (n=370, 16.4%), trauma (n=266, 11.8%) and sports medicine (n=229, 10.1%). The consortiums published 261 articles: women were lead (first) authors in 23% and senior (last) authors in 11.1%. Non-white researchers were lead authors in 24.5% (n=64) and senior authors in 17.2% (n=45). The most common level of evidence was level 3, accounting for 45.6% (n=119) of all publications. Level 1 evidence accounted for 12.6% (n=33) of published articles. Discussion Representation of women in orthopaedic research consortiums exceeds their representation in almost every orthopaedic professional society. There is less publicly available data to compare the involvement of under-represented minorities (URMs) in research consortiums to general practice. Further investigations should analyse possible avenues in which gender and racial disparity could be improved within orthopaedic surgery research.
RESUMO
Purpose: Bibliometric analysis is a common method for evaluating current trends within a scientific field. The primary aim of this study was to define and analyze the 50 most frequently cited articles in the field of elbow surgery, both of all time and those published during the 21st century. Methods: We searched the Journal Citation Report to identify articles related to elbow surgery within academic journals. Articles were sorted by total citations. The overall top 50 articles and those published since 2000 were identified, and data were collected, including title, journal of publication, publication year, country of publication, citation density, level of evidence, article type, institution, and sex of the lead and senior authors, and inclusion on the reference list for the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination within the last 5 years. Descriptive statistics were reported, and correlation analysis was performed using Spearman test. Results: For the most-cited elbow surgery articles, "fracture" was overall the most reported topic, whereas "lateral epicondylosis" and "fracture" were equal for those published since 2000. The United States was the most represented overall and for articles published since 2000. Women comprised 1/50 (2%) of lead authors overall, increasing to 8/50 (16%) for articles published during the 21st century. Most articles in during both periods contained level IV evidence, with level I evidence appearing infrequently (4%). Six percent of the most-cited articles of all time had appeared on the reference list of the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination within the past 5 years. Conclusions: The top 50 most-cited elbow surgery articles often assess fracture and lateral epicondylosis, most commonly originating from the United States. Level IV retrospective series comprises over half of the articles on this list. Women remain underrepresented as authors. Clinical Relevance: This study provides a modern reading list for upper-extremity surgeons about impactful elbow surgery articles.
RESUMO
Purpose: To identify patient, surgeon, and injury characteristics associated with preoperative computed tomography (CT) scan utilization for operative distal radius fractures (DRF). In addition, we aimed to determine if preoperative CT was associated with treatment methods other than isolated volar-locked plating (VLP). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all operatively treated adult DRFs within our health care system from 2016 to 2020. Baseline demographics, injury, treatment characteristics, and the fellowship training of the 44 included surgeons were recorded. We compared cases with and without a preoperative CT, and an adjusted logistic regression model was generated to determine the odds of having a preoperative CT. Results: A total of 1,204 operatively treated DRFs performed by 44 surgeons were included. CT utilization increased during the study period. Intra-articular fractures accounted for 76% of cases, and preoperative CT scans were ordered in 243 of 1240 cases (20%). Overall, isolated VLP was used in 83% of cases. Cases with a preoperative CT were more likely to be treated with an alternative method of fixation (such as dorsal plating). The adjusted logistic regression model demonstrated that male sex (OR 1.62; 95% CI: 1.16, 2.26), intra-articular fractures (OR 3.11; 95% CI: 1.87, 5.81), and associated fractures (OR 2.69; 95% CI: 1.82, 3.98) had a significantly increased odds of having a preoperative CT. Fellowship training was not associated with increased CT utilization overall, but hand surgeons were more likely to use a CT in Orthopaedic Trauma Association-C3 fractures. Conclusions: Patient and injury characteristics are associated with CT utilization in operative DRFs. Preoperative CTs are associated with alternative fixation approaches, as cases with a CT were more likely to use fixation methods other than isolated VLP. The costs and benefits of CT scans must be carefully weighed against whether this modality adds value or improves outcomes in treating DRFs. Level of evidence: Prognostic II.
RESUMO
Introduction: The use of telemedicine (TM) for patient care greatly increased during the COVID pandemic. This study presents data from a single health system regarding physician's perspectives on TM, which could ultimately determine how it is used in the future. Methods: A questionnaire was distributed to physicians throughout the health system. Physicians were divided based on the standard level of patient interaction in each specialty, as well as practice locations and years in practice. Physician perspectives were categorized by their opinions on different aspects of telehealth visits. Results: Of 1,794 physicians, 379 (20.7%) responded to the survey. Psychiatrists used TM significantly more than other groups and project the most future use. Surgeons were least likely to incorporate TM in the future. Ability to perform a physical examination via TM differed significantly by specialty and practice environment, but not by years in practice. Frequency of being able to complete a treatment plan via TM differed significantly by specialty, but not by years in practice or practice environment. Overall, 76.3% of physicians reported feeling "satisfied" with performing TM visits. Satisfaction with TM varied significantly by specialty and practice environment, but not by years in practice. There were no significant differences regarding physician expectations on reimbursement or billing for TM visits based on specialty, age, or practice environment. Conclusions: Discrepancies exist among physicians with respect to their satisfaction and expected future use of TM. Consensus may be difficult to reach regarding reimbursement for these visits, and further work is needed to clarify the optimal practice setting for TM.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Prestação Integrada de Cuidados de Saúde , Cirurgiões , Telemedicina , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Telemedicina/métodosRESUMO
PURPOSE: To assess the outcomes of operatively treated terrible triad (TT) elbow injuries for a single surgeon at the start of clinical practice. We aimed to define postoperative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion (ROM), and complications during the period immediately following fellowship training, in order to describe the learning process for surgical treatment of TT. Methods: All operatively treated TTs from 2017 to 2020 were included. All cases were performed by a single, fellowship-trained upper-extremity surgeon and represented a consecutive series at the start of clinical practice. Baseline demographics, injury characteristics, and surgical details were recorded for each case. PROMs [QuickDisability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and (visual analog scale) pain scale], ROM, and complications were recorded at the time of final follow-up. A perioperative glucocorticoid protocol was used in all cases without diabetes. RESULTS: There was a total of 21 included TT cases with a mean follow-up of 20 months. The operative time averaged 89 min for the first 10 cases and 83 min for the subsequent 11 cases. The mean QuickDASH and VAS pain score at final follow-up were 19 and 2.3, respectively. The mean flexion-extension arc was 122° and two cases (9%) had < 100° arc of motion. The mean pronation-supination arc was 145°. Three cases (14%) had a postoperative complication, all of which underwent reoperation. Of the 21 included cases, these reoperations represented cases #1, #14, and #17 respectively. Conclusions: Upper-extremity surgeons at the start of clinical practice may be able to achieve outcomes similar to more experienced surgeons for operatively treated TT elbow fracture dislocations. There does not appear to be a substantial "learning curve" after fellowship training with respect to PROMs, complication rates, or operative time associated with surgical treatment of TT elbow injuries.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: We assessed the readability of spine-related patient education materials on professional society websites to determine whether this had improved since last studied. We also compared the readability of these materials to a more patient-centered source, such as WebMD. METHODS: Patient education pages from the American Association of Neurologic Surgeons (AANS), North American Spine Society (NASS), and spine-related pages from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), and WebMD were reviewed. Readability was evaluated using the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas. The mean FKGL and FRE scores of the societies were compared using one-way analysis of variance. The rate of a reading level at or below an eighth grade level was compared using the χ2 test. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 156 sites. The mean FKGL score for the professional society sites was 11.4. The mean FRE score for the professional societies was 45.8, with 14.4% written at or below an eighth grade reading level. We found a significant difference in the FKGL scores and materials at or below the eighth grade level between the AAOS and AANS and AAOS and NASS. The mean FKGL and FRE scores for WebMD were 7.57 and 68.1, respectively, with a significant difference compared with the scores for the AAOS, NASS, and AANS. In addition, 80% of the WebMD materials had been written at or below the eighth grade reading level. A significant difference compared with the AANS and NASS (P < 0.0001) but not for the AAOS (P = 0.059). CONCLUSIONS: The average readability of spine-related topics exceeded the eighth grade reading level. The AAOS resources had better readability compared with the NASS and AANS. We found no improvement in readability since last studied. The readability of professional societies' materials was significantly worse than those from WebMD.