Identification of ChatGPT-Generated Abstracts Within Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Poses a Challenge for Reviewers.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the extent to which experienced reviewers can accurately discern between AI-generated and original research abstracts published in the field of shoulder and elbow surgery and compare this to the performance of an AI-detection tool. METHODS: Twenty-five shoulder and elbow-related articles published in high-impact journals in 2023 were randomly selected. ChatGPT was prompted with only the abstract title to create an AI-generated version of each abstract. The resulting 50 abstracts were randomly distributed to and evaluated by 8 blinded peer reviewers with at least 5 years of experience. Reviewers were tasked with distinguishing between original and AI-generated text. A Likert scale assessed reviewer confidence for each interpretation and the primary reason guiding assessment of generated text was collected. AI output detector (0-100%) and plagiarism (0-100%) scores were evaluated using GPTZero. RESULTS: Reviewers correctly identified 62% of AI-generated abstracts and misclassified 38% of original abstracts as being AI-generated. GPTZero reported a significantly higher probability of AI output among generated abstracts (median 56%, IQR 51-77%) compared to original abstracts (median 10%, IQR 4-37%; p < 0.01). Generated abstracts scored significantly lower on the plagiarism detector (median 7%, IQR 5-14%) relative to original abstracts (median 82%, IQR 72-92%; p < 0.01). Correct identification of AI-generated abstracts was predominately attributed to the presence of unrealistic data/values. The primary reason for misidentifying original abstracts as AI was attributed to writing style. CONCLUSIONS: Experienced reviewers faced difficulties in distinguishing between human and AI-generated research content within shoulder and elbow surgery. The presence of unrealistic data facilitated correct identification of AI abstracts, whereas misidentification of original abstracts was often ascribed to writing style.

Predicting academic productivity among American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons fellowship faculty from publications acquired before and during surgical training.

BACKGROUND: Orthopedic residency and fellowship applicants with a strong research record are highly valued for their potential in continuing academic excellence. Despite this, the association between research productivity during training and future academic productivity as an attending orthopedic surgeon is not well-established. We assess the effects of research output during different periods of surgical training as well as residency location on long-term academic productivity as an attending shoulder and elbow surgeon. METHODS: A search of the 2022-2023 American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Fellowship Directory was conducted to identify a list of orthopedic shoulder and elbow fellowship faculty members. Each surgeon's residency, fellowship and current institution of practice were determined and stratified by geographic location. Total publication counts acquired before residency, during residency, during fellowship, and after fellowship were collected for each faculty member. Attending publication rates and H-indices were calculated. A multivariate linear regression model was created, and significance was set at a P value <.05. RESULTS: A total of 149 shoulder and elbow fellowship faculty members representing 34 fellowship programs were identified. The average number of total publications per surgeon was 88.8 ± 102. The average attending publication rate was 5.29 ± 6.89 publications per year. The average H-index for included surgeons was 27.8 ± 24.4. The number of publications acquired before residency (ß = 0.293; P < .001), during residency (ß = 0.110; P = .025) and during fellowship (ß = 0.593; P < .001) were significantly associated with an increased attending publication rate, but no association was observed with the H-index [before residency (ß = -0.221; P = .574), during residency (ß = 0.045; P = .866), during fellowship (ß = 0.198; P = .678)]. There were no significant differences in total publication count (P = .397), attending publication rate (P = .237), or H-index (P = .364) based on location of residency training. DISCUSSION: Research output before and during surgical training is predictive of continued academic productivity as a shoulder and elbow surgeon. In particular, greater productivity during surgical fellowship was most predictive of academic output as an attending. While long-term academic productivity does not seem to be influenced by the geographic location of residency training, attending surgeons practicing in the Midwest had significantly greater total publication counts and H-indices but similar annual publication rates.

Long-Term Patient Outcomes for Treatment of Difficult Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus with Particulated Juvenile Allograft Cartilage Implantation ± Calcaneal Autograft: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Osteochondral lesions of the talus (OCLT) are common injuries that can be difficult to treat. To date, long-term patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) of patients with particulated juvenile allograft cartilage implantation with or without calcaneal autograft have not been compared. METHODS: Thirteen patients with difficult to treat OCLTs underwent arthroscopic-assisted implantation of particulated juvenile allograft cartilage (DeNovo NT®) with or without autogenous calcaneal bone grafting by a single surgeon. Calcaneal bone graft use was determined by lesion size > 150 mm2 and/or deeper than 5 mm. Patients were evaluated using physical examination, patient interviews, and PROMs. RESULTS: When comparing patients in regards to calcaneal bone graft implantation, no difference in age, BMI, pre-operative PROMs, or follow-up was noted, however, calcaneal bone graft patients did have a significantly larger lesion size (188.5 ± 50.9 vs. 118.7 ± 29.4 mm2 respectively; p value = 0.027). VAS and FAAM ADL scores during final follow-up improvement did not significantly differ between cohorts. The FAAM Sports score improved significantly more for the DeNovo alone group compared to the bone graft cohort (p value = 0.032). The AOFAS score improvement did not differ between cohorts (p value = 0.944), however, the SF-36 PCS improved significantly more for the DeNovo alone group compared to the bone graft cohort (p value = 0.038). No intraoperative/perioperative complications were observed with calcaneal bone grafting. CONCLUSION: While patients followed over the course of ~ 8 years after implantation of particulated juvenile allograft cartilage (DeNovo NT®) with/without autogenous calcaneal bone graft had positive post-operative PROMs, patients without calcaneal bone graft had significantly greater improvement in functional outcome scores. Whether these differences are due to graft incorporation or larger lesion size is unclear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective cohort study.

The Majority of Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy-Related Randomized Controlled Trials Reporting Nonsignificant Results Are Statistically Fragile.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the robustness of sports medicine and arthroscopy related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting nonsignificant results by calculating the reverse fragility index (RFI) and reverse fragility quotient (RFQ). METHODS: All sports medicine and arthroscopic-related RCTs from January 1, 2010, through August 3, 2021, were identified. Randomized-controlled trials comparing dichotomous variables with a reported P value ≥ .05 were included. Study characteristics, such as publication year and sample size, as well as loss to follow-up and number of outcome events were recorded. The RFI at a threshold of P < .05 and respective RFQ were calculated for each study. Coefficients of determination were calculated to determine the relationships between RFI and the number of outcome events, sample size, and number of patients lost to follow-up. The number of RCTs in which the loss to follow-up was greater than the RFI was determined. RESULTS: Fifty-four studies and 4,638 patients were included in this analysis. The mean sample size and loss to follow-up were 85.9 patients and 12.5 patients, respectively. The mean RFI was 3.7, signifying that a change of 3.7 events in one arm was needed to flip the results of the study from non-significant to significant (P < .05). Of the 54 studies investigated, 33 (61%) had a loss to follow-up greater than their calculated RFI. The mean RFQ was 0.05. A significant correlation between RFI with sample size (R2 = 0.10, P = .02) and the total number of observed events (R2 = 0.13, P < .01) was found. No significant correlation existed between RFI and loss to follow-up in the lesser arm (R2 = 0.01, P = .41). CONCLUSIONS: The RFI and RFQ are statistical tools that allow the fragility of studies reporting nonsignificant results to be appraised. Using this methodology, we found that the majority of sports medicine and arthroscopy-related RCTs reporting nonsignificant results are fragile. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: RFI and RFQ serve as tools that can be used to assess the validity of RCT results and provide additional context for appropriate conclusions.

Increased Pitch Velocity Is Associated With Throwing Arm Kinetics, Injury Risk, and Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in Adolescent, Collegiate, and Professional Baseball Pitchers: A Qualitative Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To assess the relationship between pitch velocity and throwing arm kinetics, injury, and ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLr) among high school, collegiate, and professional baseball pitchers. METHODS: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed (2008-2019), and OVID/MEDLINE (2008-2019) were queried for articles that reported on pitch velocity predicting throwing arm kinetics, injury, or UCLr. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies checklist was used to evaluate the quality of all included studies. Descriptive statistics with ranges were used to quantify data where appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 24 studies examining 2,896 pitchers, with Level of Evidence II-V were included. Intergroup analysis noted pitch velocity was significantly correlated with elbow varus torque in high school (R2 = 0.36), collegiate (R2 = 0.29), and professional (R2 = 0.076) pitchers. Elbow distraction force was positively associated with ball velocity in interpitcher analyses of high school (R2 = 0.373), professional (R2 = 0.175), and mixed-cohort evaluations (R2 = 0.624). Intragroup analysis demonstrated a strong association between pitch velocity and elbow varus torque (R2 = 0.922-0.957) and elbow distraction force (R2 = 0.910) in professional pitchers. Faster ball velocity was positively associated with a history of throwing arm injury (R2 = 0.194) in nonadult pitchers. In 2 studies evaluating professionals, injured pitchers had faster pitch velocity before injury compared with uninjured controls (P = .014; P = .0354). The need for UCLr was positively correlated with pitch velocity (R2 = 0.036) in professional pitchers. The consequences of UCLr noted little to no decrease in pitch velocity. CONCLUSIONS: Professional baseball pitchers with faster pitch velocity may be at the greatest risk of elbow injury and subsequent UCLr, potentially through the mechanism of increased distractive forces on the medial elbow complex. When a pitcher ultimately undergoes UCLr, decreases in pitching performance are unlikely, but may occur, which should encourage pitchers to caution against maximizing pitch velocity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Shoulder Arthroplasty Management in the Young Patient With Posterior Glenoid Erosion.

Osteoarthritic shoulders with posterior glenoid erosion present a unique challenge to shoulder arthroplasty surgeons. Although numerous treatment options and techniques have been described, a consensus regarding the optimal surgical management strategy has not been reached. It is important to summarize the best available evidence regarding these different treatment options, with a particular focus on the young patient.

Surgeon variation in glenoid bone reconstruction procedures for shoulder instability.

BACKGROUND: Advances in the understanding and management of glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability have led to the development of alternative bony reconstruction techniques to the Latarjet using free bone grafts, but little is known about surgeon adoption of these procedures. This study sought to characterize surgeon variation in the use of glenoid bone reconstruction procedures for shoulder instability and ascertain reasons underlying procedure choice. METHODS: A 9-question survey was created and distributed to 160 shoulder surgeons members of the PacWest Shoulder and Elbow Society, of whom 65 (41%) responded. The survey asked questions regarding fellowship training, years in practice, surgical volume, preferred methods of glenoid bone reconstruction, and reasons underlying treatment choice. RESULTS: All surgeons completed a fellowship, with an equal number of sports medicine fellowship-trained (46%) and shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained (46%) physicians. The majority had been in practice for at least 6 years (6-10 years: 25%; >10 years: 59%). Most (78%) performed ≤10 glenoid bony reconstructions per year, and 66% indicated that bony procedures represented <10% of their total annual shoulder instability case volume. The open Latarjet was the preferred primary reconstruction method (69%), followed by open free bone block (FBB) (22%), arthroscopic FBB (8%), and arthroscopic Latarjet (1%). Distal tibia allograft (DTA) was the preferred graft (74%) when performing an FBB procedure, followed by iliac crest autograft (18%), and distal clavicle autograft (6%). The top 5 reasons for preferring Latarjet over FBB were the sling effect (57%), the autologous nature of the graft (37%), its robust clinical evidence (22%), low cost (17%), and availability (11%). The top 5 reasons for choosing an FBB procedure were less anatomic disruption (58%), lower complication rate (21%), restoration of articular cartilage interface (16%), graft versatility (11%), and technical ease (11%). Only 20% of surgeons indicated always performing a bony glenoid reconstruction procedure in the noncontact athlete with less than 20% glenoid bone loss. However, that percentage rose to 62% when considering a contact athlete with the same amount of bone loss. CONCLUSIONS: Although open Latarjet continues to be the most popular glenoid bony primary reconstruction procedure in shoulder instability, nearly 30% of shoulder surgeons in the western United States have adopted FBB techniques as their preferred treatment modality--with DTA being the most frequently used graft. High-quality comparative clinical effectiveness research is needed to reduce decisional conflict and refine current evidence-based treatment algorithms.

Perioperative risk stratification tools for shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification tools are being increasingly utilized to guide patient selection for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to identify the existing calculators used to predict discharge disposition, postoperative complications, hospital readmissions, and patient candidacy for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty and to compare the specific components used to generate their prediction models. METHODS: This review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and OVID Medline were searched for studies that developed calculators used to determine patient candidacy for outpatient surgery or predict discharge disposition, the risk of postoperative complications, and hospital readmissions after anatomic or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Reviews, case reports, letters to the editor, and studies including hemiarthroplasty cases were excluded. Data extracted included authors, year of publication, study design, patient population, sample size, input variables, comorbidities, method of validation, and intended purpose. The pros and cons of each calculator as reported by the respective authors were evaluated. RESULTS: Eleven publications met inclusion criteria. Three tools assessed patient candidacy for outpatient TSA, 3 tools evaluated the risk of 30- or 90-day hospital readmission and postoperative complications, and 5 tools predicted discharge destination. Four calculators validated previously constructed comorbidity indices used as risk predictors after shoulder arthroplasty, including the Charlson Comorbidity Index, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, modified Frailty Index, and the Outpatient Arthroplasty Risk Assessment, while 7 developed newcalculators. Nine studies utilized multiple logistic regression to develop their calculators, while 1 study developed their algorithm based on previous literature and 1 used univariate analysis. Five tools were built using data from a single institution, 2 using data pooled from 2 institutions, and 4 from large national databases. All studies used preoperative data points in their algorithms with one tool additionally using intraoperative data points. The number of inputs ranged from 5 to 57 items. Four calculators assessed psychological comorbidities, 3 included inputs for substance use, and 1 calculator accounted for race. CONCLUSION: The variation in perioperative risk calculators after TSA highlights the need for standardization and external validation of the existing tools. As the use of outpatient shoulder arthroplasty increases, these calculators may become outdated or require revision. Incorporation of socioeconomic and psychological measures into these calculators should be investigated.

Preoperative allergy testing for patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies is economically justified in preventing infection after total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The use of alternative antibiotics to cefazolin has been associated with increased risk of infection after shoulder arthroplasty. Routine preoperative allergy testing in patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies increases the number able to receive cefazolin and may reduce the occurrence of infection after shoulder arthroplasty, but the financial viability of this practice is unclear. We used break-even modeling to determine the economic viability of routine preoperative allergy testing for infection prevention in total shoulder arthroplasty patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies. METHODS: Allergy testing cost ($248.24), infection rates after shoulder arthroplasty following use of noncefazolin antibiotics (3.09%), and infection-related care costs ($55,243) were derived from the literature. A break-even equation using these variables was developed to determine the absolute risk reduction (ARR) in the infection rate that would economically justify the routine implementation of preoperative allergy testing. The number needed to treat was calculated from the ARR. RESULTS: Preoperative allergy testing is considered economically justified if it prevents at least 1 infection out of 223 shoulder arthroplasties (ARR = 0.45%). These protocols remained economically viable at varying allergy testing costs, initial infection rates, and infection-related care costs. CONCLUSIONS: Routine preoperative penicillin allergy testing is an economically justified infection prevention strategy among patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies in the setting of elective shoulder arthroplasty. Widespread implementation of this practice may considerably reduce the economic and societal burden associated with prosthetic infections.

Poor evidence is used to support commercial payers' coverage policies for shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of shoulder arthroplasty has continued to increase over the past decade. In response, commercial payers have implemented strategies to control the medical requirement of these surgeries in attempt to contain the growing costs. For example, most payers require a prolonged trial of conservative management prior to shoulder arthroplasty for patients who may otherwise be surgical candidates. However, little is known regarding the evidence used to support these indications. The purpose of this study was to analyze the references used by commercial payers to substantiate their coverage policies for shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Ten of the leading commercial payers for total shoulder arthroplasty were identified. Publicly available coverage policies were searched on the internet or requested directly from the payer via email or telephone. Cited references were reviewed independently by two authors for type of document, level of evidence, and mention of the efficacy of conservative management. RESULTS: A total of 5 coverage policies were obtained with 118 references. The most common reference type was primary journal article (n = 70; 59.3%) followed by review or expert opinion articles (n = 35; 29.7%). Most references were of level IV evidence (n = 60; 52.2%), with only 6 (5.2%) of level I or II evidence. Only 4 (3.5%) references mentioned the efficacy of conservative management in patients who may be candidates for shoulder arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: The majority of references used to substantiate the coverage policies for shoulder arthroplasty among major commercial payers within the United States are of low scientific evidence and fail to demonstrate the success of required nonoperative intervention strategies. Our study underscores the need for high-quality, comparative trials that evaluate the outcomes of conservative management vs. shoulder arthroplasty in end-stage glenohumeral osteoarthritis patients in order to determine the most cost-effective treatment algorithm.

Prospective registration of randomized clinical trials for total shoulder arthroplasty is low: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Prospective trial registration has become an important means of improving the transparency and reproducibility of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and is recommended by the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES) per the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. Herein, we performed a cross-sectional evaluation of RCTs published in JSES from 2010 to present to determine the prevalence of trial registration and consistency of outcome reporting. METHODS: The electronic database PubMed was searched to identify all RCTs on total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) published in JSES from 2010 to 2022 using the search terms "randomized controlled trial" AND "shoulder" AND "arthroplasty OR replacement." RCTs were considered to be registered if they provided a registration number. For articles that were registered, authors also extracted the registry name, registration date, date of first enrollment, date of last enrollment, and if the primary outcomes reported in the registry were either (1) omitted, (2) newly introduced in the publication, (3) reported as a secondary outcome or vice versa, or (4) varied in timing of assessment compared to the publication. "Early" RCTs were considered those published from 2010 to 2016, whereas "later" RCTs were from 2017 to 2022. RESULTS: Fifty-eight RCTs met inclusion criteria. There were 16 early RCTs and 42 later RCTs. Twenty-three of the 58 (39.7%) studies were registered, with 9 of 22 with an available registry (40.9%) of those being enrolled prior to patient enrollment. Nineteen of the registered studies (82.6%) provided the name of the registry and a registration number. The proportion of later RCTs that were registered was not significantly different from the early RCTs (45.2% vs. 25.0%, P = .232). Seven RCTs (31.8%) had at least 1 inconsistency compared with the registry. The most common discrepancy was the timing of the assessment (ie, follow-up period) reported in the publication vs. the registry. DISCUSSION: Although JSES recommends prospective trial registration, less than half of shoulder arthroplasty RCTs are registered and more than 30% registered trials have at least 1 inconsistency with their registry record. More rigorous review of trial registration and accuracy is necessary to limit bias in published shoulder arthroplasty RCTs.

Evaluation of the National Institutes of Health-Supported Relative Citation Ratio Among Fellowship-Trained American Orthopaedic Joint Reconstruction Surgery Faculty: A New Bibliometric Measure of Scientific Influence.

BACKGROUND: The relative citation ratio (RCR), a novel National Institutes of Health-Supported measure of research productivity, allows for accurate interdisciplinary comparison of publication influence. This study evaluates the RCR of fellowship-trained adult reconstructive orthopaedic surgeons with the goal of analyzing potentially influential physician demographics. METHODS: Adult Reconstruction Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education fellowship-trained faculty for orthopaedic residency programs were identified via departmental websites. The National Institutes of Health's iCite database was retrospectively reviewed for mean RCR, weighted RCR, and publication count by surgeon. Multivariate analyses were performed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and analyses of variance testing to compare sex, career length, academic rank, and professional degrees in addition to an MD or DO. Significance was considered P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 488 fellowship-trained adult reconstruction faculty from 144 programs were included in the analysis. Overall, the faculty recorded a median RCR of 1.65 (interquartile range: 1.01-2.28) and a median weighted RCR of 16.59 (interquartile range: 3.98-61.92). The weighted RCR and total number of publications were associated with academic rank and career longevity, while the mean RCR was associated with academic rank. The median RCR ranged from 1.12 to 1.87 for all subgroups. CONCLUSION: Adult reconstruction faculty are exceptionally productive and generate highly impactful studies as evidenced by the high median RCR value relative to the National Institutes of Health standard value of 1.0. Our data have important implications in the assessment of grant outcomes, promotion, and continued evaluation of research influence within the hip and knee community.

Factors Associated With Amputation Following Ankle Fracture Surgery.

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at increased risk of complications following ankle fracture surgery. Previous research suggests that patients of low socioeconomic status are at increased risk of amputation following orthopedic complications. The purpose of this research was to determine if low socioeconomic status increases risk of below-knee amputation (BKA) following ankle fractures among patients with DM. The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried from 2010 to 2014 to identify 125 diabetic patients who underwent ankle fracture surgical fixation followed by BKA. Two cohorts (BKA vs no BKA) and a multivariate logistic regression model were created to compare the effects of independent variables, including age, sex, race, primary payer, median household income by ZIP code, hospital location/teaching status, and comorbidities. The most predictive variables for BKA were concomitant peripheral vascular disease (odds ratio [OR] 5.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.51-8.15), history of chronic diabetes-related medical complications (OR 3.29, CI 2.16-5.01), age in the youngest quartile (OR 2.54, CI 1.38-4.67), and male sex (OR 2.28, CI 1.54-3.36). Patient race and median household income were not significantly associated with BKA; however, risk of BKA was greater among patients with Medicaid (OR 2.23, CI 1.09-4.53) or Medicare (OR 1.85, CI 1.03-3.32) compared to privately insured patients. Diabetic inpatients with Medicaid insurance are at over twice the odds of BKA compared to privately insured patients following ankle fracture. Furthermore, peripheral vascular diseases, uncontrolled diabetes, younger age, and male sex each independently increase risk of BKA.

A Systematic Review of Lower-Body Kinematic and Strength Factors Associated With Pitch Velocity in Adult Baseball Pitchers.

CONTEXT: Ball velocity for baseball pitchers is influenced by a multitude of factors along the kinetic chain. While a vast amount of data currently exist exploring lower-extremity kinematic and strength factors in baseball pitchers, no previous study has systematically reviewed the available literature. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to perform a comprehensive assessment of the available literature investigating the association between lower-extremity kinematic and strength parameters and pitch velocity in adult pitchers. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Cross-sectional studies that investigated the association between lower-body kinematic and strength factors and ball velocity in adult pitchers were selected. A methodological index for nonrandomized studies checklist was used to evaluate the quality of all included studies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria comprising a total of 909 pitchers (65%, professional, 33% college, and 3% recreational). The most studied elements were hip strength and stride length. The mean methodological index for nonrandomized studies score was 11.75 of 16 (range = 10-14). Pitch velocity was found to be influenced by several lower-body kinematic and strength factors including the following: (1) hip range of motion and strength of muscles around the hip and pelvis, (2) alterations in stride length, (3) alterations in lead knee flexion/extension, and (4) several pelvic and trunk spatial relationships throughout the throwing phase. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this review, we conclude that hip strength is a well-established predictor of increased pitch velocity in adult pitchers. Further studies in adult pitchers are needed to elucidate the effect of stride length on pitch velocity given mixed results across multiple studies. This study can provide a basis for trainers and coaches to consider the importance of lower-extremity muscle strengthening as a means by which adult pitchers can improve pitching performance.

Evaluation of the National Institutes of Health-supported relative citation ratio among American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons fellowship faculty: a new bibliometric measure of scientific influence.

BACKGROUND: Publication metrics are used to evaluate and compare research productivity among academic faculty. However, traditional bibliometrics, such as the Hirsch index and article citation count, are limited by lack of field-normalization and yield inaccurate cross-specialty comparisons. Herein, we evaluate the use of a new field-normalized article-level metric developed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), known as the relative citation ratio (RCR), among American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) fellowship faculty and analyzed physician factors associated with RCR values. METHODS: A retrospective data analysis was performed using the iCite database for all shoulder and elbow surgery fellowship faculty listed on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) directory as of November 14, 2021. Mean RCR, weighted RCR, and total publication count were compared by sex, career duration, academic rank, and presence of additional degrees. Mean RCR represents the total number of article citations per year of a publication divided by the average number of citations per year received by NIH-funded papers in the same field; mean RCR serves as a measure of overall research impact. A value of 1.0 is the NIH-funded field-normalized standard. The weighted RCR represents the sum of all article-level RCR scores and is a measure of overall research productivity. Student t tests were used for two-group analyses whereas analyses of variance were used for between-group comparisons of 3 or more subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 145 ASES fellowship faculty members from 33 fellowship programs were included in the analysis. Overall, ASES fellowship faculty produced highly impactful research with a median RCR of 1.8 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.4-2.3) and a median weighted RCR of 67.0 (IQR 21.1-212.7). Advanced academic rank and career longevity were associated with increased weighted RCR and total publication count. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1.0. CONCLUSIONS: ASES fellowship faculty are exceptionally productive and produce highly impactful research, as evidenced by the high median RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1.0. This information can be used as a standard to assess the improvement of grant outcomes, promotion, fellowship education, and continued evaluation of research productivity in the shoulder and elbow community.

Wide variability of shoulder and elbow case volume in orthopedic surgery residency.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing popularity of certain shoulder and elbow procedures (eg, shoulder arthroplasty), resident exposure to these surgeries remains unclear. This study sought to evaluate trends in graduating orthopedic resident case volumes of commonly performed shoulder and elbow procedures. METHODS: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) surgical case log data from 2016 to 2020 for graduating US orthopedic surgery residents was assessed. Procedures of the shoulder and humerus/elbow were categorized into predefined ACGME categories: repair/revision/reconstruction, fracture/dislocation, and arthroscopy. The average number of cases performed per resident in each of these categories was directly compared from 2016 to 2020. The 10th and 90th percentiles of case volumes within each category of procedures was compared from 2016 and 2020. RESULTS: There was a 31% increase in the number of shoulder repair/revision/reconstruction cases between 2016 and 2020 (average: 27.5 to 36.1; P < .001), followed by a 23% increase for elbow fracture/dislocation (24.4 to 30; P < .001), 21% increase for elbow repair/revision/reconstruction (10.6 to 12.8; P < .001), and 16% increase for shoulder arthroscopy (69 to 79.7; P < .001). No significant changes were found for shoulder fracture/dislocation and elbow arthroscopy. There was a wide case volume variability for each procedure, particularly for shoulder repair/revision/reconstruction, where there was a nearly 5-fold difference in the number of cases performed between the 10th and 90th percentiles of residents in 2020 (13 vs. 62 cases, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The case category shoulder repair/revision/reconstruction has seen the largest relative increase in the shoulder and elbow case volume of graduating orthopedic surgery residents, most likely reflecting the national rising trends of shoulder arthroplasty. However, our study shows that there is wide variability in resident exposure to these cases. Implementation of shoulder arthroplasty case minimum requirements might help reduce case variability and discrepancies in resident education.

Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage does not predict outcomes or cost after elective shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that the variation in value of shoulder arthroplasty may be mediated by factors external to surgery. We sought to determine if neighborhood-level socioeconomic deprivation is associated with postoperative outcomes and cost among patients undergoing elective shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: We identified 380 patients undergoing elective total shoulder arthroplasty (anatomic or reverse) between 2015 and 2018 in our institutional registry with minimum 2-year follow-up. Each patient's home address was mapped to the area deprivation index in order to determine the level of socioeconomic disadvantage. The area deprivation index is a validated composite measure of 17 census variables encompassing income, education, employment, and housing conditions. Patients were categorized into 3 groups based on socioeconomic disadvantage (least disadvantaged [deciles 1-3], middle group [4-6], and most disadvantaged [7-10]). Bivariate analysis was performed to determine associations between the level of socioeconomic deprivation with hospitalization time-driven activity-based costs and 2-year postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and pain intensity scores. RESULTS: Overall 19% of patients were categorized as most disadvantaged. These patients were found to have equivalent preoperative pain intensity (P = .51), SANE (P = .50), and ASES (P = .72) scores compared to the middle and least disadvantaged groups, as well as similar outcome improvement at 2 years postoperatively (ASES): least disadvantaged group [35.7-84.3], middle group [35.1-82.4], and most disadvantaged group [37.1-84.0] [P = .56]; SANE: least disadvantaged group [31.8-87.1], middle group [30.8-84.8], and most disadvantaged group [34.2-85.1] [P = .42]; and pain: least disadvantaged group [6.0-0.97], middle group [6-0.97], and most disadvantaged group [5.6-0.80] [P = .88]. No differences in hospitalization costs were noted between groups (P = .77). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing elective shoulder arthroplasty residing in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods demonstrate equivalent preoperative and postoperative outcomes as others, without incurring higher costs. These findings support continued efforts to provide equitable access to orthopedic care across the socioeconomic spectrum.

Orthopedic surgeon-scientist representation is low among National Institutes of Health grants for rotator cuff research.

Background: The purpose of this study is to characterize National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for rotator cuff research and evaluate the impact of orthopedic surgeons on this portfolio. Methods: The NIH's Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results database was queried for "rotator cuff repair" or "rotator cuff tear" from the 2011 to 2021 fiscal years. Compound annual growth rates were calculated and grants were categorized by basic, clinical, or translational research. Funding totals were compared by Principal Investigator (PI) and grant characteristics. Results: A total of 52 grants were awarded to 38 PIs between 2011 and 2021, totaling $40,156,859. Annual NIH funding for rotator cuff tear and rotator cuff repair increased by a Compound annual growth rate of 11.0% from 2011 to 2021, compared to 3.4% for the total NIH budget. Orthopedic surgeon-scientists received $9,208,212 (22.9%), most commonly through R01 (80.5%) and K08 (7.1%) mechanisms. No significant difference in funding was found by PI sex (P = .332), degree (P = .460), academic rank (P = .118), or researcher type (P = .227). Professors had a higher h-index than associate and assistant professors (P = .001). Orthopedic surgeon-scientists had a higher h-index (mean 36.3 ± 9.4) compared to clinician-scientists (mean 8.0 ± 1.4) and research-scientists (35.5 ± 40.7) (P = .044). Clinical topics receiving the highest funding were rehabilitation (23.9%), diagnosis, (22.3%) and surgical technique (14.8%). Orthopedic surgeon-scientists acquired funding for diagnosis (57.1%), rehabilitation (17.0%), and surgical technique (14.5%). Discussion: While NIH funding for rotator cuff research is growing, orthopedic surgeon representation is low. Future studies should evaluate barriers to obtaining funding for orthopedic surgeon-scientists.