Capacity Building During Short-Term Surgical Outreach Trips: A Review of What Guidelines Exist.

INTRODUCTION: While short-term surgical outreach trips improve access to care in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), there is rising concern about their long-term impact. In response, many organizations seek to incorporate capacity building programs into their outreach efforts to help strengthen local health systems. Although leading organizations, like the World Health Organization (WHO), advocate for this approach, uniform guidelines are absent. METHODS: We performed a systematic review, using search terms pertaining to capacity building guidelines during short-term surgical outreach trips. We extracted information on authorship, guideline development methodology, and guidelines relating to capacity building. Guidelines were classified according to the Global-QUEST framework, which outlines seven domains of capacity building on surgical outreach trips. Guideline development methodology frequencies and domain classifications frequencies were calculated; subsequently, guidelines were aggregated to develop a core guideline for each domain. RESULTS: A total of 35 studies were included. Over 200 individual guidelines were extracted, spanning all seven framework domains. Guidelines were most frequently classified into Coordination and Community Impact domains and least frequently into the Finance domain. Less than half (46%) of studies collaborated with local communities to design the guidelines. Instead, guidelines were predominantly developed through author trip experience. CONCLUSION: As short-term surgical trips increase, further work is needed to standardize guidelines, create actionable steps, and promote collaborations in order to promote accountability during short-term surgical outreach trips.

Medicaid insurance is associated with treatment disparities for proximal humerus fractures in a national database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are the third most common type of fragility fracture in the elderly and are increasing in incidence. Disparities in treatment type, time to surgery (TTS), and complications based upon insurance type have been identified for other orthopedic conditions. Given the incidence and burden of PHFs, we sought to evaluate if insurance type was associated with treatment received, TTS, and complications in the treatment of PHFs. METHODS: We used PearlDiver, a national administrative claims database that consists of 122 million patient records. Patients diagnosed with an isolated PHF between 2010 and 2019 were identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revision diagnostic codes and stratified by insurance type (Medicaid, private, or Medicare). Outcomes evaluated were rate of surgery within 3 months of diagnosis with open reduction and internal fixation, hemiarthroplasty, or reverse shoulder arthroplasty; average TTS; 90-day readmissions and medical postoperative complications (deep vein thrombosis, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, sepsis, acute respiratory failure, cerebrovascular event, and acute renal failure); and 1-year surgical postoperative complications (stiffness, noninfectious wound complications, dislocation, and infection). Multivariable logistic regressions adjusting for age, sex, and Elixhauser comorbidity index were utilized to determine the association between insurance type and surgery rate/complications. RESULTS: We included 245,396 patients for analysis. Fourteen percent of Medicaid patients (1789/12,498) underwent surgery compared to 17% (25,347/149,830) of privately insured patients and 16% (13,305/83,068) of Medicare patients (pairwise, P < .001). TTS (Medicaid: 11.7 days, private: 10.6 days [P < .001]; Medicare: 10.7 days [P = .003]) varied by insurance type. Private or Medicare-insured patients were less likely to be readmitted (adjusted odds ratio: 0.77 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63-0.93] for private vs. Medicaid and 0.71 [95% CI: 0.59-0.88] for Medicare vs. Medicaid) and experienced fewer 90-day postoperative complications (adjusted odds ratio: 0.73 [95% CI: 0.62-0.85] for private vs. Medicaid, 0.65 [95% CI: 0.55-0.77] for Medicare vs. Medicaid), such as acute renal failure. TTS was also associated with differing rates of readmissions and complications. CONCLUSION: There are differences in rates of surgery, TTS, and complications after PHFs based on insurance type, representing opportunities for quality improvement initiatives. Potential methods to address these disparities include implementing standardized PHF protocols and/or reimbursement models and quality metrics that reward equitable treatment. Further research and policy adaptations should be incorporated to decrease barriers that patients face and minimize health care inequities seen in the treatment of PHFs based on insurance type.

Patient Follow-up After Orthopaedic Outreach Trips - Do We Know Whether Patients are Improving?

BACKGROUND: The burden of traumatic musculoskeletal injuries falls greatest on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To help address this burden, organizations host over 6,000 outreach trips annually, 20% of which are orthopaedic. Monitoring post-surgical outcomes is critical to ensuring care quality; however, the implementation of such monitoring is unknown. The purpose of this review is to identify published follow-up practices of short-term orthopaedic surgery outreach trips to LMICs. METHODS: We completed a systematic review of Pubmed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and ProQuest following PRISMA guidelines. Follow-up method, rate, duration, and types of outcomes measured along with barriers to follow-up were collected and reported. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1,452 articles, 18 of which were eligible. The mean follow-up time was 5.4 months (range: 15 days-7 years). The mean follow-up rate was 65.8% (range: 22%-100%), the weighted rate was 57.5%. Fifteen studies reported follow-up at or after 3 months while eight studies reported follow-up at or after 9 months. Fifteen studies reported follow-up in person, three reported follow-up via phone call or SMS. Outcome reporting varied among mortality, complications, and patient-reported outcomes. The majority (75%) outlined barriers to follow-up, most commonly noting transportation and costs of follow-up to the patient. CONCLUSIONS: There is minimal and heterogeneous public reporting of patient outcomes and follow-up after outreach trips to LMICs, limiting quality assessment and improvement. Future work should address the design and implementation of tools and guidelines to improve follow-up as well as outcome measurement to ensure provision of high-quality care.

Site of Service Disparities Exist for Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The rate of outpatient total joint arthroplasty procedures, including those performed at ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) and hospital outpatient departments, is increasing. The purpose of this study was to analyze if type of insurance is associated with site of service (in-patient vs outpatient) for total joint arthroplasty and adverse outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), or total hip arthroplasty (THA) using Current Procedural Terminology codes in a national administrative claims database. Eligible patients were stratified by type of insurance (Medicaid, Medicare, private). The primary outcome was site of service. Secondary outcomes included general complications, procedural complications, and revision procedures. We evaluated the associations using adjusted multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: We identified 951,568 patients for analysis; 46,703 (4.9%) patients underwent UKA, 607,221 (63.8%) underwent TKA, and 297,644 (31.3%) underwent THA. Overall, 9.6% of procedures were outpatient. Patients with Medicaid were less likely than privately insured patients to receive outpatient UKA or THA (UKA: odds ratio [OR], 0.729 [95% CI, 0.640-0.829]; THA: OR, 0.625 [95% CI, 0.557-0.702]) but more likely than patients with Medicare to receive outpatient TKA or THA (TKA: OR, 1.391 [95% CI, 1.315-1.472]; THA: OR, 1.327 [95% CI, 1.166-1.506]). Patients with Medicaid were more likely to experience complications and revision procedures. CONCLUSION: Differences in site of service and complication rates following hip and knee arthroplasty exist based on type of insurance, suggesting a disparity in care. Further exploration of drivers of this disparity is warranted and can inform interventions (eg, progressive value-based payments) to support equity in orthopedic services. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(3):179-184.].

Does Time to Surgery for Distal Radius Fractures Impact Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes? A Systematic Literature Review.

Distal radius fractures are one of the most common upper extremity fractures across all age groups. Although the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS) Clinical Practice Guidelines have defined recommendations for the treatment of distal radius fractures, the optimal time to surgery was not included. There remains relatively little guidance or consensus regarding the optimal timing of surgical intervention for distal radius fractures and the impact of time to surgery on outcomes. As such, the purpose of this investigation is to systematically review clinical and radiographic outcomes associated with time to surgical management of distal radius fractures.

Capacity Assessment Tool to Promote Capacity Building in Global Orthopaedic Surgical Outreach.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of nongovernmental organizations from high-income countries aim to provide surgical outreach for patients in low- and middle-income countries in a manner that builds capacity. There remains, however, a paucity of measurable steps to benchmark and evaluate capacity-building efforts. Based on a framework for capacity building, the present study aimed to develop a Capacity Assessment Tool for orthopaedic surgery (CAT-os) that could be utilized to evaluate and promote capacity building. METHODS: To develop the CAT-os tool, we utilized methodological triangulation-an approach that incorporates multiple different types of data. We utilized (1) the results of a systematic review of capacity-building best practices in surgical outreach, (2) the HEALTHQUAL National Organizational Assessment Tool, and (3) 20 semistructured interviews to develop a draft of the CAT-os. We subsequently iteratively used a modified nominal group technique with a consortium of 8 globally experienced surgeons to build consensus, which was followed by validation through member-checking. RESULTS: The CAT-os was developed and validated as a formal instrument with actionable steps in each of 7 domains of capacity building. Each domain includes items that are scaled for scoring. For example, in the domain of partnership, items range from no formalized plans for sustainable, bidirectional relationships (no capacity) to local surgeons and other health-care workers independently participating in annual meetings of surgical professional societies and independently creating partnership with third party organizations (optimal capacity). CONCLUSIONS: The CAT-os details steps to assess capacity of a local facility, guide capacity-improvement efforts during surgical outreach, and measure the impact of capacity-building efforts. Capacity building is a frequently cited and commendable approach to surgical outreach, and this tool provides objective measurement to aid in improving the capacity in low and middle-income countries through surgical outreach.