Progression of Hamate Hook Stress Reactions in Elite Baseball Players.

BACKGROUND: Hamate hook fractures can occur as a result of repetitive contact with the knob of the bat used in the sport of baseball. Hamate hook excision has resulted in excellent outcomes and return to sport (RTS) in elite baseball players. The ideal treatment for hamate stress response before the development of a fracture line is unknown. PURPOSE: To report the outcomes of elite baseball players with hamate bone edema. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of all elite baseball players with hamate bone edema consistent with a stress response at 2 institutions. Players were eligible for inclusion if they played collegiate or professional baseball at the time of initial injury, had magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showing hamate bone edema, and had no radiographic evidence of acute fracture lines at initial presentation. RESULTS: A total of 4 players with a mean age of 22.8 years were included. All injuries occurred in the nondominant hand. All athletes had normal initial wrist radiographs and MRI showing hamate edema but no fracture line. Patients returned to play as tolerated and developed an acute injury at an average of 25.8 days (range, 10-56 days) from the initial presentation. Repeat radiographs demonstrated acute hamate hook fractures in all 4 (100%) athletes. All 4 athletes underwent hamate hook excision. There were no postoperative complications. All athletes returned to sport at their previous level of competition at a mean of 5.3 weeks (range, 3.6-7.3 weeks). CONCLUSION: There is a high rate of hamate bone edema progression to acute hamate hook fracture in elite baseball players, with 100% RTS at preinjury level after hamate hook excision. We therefore recommend against prolonged rest. Continuation of play with hamate bone edema followed by hamate hook excision for acute fracture limits the time missed and obtains a faster RTS in elite baseball players.

Which Subspecialties Do Female Orthopaedic Surgeons Choose and Why?: Identifying the Role of Mentorship and Additional Factors in Subspecialty Choice.

Limited data exist delineating the reasons women choose subspecialties within orthopaedics. Purpose: (1) To perform a survey that determines subspecialties female orthopaedic surgeons select and (2) to analyze the motivations behind their choices. Methods: A 10-question survey was distributed via e-mail to the Ruth Jackson Orthopaedic Society (RJOS), Texas Orthopaedic Association (TOA), and to a private internet page for women in Orthopaedics, which covered the area of subspecialty practice, motivations, and demographic data. Practicing female orthopaedic surgeons, fellows, or fellowship-matched residents were included. Respondents' ranked motivations when deciding for or against a subspecialty were analyzed and comparisons made. Results: Of the 304 survey responses, 288 met inclusion criteria. The most common subspecialties were hand (24.0%), pediatrics (22.6%), and sports medicine (16.3%). A higher proportion of younger surgeons are electing to subspecialize in sports medicine, whereas a lower proportion of younger surgeons are pursuing general orthopaedics. Top-ranked reasons for selecting a subspecialty were personal satisfaction (50.8%), intellectual stimulation (42.1%), and strong mentorship (37.4%). The most common reason for not selecting a subspecialty was lack of interest (60.6%). Conclusion: Strong mentorship was the largest extrinsic/modifiable factor that affected the decision-making process. A continued focus on mentorship will be necessary to encourage future female orthopaedic surgeons to enter this field and inspire them to explore a different set of subspecialties.

An Evaluation of the Rotator Cuff Repair Research Pipeline.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a study of recommendations from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) guideline, "Optimizing the Management of Rotator Cuff Problems." Using these recommendations, we conducted searches of clinical trial registries and bibliographic databases to note the extent to which new research has been undertaken to address areas of deficiency. HYPOTHESIS: Newly conducted research regarding rotator cuff repair and injury is available that will fill knowledge gaps identified by the AAOS guideline. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: For each recommendation in the AAOS guideline, we created PICO (participants, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions and search strings. Searches were conducted of ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, MEDLINE via PubMed, and EMBASE to locate studies undertaken after the final literature search performed by the AAOS work group. RESULTS: We located 210 newly registered trials and 448 published studies that are relevant to the recommendations made in the rotator cuff guideline. The majority of the recommendations have been addressed by relevant registered trials or published studies. Of the 448 published studies, 185 directly addressed the guideline recommendations. Additionally, 71% of the 185 published studies directly addressing the recommendations were randomized trials or systematic reviews/meta-analyses. The most important finding of our study was that the recommendations in the AAOS rotator cuff guideline have been adequately addressed. CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic researchers have adequately addressed knowledge gaps regarding rotator cuff repair treatment and management options. As such, the AAOS may consider a guideline update to ensure that recommendations reflect current findings in orthopaedic literature.

The Robustness of Trials That Guide Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The fragility index (FI) may prove to be a powerful metric of trial robustness. The FI is the minimum number of patient events that would need to become nonevents in order to nullify a significant result. The fragility quotient (FQ) is the FI divided by the total sample size. This study evaluates the robustness of the 20% of orthopaedic clinical trials that were cited as having strong evidence in the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Clinical Practice Guidelines and that could be analyzed with these indices. METHODS: From the AAOS recommendations with strong evidence, we extracted the randomized controlled trials that were cited as having supporting evidence that could be analyzed with the FI. Each trial's FI was calculated using the fragility calculator (http://www.fragilityindex.com). With use of the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0, we evaluated the likelihood of bias. We also performed a post hoc power analysis of eligible studies. RESULTS: The median FI for the 72 trials was 2 events, and the median FQ was 0.022. Of the 72 trials, only 3 (4.2%) were at a low risk of bias, and 35 (48.6%) were at a high risk of bias. Thirty-eight (53%) of the trials were underpowered. We identified a strong correlation between a trial's FI or FQ and the trial's power. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that trials that provided strong evidence for orthopaedic surgery guidelines were largely fragile, underpowered, and at risk of bias.

An Evaluation of Reporting Guidelines and Clinical Trial Registry Requirements Among Orthopaedic Surgery Journals.

BACKGROUND: The responsibility for ensuring that studies are adequately reported is primarily that of those conducting the study; however, journal policies may influence how thoroughly authors choose to report their research. The use of reporting guidelines and prospective trial registration are promising avenues for ensuring that published studies adhere to the highest methodological standards. The purpose of this study is to evaluate orthopaedic surgery journal policies regarding reporting guidelines and trial registration, and to evaluate the effects that these policies have on adherence to reporting. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of journal policies and "Instructions for Authors" to determine the journals' policies and guidance regarding use of reporting guidelines and study registration. We also examined whether trials published in journals referencing CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) had higher rates of compliance with publishing a CONSORT flow diagram and whether journals with trial registration policies were more likely to contain registered trials than journals without these requirements. RESULTS: Of the 21 orthopaedic surgery journals, 6 (29%) did not mention a single guideline, and clinical trial registration was required by 11 (52%) orthopaedic surgery journals and recommended by 2 (10%). Of the 21 general medical journals, 3 (14%) did not mention a single guideline, and trial registration was required by 13 (62%) general medical journals and recommended by 5 (24%) others. Furthermore, journals that referenced CONSORT were more likely to publish trials with a CONSORT flow diagram. Journals with trial registration policies were more likely to publish registered trials. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting guidelines and trial registration are suboptimally required or recommended by orthopaedic surgery journals. These 2 mechanisms may improve methodology and quality, and should be considered for adoption by journal editors in orthopaedic surgery. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Because orthopaedic surgeons rely on high-quality research to direct patient care, measures must be taken to ensure that published research is of the highest quality. The use of reporting guidelines and prospective clinical trial registration may improve the quality of orthopaedic research, thereby improving patient care.

Long-term Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients 60 Years and Older.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating the benefit of surgical reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in middle-aged patients have shown promising results, but study populations were limited primarily to patients who were 40 to 60 years old. Some authors have suggested that surgery may benefit these older patients. HYPOTHESIS: Patients aged ≥60 years with functional instability after ACL injury would benefit from ACL reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Medical records from 1984 through 2010 were searched for patients aged ≥60 years who had undergone primary arthroscopic ACL reconstruction at a single institution. Fifteen patients (15 knees) were identified as meeting the above criteria. All patients were contacted for a telephone interview, and they completed Short Form-36 and modified Cincinnati Knee Score forms. One patient was deceased, and 1 had undergone revision to total knee arthroplasty. Among the remaining 13 patients, the mean age at surgery was 63.5 years (range, 60-73 years), and the mean patient age at the time of follow-up was 73 years (range, 65-85 years). Preoperative radiographs showed no obvious evidence of arthritis in 10 (77%) of the 13 patients; small osteophytes without loss of joint space were seen in 3 (23%) patients. The mean length of follow up was 115.7 months (range, 53-193 months). RESULTS: At their last clinic visits, all 13 patients had regained full range of motion and returned to sports or exercise, such as tennis, golf, gym exercise, and yoga. Twelve patients reported no joint laxity. CONCLUSION: Patients aged ≥60 years with symptomatic instability from ACL injury can have good to excellent subjective outcomes with surgical reconstruction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Physicians who treat active patients older than 60 years should not exclude ACL reconstruction based on the patient's age alone.