Perceived effectiveness of video interviews for orthopaedic surgery residency during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: During the 2020-21 residency interview season, interviews were conducted through virtual platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study is to assess the general perceptions of applicants, residents and attendings at a single, large, metropolitan orthopaedic residency with regards to the video interview process before and after the interview season. METHODS: Surveys were sent to all orthopaedic applicants, residents, and attendings before the interview season. Applicants who received interviews and responded to the first survey (46) and faculty who responded to the first survey (28) were sent a second survey after interviews to assess how their perceptions of video interviews changed. RESULTS: Initially, 50% of applicants (360/722) and 50% of faculty and residents (28/56) responded before interview season. After interviews, 55% of interviewees (25/46) and 64% of faculty and residents (18/28) responded. Before interviews, 91% of applicants stated they would prefer in-person interviews and 71% were worried that video interviews would prevent them from finding the best program fit. Before interviews, 100% of faculty and residents stated they would rather conduct in-person interviews and 86% felt that residencies would be less likely to find applicants who best fit the program. Comparing responses before and after interviews, 16% fewer applicants (p = 0.01) perceived that in-person interviews provide a better sense of a residency program and faculty and residents' perceived ability to build rapport with interviewees improved in 11% of respondents (p = 0.01). However, in-person interviews were still heavily favored by interviewees (84%) and faculty and residents (88%) after the interview season. CONCLUSIONS: In-person interviews for Orthopaedic Surgery Residency are perceived as superior and are preferred among the overwhelming majority of applicants, residents, and interviewers. Nevertheless, perceptions toward video interviews improved in certain domains after interview season, identifying potential areas of improvement and alternative interview options for future applicants.

Career Longevity and Performance After Shoulder Instability in National Football League Athletes.

PURPOSE: To investigate the career longevity, game utilization, and performance of National Football League (NFL) athletes after glenohumeral instability events treated operatively versus nonoperatively. METHODS: Using public resources, we identified NFL players who sustained a shoulder instability event from September 2000 to February 2019. Players with prior shoulder instability, without NFL experience before injury, or who did not return to play (RTP) after injury were excluded. Demographic information, utilization (games and seasons), and season approximate value (SAV) statistics were recorded 1 year prior to injury and 3 years after RTP. Statistical analysis compared utilization and the SAV after RTP for athletes managed operatively versus nonoperatively. RESULTS: We identified 97 NFL players who sustained their first instability event while playing in the NFL, 91 of whom returned to play (93.8%). Quarterbacks were significantly more likely to undergo immediate surgical management compared with players in other positions (P = .023). The final analysis included 58 players managed operatively and 33 managed nonoperatively by the end of the index season. Players treated operatively played in significantly more seasons after RTP during their remaining careers (4.1 ± 2.7 seasons vs 2.8 ± 2.5 seasons, P = .015). There were no differences in games played or started, offensive or defensive snap count percentage, or performance (SAV) before and after injury when compared between cohorts (P > .05). After surgical stabilization, time to RTP (36.62 ± 10.32 weeks vs 5.43 ± 12.33 weeks, P < .05) and time interval before recurrent instability (105.7 ± 100.1 weeks vs 24.7 ± 40.6 weeks, P < .001) were significantly longer than with nonoperative treatment. Additionally, the operative cohort experienced less recurrent instability (27% vs 50%, P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: Athletes who RTP in the NFL after a shoulder instability injury do so with a similar workload and performance irrespective of surgical or nonsurgical management. Whereas nonoperative treatment is associated with faster RTP, operative management is associated with fewer recurrent instability events, greater time between recurrent instability events, and greater career longevity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective case-control study.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Various Treatment Options for Distal Radius Fractures.

Purpose: To conduct a cost-effectiveness study of nonsurgical and surgical treatment options for distal radius fractures using distinct posttreatment outcome patterns. Methods: We created a decision tree to model the following treatment modalities for distal radius fractures: nonsurgical management, external fixation, percutaneous pinning, and plate fixation. Each node of the model was associated with specific costs in dollars, a utility adjustment (quality-adjusted life year [QALY]), and a percent likelihood. The nodes of the decision tree included uneventful healing, eventful healing and no further intervention, carpal tunnel syndrome, trigger finger, and tendon rupture as well as associated treatments for each event. The percent probabilities of each transition state, QALY values, and costs of intervention were gleaned from a systematic review. Rollback and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analyses were conducted to identify optimal treatment strategies. Threshold values of $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY were used to distinguish the modalities in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis. Results: Both the rollback analysis and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis revealed nonsurgical management as the predominant strategy when compared with the other operative modalities. Nonsurgical management dominated external fixation and plate fixation, although it was comparable with percutaneous fixation, yielding a $2,242 lesser cost and 0.017 lesser effectiveness. Conclusions: The cost effectiveness of nonsurgical management is driven by its decreased cost to the health care system. Plate and external fixation have been shown to be both more expensive and less effective than other proposed treatments. Percutaneous pinning has demonstrated more favorable effectiveness in the literature than plate and external fixation and, thus, may be more cost effective in certain circumstances. Future studies may find value in investigating further clinical aspects of distal radius fractures and their association with nonsurgical management versus that with plate fixation. Type of study/level of evidence: Economic/decision analysis II.