A 3-Dimensional Printed Dynamic External Fixator for the Treatment of Proximal Interphalangeal Fracture-Dislocations: A Biomechanical Study.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the efficacy of a 3-dimensional printed dynamic external fixator for treating proximal interphalangeal (PIP) fracture-dislocations. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference in maintaining PIP joint reduction between a 3-dimensional printed dynamic external fixator (3DPDEF) and the pins and rubbers traction system (PRTS). METHODS: Ten cadaveric fingers underwent an oblique osteotomy at the base of the middle phalanx, recreating an unstable dorsal PIP fracture-dislocation. The percentages of compromised articular surface and middle phalanx dorsal displacement were measured. Both fixators were randomly placed on each digit and underwent 1,400 flexion-extension cycles. Efficacy, determined by joint reduction and maintenance of dorsal translation correction, was assessed using fluoroscopy before and after the cycles. RESULTS: The mean compromised articular surface was 50.8%. After osteotomy, PIP joint subluxation occurred at 37.8° flexion. Dorsal translation after osteotomies was 2.8 mm. After applying the 3DPDEF and the PRTS, it was 0 mm and 0.1 mm, respectively. During the cycles, all the joints remained stable and reduced. Dorsal displacement after cycles was -0.1 mm for the 3DPDEF and 0 mm for the PRTS. The mean translation difference between both fixators was 0.1 and 0 mm before and after the cycles. The translation differences before and after the cycles were 0.1 mm for both dynamic fixators. CONCLUSIONS: The 3DPDEF is a suitable option for PIP fracture-dislocations, providing stability comparable to that of the PRTS while offering benefits, such as easy placement, controlled distraction, and clear visualization of the articular surface. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This external fixator, characterized by its efficacy, low cost, and simplicity of application, broadens the options available to address PIP fracture-dislocations.

Utilization of Surgical Fixation for Distal Radius Fractures in the United States: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: In contrast to younger adult populations, clinical practice guidelines state that there is no difference in long-term functional outcomes in surgically versus nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures in patients ≥65 years old. In this study, we asked the following questions: (1) has treatment for distal radius fractures in younger and older adult populations changed over time? (2) What patient and surgeon factors are associated with treatment trends? METHODS: Using a national administrative claims database, we identified patients aged ≥18 years with isolated, closed distal radius fractures, subdivided by age (18-64 years, ≥65 years old). We characterized the proportion of patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) over time. We stratified our analysis by surgeon subspecialty, region, and mean area income. Changes in ORIF utilization over time were evaluated using linear regression models. RESULTS: The proportion of distal radius ORIF, including in patients aged ≥65 years, increased from 10.4% in 2012 to 15.1% in 2020. Of the ORIF procedures performed, hand surgeons accounted for an increasing proportion over time, with a corresponding decrease in those performed by general orthopedic surgeons. The proportion of ORIF increased over time in all US regions, with the largest rate of increase in the Midwest for patients aged ≥65 years and Northeast for patients aged 18-64 years. Patients living in areas with mean family income ≥$65,000 were more likely to undergo ORIF. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of distal radius ORIF including in older adult populations is increasing in all US regions, and an increasing proportion is performed by hand surgeons. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Further analysis of the drivers of these trends is warranted, given the rising incidence of surgical treatment in older patients, which could reflect evolving patient activity demands and suggest a need to further evaluate conventional treatment algorithms based on age.

A Biomechanical Analysis of Oblique Metacarpal Metadiaphyseal Fracture Fixation in a Cadaver Model.

PURPOSE: Although metacarpal fractures are typically managed nonoperatively, when surgical management is indicated, metacarpal fractures are commonly treated with crossed Kirschner wires (K-wires), which may limit early range of motion. Intramedullary implants are increasing in use with the potential advantage of early range of motion; however, stability in oblique metacarpal neck fractures remains a theoretical concern. The purpose of this study was to determine the biomechanical stability of noncompressive intramedullary fixation for oblique metacarpal neck fractures compared with crossed K-wire fixation. METHODS: The index, long, and small metacarpals were harvested from three matched pairs of fresh-frozen cadavers. Oblique fractures at the metadiaphyseal region were created in each metacarpal. Each metacarpal was randomized to noncompressive, threaded intramedullary nail fixation or fixation with two crossed K-wires. Specimens were mounted in a Materials Testing System load frame and axially loaded until failure. Load to failure (LTF), stiffness, and load to 2 mm displacement were calculated from load-displacement curves. Differences in peak LTF, stiffness, and load to 2 mm displacement between noncompressive intramedullary fixation and crossed K-wire fixation were evaluated. RESULTS: The noncompressive intramedullary fixation cohort had a significantly higher LTF (1,190.9 ± 534.7 N vs 297.0 ± 156.0 N) and stiffness (551.3 ± 164.6 N/mm vs 283.0 ± 194.5 N/mm) when compared with the crossed K-wire fixation cohort. Load at 2 mm displacement was greater in the noncompressive intramedullary fixation cohort compared with crossed K-wire fixation (820.5 ± 203.9 vs 514.1 ± 259.6). CONCLUSIONS: For oblique metadiaphyseal metacarpal fractures, noncompressive intramedullary fixation provides a biomechanically superior construct under axial loading in terms of LTF, stiffness, and load to 2 mm of displacement compared with crossed K-wire fixation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Noncompressive intramedullary nails may be an alternative to K-wire fixation for the treatment of oblique metadiaphyseal metacarpal fractures.

Surgeon Alignment With Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Qualitative Analysis of Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are developed to guide physicians in providing consistent high-quality care. Despite availability of evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of distal radius fractures, prior work suggests many patients receive treatment that is misaligned with the CPG. We sought to explore barriers and facilitators of guideline-aligned care for distal radius fractures. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews of a purposive sample of surgeons who treat distal radius fractures. Our interview guide was based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Interviews were transcribed and coded using a deductive analytical approach within the 14 TDF domains. Belief statements underlying similar codes were developed to describe barriers and facilitators of guideline-aligned care. A content analysis was performed to count the frequency of each TDF domain. RESULTS: We interviewed 14 surgeons. The most common TDF domains were beliefs about consequences (110), knowledge (49), and social influences (29). Belief statements representative of barriers of concordance to the CPGs included, "I am more likely to deviate from the CPGs when the CPGs differ from my professional opinion," which was coded under beliefs about consequences. Similar belief statements were created for each theme within TDF domains. CONCLUSION: Decision-making for patients with distal radius fractures is driven by beliefs about consequences, knowledge, and social influences. Strategies to address these beliefs in other fields such as including patient factors in a further structured shared decision-making process, developing implementation toolkits as part of the CPG development process, and implementing payment programs may improve CPG alignment.

Goal Concordant Care: A Cross-Sectional Study Evaluating Correlates of Concordant Care and Association With Satisfaction and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The concordance between patient and physician goals has been associated with improved outcomes in many chronic diseases. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between goal concordant care, patient satisfaction, and patient experience and to analyze factors associated with goal concordant care in hand and upper extremity surgery. METHODS: New patients who were 18 years or older were invited to participate. Goal concordant care was defined as the patient's previsit treatment goal matching the primary treatment received. The χ2 tests were used to evaluate the association between goal concordant care and patient satisfaction and patient experience. We conducted univariable logistic regression to evaluate variables for their association with concordance and multivariable logistic regression for variables that were significantly associated in the initial analyses to evaluate their aggregate influence on concordance. RESULTS: In total, 169 patients enrolled. The rate of goal concordant care was 62%; concordance was not associated with patient satisfaction or experience. Age, sex, English proficiency, health literacy, education level, employment and relationship status, pain self-efficacy, symptom duration, functional disability, and patient-centered decision-making were not associated with concordant care. Patients with annual income less than $50,000 had significantly higher odds of goal discordant care. CONCLUSION: Patients with lower income had more than 3 times the odds of receiving discordant care. However, discordant care was not associated with patient satisfaction or experience. Further studies on other pertinent outcomes are needed in orthopedic surgery (eg, treatment adherence). Known care disparities based on socioeconomic status may be mediated through care discordance and should be investigated.

Current Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Ignores Functional Demand.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used in orthopaedic surgery to measure aspects of musculoskeletal function that are important to patients, such as disability and pain. However, current assessments of function using PROMs do not necessarily consider a patient's functional demands in detail. A patient's functional demands could serve as a confounder to their perception of their functional ability. Hence, functional demands may need to be adjusted for when PROMs are used to measure musculoskeletal function. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in which new orthopaedic patients completed a questionnaire regarding demographics, function [Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System], functional demand (Tegner Activity Level Scale), pain self-efficacy, and symptoms of depression. 169 eligible patients with diverse orthopaedic conditions were enrolled in the study from an orthopaedic clinic, and 19 were excluded for incomplete questionnaires. RESULTS: The mean Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System score was 36.5 ± 9.1, and the mean Tegner score was 2.6 ± 2.0. In the multivariable regression model, patient-reported function was significantly associated with functional demand (ß = 0.17, P < 0.001). Significant associations were observed for pain self-efficacy (ß = 0.15, P < 0.001), acuity (ß = -0.10, P = 0.004), and age 80 years or older (ß = -0.16, P = 0.004). No notable association was observed with depression or age 65 to 79 years. DISCUSSION: Higher patient-reported physical function is associated with higher levels of functional demand when controlling for psychosocial factors, acuity, and age. Because of its confounding effect on measuring physical function, functional demand should be assessed and included in models using PROMs before and after surgery. For example, payment models using improvements in PROMs, such as the short form of the Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score after joint arthroplasty, should include functional demand in the model when assessing quality of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Opioid Use After Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty: A National Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we tested the null hypothesis that robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) vs conventional THA was not associated with (1) the amount of postoperative opioid use and (2) the incidence of new, persistent opioid use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a large, national administrative database to identify patients 50 years and older undergoing primary robotic or conventional THA. Patients with hip fractures or a history of malignancy, hip infection, or opioid use disorder were excluded. Patients who filled an opioid prescription within 1 year to 30 days preoperatively or who underwent a subsequent procedure within 1 year after THA were excluded. Outcomes included the morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) filled within the THA perioperative period and the incidence of new, persistent opioid use. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations between robotic-assisted THA and new, persistent opioid use, adjusting for age, sex, insurance plan, region, location of surgery, and comorbidities. RESULTS: In the postoperative period, robotic-assisted THA, compared with conventional THA, was associated with a lower mean total MMEs filled per patient (452.2 vs 517.1; P<.001) and a lower mean MMEs per patient per day (71.53 vs 74.64; P<.001). Patients undergoing robotic-assisted THA had decreased odds of developing new, persistent opioid use compared with patients undergoing conventional THA (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.74-0.90]). CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted THA is associated with lower postoperative opioid use and a decreased odds of developing new, persistent opioid use compared with conventional THA. For the purposes of reducing opioid use, our results support the adoption of robotic-assisted THA. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(5):289-294.].

Health Numeracy Is Associated With a Patient's Ability to Interpret Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Data.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were originally developed as research tools; however, there is increasing interest in using PROMs to inform clinical care. Prior work has shown the benefits of implementing PROMs at the point of care, but a patient's health numeracy (their ability to understand and work with numbers) may affect their ability to interpret PROM results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We recruited patients presenting to an outpatient orthopedic clinic. Forty-nine patients completed a survey that included demographic information, the short-form General Health Numeracy Test, and accuracy questions about four PROM displays (bar graph, table, line graph, pictograph) that indicated the same PROM results. RESULTS: Patients with higher health numeracy answered all display accuracy questions correctly (P=.016). Patients who preferred using the table were more likely to answer display accuracy questions incorrectly (odds ratio, 0.013, P=.024). The two most frequently preferred PROM formats were bar graphs and tables, and most patients preferred to learn about their PROM function scores via a combination of displays and verbal discussions. CONCLUSION: Patient health numeracy is associated with the ability to correctly interpret visual displays of PROMs. Implementation of PROMs at point of care currently does not account for health numeracy. Efforts to account for health numeracy when using PROMs at point of care may improve the efficacy of using PROMs to improve outcomes in orthopedic surgery. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(5):e255-e260.].

Performing region-specific tasks does not improve lower extremity patient-reported outcome scores.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures quantify outcomes from patients' perspective with validated instruments. QuickDASH (Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand, an upper extremity PROM) scores improve after completing instrument tasks, suggesting patient-reported outcome results can be modified. We hypothesized that performing lower extremity tasks on the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint reconstruction (KOOS-JR) and hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint reconstruction (HOOS-JR) instruments would similarly improve the scores. METHODS: Forty seven hip and 62 knee osteoarthritis patients presenting to a suburban academic center outpatient osteoarthritis and joint replacement clinic were enrolled and randomized to an intervention or a control group. Inclusion criteria were age over 18 years and English competency. Patients completed a HOOS-JR or KOOS-JR instrument, completed tasks similar to those of the instrument (intervention) or the QuickDASH (control), and then repeated instruments again. Paired and unpaired t-tests were used to compare the intervention and control group scores before and after tasks. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in total or individual scores after task completion compared to baseline in either the HOOS-JR or the KOOS-JR groups. There was no significant difference in the scores between the intervention or control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Disability may be less modifiable in the lower extremity than in the upper extremity, perhaps because upper extremity activities are more easily compensated by the contralateral limb, or because lower extremity activities are more frequent. Thorough evaluation of factors influencing patient-reported outcome measures is necessary before their extensive application to quality control and reimbursement models.

Are Orthopaedic Clinical Trials Linguistically and Culturally Diverse? A Systematic Review.

Purpose: Underrepresentation and misrepresentation of historically underrepresented populations in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may have implications for the validity of research results and their application for diverse populations. To evaluate the representation of historically linguistically, racially, and ethnically underrepresented participants in orthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to assess the use of translated and culturally adapted patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods: Separate and comprehensive literature searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were performed to identify RCTs utilizing PROMs between the years 2012 - 2022 among the top five highest 5-year impact factor orthopaedic journals according to the 2021 Journal Citation Reports database. The primary outcomes of interest included reporting of linguistic, racial and ethnic demographic characteristics of trial participants and the utilization of translated PROMs. The methodological quality of each clinical trial was assessed using the Jadad Criteria. Results: 230 RCTs met inclusion criteria. The language of participants was reported in 14% of trials and in 17% of trials when searching both the published text and clinical trial registration information. In addition, race and/or ethnicity was reported in 11% of trials, and the use of translated PROMs was reported in 7% of trials. Among the six multinational studies, none reported the language of the study population nor the use of translated PROMs. Notably, four studies (2%) reported utilizing culturally adapted PROMs. The average Jadad score was 3.07. Conclusion: Participant language, race, and ethnicity are infrequently reported in orthopaedic clinical trials, potentially limiting the application and interpretation of study results. Similarly, the linguistic and cultural adaptation of PROMs utilized are often not reported, which also limits interpretations of the validity and generalizability of orthopedic study results. Researchers and journals should promote standard reporting of demographic data and methods of PROM adaptation to ensure results are generalizable to diverse patient populations. Level of Evidence: III.

The Association Between Social Determinants of Health and Distal Radius Fracture Outcomes.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if adverse social determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with differential complication rates following surgical fixation of distal radius fractures and assess which SDOH domain (economic, educational, social, health care, or environmental) is most associated with postoperative complications. METHODS: Using a national administrative claims database, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing open treatment for an isolated distal radius fracture between 2010 and 2020. Patients were stratified based on the presence/absence of at least one SDOH code and propensity score matched to create two cohorts balanced by age, sex (male or female), insurance type, and comorbidities. Social determinants of health examined included economic, educational, social, health care, and environmental factors. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the isolated effect of SDOH on 90-day and 1-year complication rates. RESULTS: After propensity matching, 57,025 patients in the adverse SDOH cohort and 57,025 patients in the control cohort were included. Patients facing an adverse SDOH were significantly more likely to experience 90-day complications, including emergency department visits (Odds ratio (OR): 3.18 [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.07-3.29]), infection (OR: 2.37 [95% CI: 2.12-2.66]), wound dehiscence (OR: 2.06 [95% CI: 1.72-2.49]), and 1-year complications, including complex regional pain syndrome (OR: 1.35 [95% CI: 1.15-1.58]), malunion/nonunion (OR: 1.18 [95% CI: 1.08-1.29]), and hardware removal (OR: 1.13 [95% CI: 1.07-1.20]). Additionally, patients facing an adverse SDOH had a significantly increased risk of 90-day complications, regardless of fracture severity, and patients with economic and social challenges had the highest odds of both 90-day and 1-year postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Social determinants of health are associated with increased complications following distal radius fracture fixation, even when controlling for demographic and clinical factors. We recommend routine screening for adverse SDOH and inclusion of SDOH data into health records to not only inform quality improvement initiatives and risk adjustment for outcome-based quality measurements but also to allow providers to begin to discuss and address such barriers during the perioperative period. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognosis II.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Early versus Late Debridement of Superficial Triangular Fibrocartilage Complex Tears.

Background: While initial nonoperative management is the conventional approach for superficial triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) tears, a substantial portion of these cases go on to require surgery, and the optimal duration of nonoperative treatment is unknown. In this study, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of early versus late arthroscopic debridement for the treatment of superficial TFCC tears without distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) instability. Methods: We created a decision tree to compare the following strategies from a healthcare payer perspective: immediate arthroscopic debridement versus immobilization for 4 or 6 weeks with late debridement as needed. Costs were obtained from the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services and a national administrative claims database. Probabilities and health-related quality-of-life measures were obtained from published sources. We conducted sensitivity analyses on model inputs, including a probabilistic sensitivity analysis consisting of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. Results: Immobilization for 6 weeks while reserving arthroscopic debridement for refractory cases was both the least costly and most effective strategy. Immediate arthroscopic debridement became cost-effective when success rates of immobilization for 4 or 6 weeks were less than 7.7 or 10.5%, respectively. Our probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that immobilization for 6 weeks was preferred 97.6% of the time, and immobilization for 4 weeks was preferred 2.4% of the time. Conclusion: Although various early and late debridement strategies can be used to treat superficial TFCC tears without DRUJ instability, immobilization for 6 weeks while reserving arthroscopic debridement for refractory cases is the optimal strategy from a cost-effectiveness standpoint.

Pain Self-Efficacy Can Improve During a Visit With an Orthopedic Surgeon.

BACKGROUND: Greater pain self-efficacy (PSE) is associated with reduced pain, fewer limitations, and increased quality of life after treatment for orthopedic conditions. The aims of this study were to (1) assess if PSE improves during a visit with an orthopedic surgeon and (2) identify modifiable visit factors that are associated with an increase in PSE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study of orthopedic clinic visits at a multispecialty clinic from February to May 2022. New patients who presented to one of six orthopedic surgeons were approached for the study. Patients who provided consent completed a pre-visit questionnaire including the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) and demographic questions. A trained research member recorded the five-item Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making Instrument (OPTION-5) score, number of questions asked, and visit duration. Immediately after the visit, patients completed a post-visit questionnaire consisting of the PSEQ and Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS). RESULTS: Of 132 patients enrolled, 61 (46%) had improved PSE after the orthopedic visit, with 38 (29%) having improvement above a clinically significant threshold. There were no significant differences between patients with increased PSE and those without increased PSE when comparing the PICS, OPTION-5, questions asked, or visit duration. CONCLUSION: Almost half of the patients had improvement in PSE during an orthopedic visit. The causal pathway to how to improve PSE and the durability of the improved PSE have implications in strategies to improve patient outcomes in orthopedic surgery, such as communication methods and shared decision-making. Future research can focus on studying different interventions that facilitate improving PSE. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(4):e197-e203.].

Clinical Practice Guidelines to Support Capacity Building in Orthopaedic Surgical Outreach: An International Consensus Building Approach.

BACKGROUND: Surgical outreach to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by organizations from high- income countries is on the rise to help address the growing burden of conditions warranting surgery. However, concerns remain about the impact and sustainability of such outreach. Leading organizations (e.g., the World Health Organization) advocate for a capacity-building approach to ensure the safety, quality, and sustainability of the local health-care system. Despite this, to our knowledge, no guidelines exist to inform such efforts. We aimed to develop clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to support capacity-building in orthopaedic surgical outreach utilizing a multistakeholder and international voting panel. METHODS: We followed a modified American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) CPG development process. We systematically reviewed the existing literature across 7 predefined capacity-building domains (partnership, professional development, governance, community impact, finance, coordination, and culture). A writing panel composed of 6 orthopaedic surgeons with extensive experience in surgical outreach reviewed the existing literature and developed a consensus-based CPG for each domain. We created an international voting panel of orthopaedic surgeons and administrators who have leadership roles in outreach organizations or hospitals with which outreach organizations partner. Members individually reviewed the CPGs and voted to approve or disapprove each guideline. A CPG was considered approved if >80% of panel members voted to approve it. RESULTS: An international voting panel of 14 surgeons and administrators from 6 countries approved all 7 of the CPGs. Each CPG provides recommendations for capacity-building in a specific domain. For example, in the domain of partnership, the CPG recommends the development of a documented plan for ongoing, bidirectional partnership between the outreach organization and the local team. In the domain of professional development, the CPG recommends the development of a needs-based curriculum focused on both surgical and nonsurgical patient care utilizing didactic and hands-on techniques. CONCLUSIONS: As orthopaedic surgical outreach grows, best-practice CPGs to inform capacity-building initiatives can help to ensure that resources and efforts are optimized to support the sustainability of care delivery at local sites. These guidelines can be reviewed and updated in the future as evidence that supports capacity-building in LMICs evolves.The global burden of disease warranting surgery is substantial, and morbidity and mortality from otherwise treatable conditions remain disproportionately high in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)1,2. It is estimated that up to 2 million (about 40%) of injury-related deaths in LMICs could be avoided annually if mortality rates were reduced to the level of those in high-income countries (HICs)3. Despite this, progress toward improved access to safe, timely surgery in resource-poor areas has been slow. Historically, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have tried to address unmet surgical needs through short-term outreach trips; however, growing criticism has highlighted the limitations of short-term trips, including limited follow-up, an increased burden on the local workforce, and further depletion of local resources4-6. In light of ongoing concerns, public health priorities have shifted toward models that emphasize long-term capacity-building rather than short-term care delivery. Capacity-building is an approach to health-care development that builds independence through infrastructure development, sustainability, and enhanced problem-solving while taking context into account7,8.

Are Clinical Practice Guidelines Representative of Patients With Distal Radius Fractures? A Review of Patient Demographics and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used to Inform Guidelines.

PURPOSE: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are recommendations developed for broad application to optimize high-quality care and decision-making. The composition of patients and outcome measures used in studies informing CPGs; however, has not been rigorously evaluated. With growing evidence that outcomes in musculoskeletal surgery vary by sociocultural factors, we aimed to: (1) review the linguistic, racial, and ethnic representation of the patients in the studies informing CPGs for distal radius fractures and (2) assess their use of linguistically and culturally adapted patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons website was used to identify relevant studies. Key variables were extracted, including inclusion and exclusion criteria, language of study, patient language and proficiency, patient race and ethnicity, and use of translated or culturally adapted PROMs. If provided, the clinical trial registration page for the study was evaluated. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the frequency of each variable. RESULTS: Fifty-four published texts were evaluated. Participant language was reported in four (7%) of the published texts and six (11%) when including the clinical trial registration information. Of the published texts, one (2%) reported ethnic group/race data and 40 (74%) used PROMs. Of those using PROMs, eight (20%) of 40 reported the use of translated PROMs, and three (8%) of 40 reported the use of culturally adapted PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of reporting of linguistic, racial, and ethnic data and inconsistent use of PROMs, particularly those that are translated and culturally adapted, in studies included in the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons CPG for distal radius fractures. As sociocultural characteristics and PROMs are associated with outcomes, ensuring they are broadly represented in studies, may improve equity and shared decision-making. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Greater inclusion and reporting of demographic data and PROMs are required in musculoskeletal studies to ensure broad applicability and advance health equity.

Implementation of an electronic health record system during global surgical outreach: A prospective evaluation of success and sustainability.

BACKGROUND: The burden of musculoskeletal conditions continues to grow in low- and middle-income countries. Among thousands of surgical outreach trips each year, few organizations electronically track patient data to inform real-time care decisions and assess trip impact. We report the implementation of an electronic health record (EHR) system utilized at point of care during an orthopedic surgical outreach trip. METHODS: In March 2023, we implemented an EHR on an orthopedic outreach trip to guide real-time care decisions. We utilized an effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 3 design to evaluate implementation success. Success was measured using outcomes adopted by the World Health Organization, including acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, adoption, fidelity, and sustainability. Clinical outcome measures included adherence to essential quality measures and follow-up numerical rating system (NRS) pain scores. RESULTS: During the 5-day outreach trip, 76 patients were evaluated, 25 of which underwent surgery beforehand. The EHR implementation was successful as defined by: mean questionnaire ratings of acceptability (4.26), appropriateness (4.12), feasibility (4.19), and adoption (4.33) at least 4.00, WHO behaviorally anchored rating scale ratings of fidelity (6.8) at least 5.00, and sustainability (80%) at least 60% follow-up at 6 months. All clinical quality measures were reported in greater than 80% of cases with all measures reported in 92% of cases. NRS pain scores improved by an average of 2.4 points. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate successful implementation of an EHR for real-time clinical use on a surgical outreach trip. Benefits of EHR utilization on surgical outreach trips may include improved documentation, minimization of medical errors, and ultimately improved quality of 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.].

Orthopedic surgery in Palau-Current capacity, needs, and future directions.

BACKGROUND: Palau, an island nation in Micronesia, is a medically underserved area with a shortage of specialty care services. Orthopedic diagnoses in Palau remain among the three most common reasons for costly off-island medical referral. The purpose of this study was to assess Palau's current orthopedic surgery capacity and needs to inform interventions to build capacity to improve care access and quality. METHODS: Orthopedic needs and capacity assessment tools developed by global surgical outreach experts were utilized to gather information and prompt discussions with a broad range of Palau's most knowledgeable stakeholders (n = 6). Results were reported descriptively. RESULTS: Finance, community impact, governance, and professional development were the lowest-scored domains from the Capacity Assessment Tool for orthopedic surgery (CAT-os), indicating substantial opportunity to build within these domains. According to administrators (n = 3), governance and finance were the greatest capacity-building priorities, followed by professional development and partnership. Belau National Hospital (BNH) had adequate surgical infrastructure. Skin grafting, soft tissue excision/resection, infection management, and amputation were the most commonly selected procedures by stakeholders reporting orthopedic needs. CONCLUSIONS: This study utilizes a framework for orthopedic capacity-building in Palau which may inform partnership between Palau's healthcare system and orthopedic global outreach organizations with the goal of improving the quality, safety, and value of the care delivered. This demonstration of benchmarking, implementation planning, and subsequent re-evaluation lays the foundation for the understanding of capacity-building and may be applied to other medically underserved areas globally to improve access to high-quality orthopedic care.

Equitable Integration of Patient-Reported Outcomes Into Clinical Practice-Opportunities, Challenges, and a Roadmap for Implementation.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a standardized assessment from the patient about their own health status. Although originally developed as research tools, PROMs can be used in clinical care to complement objective functional measures (eg, range of motion) and are increasingly integrated to guide treatment decisions and predict outcomes. In some situations, when PROMs are used during clinical care they can improve patient mortality, outcomes, engagement, well-being, and patient-physician communication. Guidance on how PROMs should be communicated with patients continued to be developed. However, PROM use may have unintended consequences, such as when used implemented without accounting for confounding factors (eg, psychological and social health) or in perpetuating healthcare disparities when used imprecisely (eg, lack of linguistic or cultural validation). In this review, we describe the current state of PROM use in orthopaedic surgery, highlight opportunities and challenges of PROM use in clinical care, and provide a roadmap to support orthopaedic surgery practices in incorporating PROMs into routine care to equitably improve patient health.

Is There Variation in Time to and Type of Treatment for Hip Osteoarthritis Based on Insurance?

BACKGROUND: Disparities in care access based on insurance exist for total hip arthroplasty (THA), but it is unclear if these lead to longer times to surgery. We evaluated whether rates of THA versus nonoperative interventions (NOI) and time to THA from initial hip osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis vary by insurance type. METHODS: Using a national claims database, patients who had hip OA undergoing THA or NOI from 2011 to 2019 were identified and divided by insurance type: Medicaid-managed care; Medicare Advantage; and commercial insurance. The primary outcome was THA incidence within 3 years after hip OA diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression models were created to assess the association between THA and insurance type, adjusting for age, sex, region, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Medicaid patients had lower rates of THA within 3 years of initial diagnosis (7.4 versus 10.9 or 12.0%, respectively; P < .0001) and longer times to surgery (297 versus 215 or 261 days, respectively; P < .0001) compared to Medicare Advantage and commercially-insured patients. In multivariable analyses, Medicaid patients were also less likely to receive THA (odds ratio (OR) = 0.62 [95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.60 to 0.64] versus Medicare Advantage, OR = 0.63 [95% CI: 0.61 to 0.64] versus commercial) or NOI (OR = 0.92 [95% CI: 0.91 to 0.94] versus Medicare Advantage, OR = 0.81 [95% CI: 0.79 to 0.82] versus commercial). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid patients experienced lower rates of and longer times to THA than Medicare Advantage or commercially-insured patients. Further investigation into causes of these disparities, such as costs or access barriers, is necessary to ensure equitable care.