Forgetting the Frail: National Trends in Vitamin D Prescription After Fragility Fracture-A Large Insurance Claims Database Study.

INTRODUCTION: Vitamin D plays a critical role in bone health, affecting bone mineral density and fracture healing. Insufficient serum vitamin D levels are associated with increased fracture rates. Despite guidelines advocating vitamin D supplementation, little is known about the prescription rates after fragility fractures. This study aims to characterize vitamin D prescription rates after three common fragility fractures in patients older than 50 years and explore potential factors influencing prescription rates. METHODS: The study used the PearlDiver Database, identifying patients older than 50 years with hip fractures, spinal compression fractures, or distal radius fractures between 2010 and 2020. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and vitamin D prescription rates were analyzed. Statistical methods included chi-square analysis and univariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: A total of 3,214,294 patients with fragility fractures were included. Vitamin D prescriptions increased from 2.50% to nearly 6% for all fracture types from 2010 to 2020. Regional variations existed, with the Midwest having the highest prescription rate (4.25%) and the West the lowest (3.31%). Patients with comorbidities such as diabetes, tobacco use, obesity, female sex, age older than 60 years, and osteoporosis were more likely to receive vitamin D prescriptions. DISCUSSION: Despite a notable increase in vitamin D prescriptions after fragility fractures, the absolute rates remain low. Patient comorbidities influenced prescription rates, perhaps indicating growing awareness of the link between vitamin D deficiency and these conditions. However, individuals older than 60 years, a high-risk group, were markedly less likely to receive prescriptions, possibly because of practice variations and concerns about polypharmacy. Educational initiatives and revised guidelines may have improved vitamin D prescription rates after fragility fractures. However, there is a need to raise awareness about the importance of vitamin D for bone health, particularly in older adults, and additional study variations in prescription practices. These findings emphasize the importance of enhancing post-fracture care to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with fragility fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Best Practice Guidelines for Assessment and Management of Osteoporosis in Adult Patients Undergoing Elective Spinal Reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN: Expert consensus study. OBJECTIVE: This expert panel was created to establish best practice guidelines to identify and treat patients with poor bone health prior to elective spinal reconstruction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Currently, no guidelines exist for the management of osteoporosis and osteopenia in patients undergoing spinal reconstructive surgery. Untreated osteoporosis in spine reconstruction surgery is associated with higher complications and worse outcomes. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel with 18 experts was assembled including orthopedic and neurological surgeons, endocrinologists, and rheumatologists. Surveys and discussions regarding the current literature were held according to Delphi method until a final set of guidelines was created with over 70% consensus. RESULTS: Panelists agreed that bone health should be considered in every patient prior to elective spinal reconstruction. All patients above 65 and those under 65 with particular risk factors (chronic glucocorticoid use, high fracture risk or previous fracture, limited mobility, and eight other key factors) should have a formal bone health evaluation prior to undergoing surgery. DXA scans of the hip are preferable due to their wide availability. Opportunistic CT Hounsfield Units of the vertebrae can be useful in identifying poor bone health. In the absence of contraindications, anabolic agents are considered first line therapy due to their bone building properties as compared with antiresorptive medications. Medications should be administered preoperatively for at least 2 months and postoperatively for minimum 8 months. CONCLUSION: Based on the consensus of a multidisciplinary panel of experts, we propose best practice guidelines for assessment and treatment of poor bone health prior to elective spinal reconstructive surgery. Patients above age 65 and those with particular risk factors under 65 should undergo formal bone health evaluation. We also established guidelines on perioperative optimization, utility of various diagnostic modalities, and the optimal medical management of bone health in this population.Level of Evidence: 5.

Impact of Level of Evidence on Citation of Orthopaedic Articles.

INTRODUCTION: Level of evidence grading has become widely used in orthopaedics. This study reviewed clinical research articles published in leading orthopaedic journals to describe the association between level of evidence and number of future citations, which is one measure of an article's impact in the field. METHODS: The first 100 clinical research articles published in 2014 by each of the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, and the American Journal of Sports Medicine were reviewed for level of evidence and article characteristics. Web of Science was used to identify the number of citations of each article over the following 5 years. Univariable analyses and multivariable linear regression were used to describe the associations. RESULTS: Three hundred articles were evaluated. Univariable analysis revealed no association between level of evidence and number of citations, with a median number of citations for level 1 articles of 23 (interquartile range [IQR], 14-49), level 2 articles 24 (IQR, 13-47), level 3 articles 22 (IQR, 13-40), and level 4 or 5 articles 20 (IQR, 10-36). Univariable analyses showed weak associations between other article characteristics and citations. Even after adjusting for other variables, the standardized regression coefficient for level 1 versus level 4 or 5 was only 0.14 and the overall model had a poor fit with an R2 of 0.18. CONCLUSIONS: Among clinical research articles published in leading orthopaedic journals, no notable association was found between level of evidence and future citations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Readers of the orthopaedic literature should understand that no association was found between level of evidence and future citations. Additional work is needed to better understand the effect level of evidence has on clinicians and researchers.

Secondary Fracture Prevention: Consensus Clinical Recommendations from a Multistakeholder Coalition.

Osteoporosis-related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fractureamong people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, andsubcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficaciousandcanreduce risk of future fracture.Patientsneededucation,however, about thebenefitsandrisks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first-line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive butmay be beneficial for selected patients at high risk.Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the earlypost-fractureperiod,prompt treatment is recommended.Adequate dietary or supplemental vitaminDand calciumintake shouldbe assured. Individuals beingtreatedfor osteoporosis shouldbe reevaluated for fracture risk routinely, includingvia patienteducationabout osteoporosisandfracturesandmonitoringfor adverse treatment effects.Patients shouldbestronglyencouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol inmoderation atmost, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (eg, hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease).

Do 30-Day Reoperation Rates Adequately Measure Quality in Orthopedic Surgery?

BACKGROUND: Unplanned reoperation rates represent an important metric in monitoring quality in orthopedic surgery. Previous studies have focused on 30-day reoperation rates, not accounting for complications that may arise beyond this time. This study aimed to understand the frequency, timing, and procedure type of orthopedic reoperations, as well as the complications leading up to these reoperations over a 1-year period. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort study reviewed all orthopedic surgeries performed within a three-year period and subsequently identified reoperations within a year following the initial case. Exclusion criteria for reoperations included those that were planned, involved a different body part, or had a different laterality from the first operation. The cases were analyzed by procedure type, timing of reoperation, and causes of reoperation. RESULTS: Of the 10,449 orthopedic surgeries performed between 2012 and 2015, 947 (9.1%) were unplanned reoperations within 1 year. Most (775; 81.8%) unplanned reoperations occurred after 30 days. Infections/wound complications (58.2%) were the most common reason for unplanned reoperations at 1 month from the initial operation, and mechanical complications (49.5%) predominated at the 6-months-to-1-year time frame. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the current paradigm of focusing on reoperations occurring within 30 days of the initial operation captures only a fraction of unplanned reoperations. Stratification of this metric by time and precipitating complication type provides additional information that quality improvement programs may target. A 1-year unplanned reoperation rate could be used as a broad indicator of surgical quality across institutions.

Secondary Fracture Prevention: Consensus Clinical Recommendations from a Multistakeholder Coalition.

Osteoporosis-related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fracture among people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, and subcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficacious and can reduce risk of future fracture. Patients need education, however, about the benefits and risks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first-line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive but may be beneficial for selected patients at high risk. Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the early post-fracture period, prompt treatment is recommended. Adequate dietary or supplemental vitamin D and calcium intake should be assured. Individuals being treated for osteoporosis should be reevaluated for fracture risk routinely, including via patient education about osteoporosis and fractures and monitoring for adverse treatment effects. Patients should be strongly encouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol in moderation at most, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (eg, hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease). © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Financial Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Surgical Treatment of Foot and Ankle Osteomyelitis.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is generally considered the most sensitive imaging for diagnosis of osteomyelitis; however, it is associated with significant cost and is at times ordered as initial screening imaging when a less resource-intensive test would suffice. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to examine the differences between patients with osteomyelitis of the foot and ankle, and their subsequent treatment course, who underwent MRI compared with those who did not. Financial impact of MRI as it relates to clinical decision-making was also calculated. Patients treated for a diagnosis of osteomyelitis of the foot and ankle from 2009 to 2015 were retrospectively identified. Demographics, imaging modalities, and operative procedures for each patient were collected. An "impact MRI" was defined as one that led to a subsequent operative procedure within the same admission. The impact cost of an MRI was estimated using the equation: (average MRI cost) × (total MRIs/impact MRIs). A total of 144 patients underwent 220 MRIs, and 399 patients did not have MRIs. The operative rate between the 2 groups was similar (70.8% versus 70.4%, p = .93). Multiple linear regression showed that MRI was not a significant predictor of operation (p = .50). However, we found a significant correlation between MRI use and operative intervention for patients with increased comorbidities. From 2011 to 2015, there was a significant increase in impact cost, while controlling for average MRI cost ($8172 to $15,292, p ≤ .05). Over the study period, the impact cost of an MRI significantly increased from 1.8 to 5.0 times the average cost.

Association of Injury Energy Level and Neurovascular Injury Following Knee Dislocation.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the associations between mechanism of injury energy level and neurovascular injury (NVI) following knee dislocation (KD) using a large representative sample of trauma patients and to examine risk factors within these groups. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Trauma centers participating in the American College of Surgeons National Trauma Data Bank. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with KD without lower extremity fracture. INTERVENTION: Patients were grouped as ultra-low, low, or high-energy based on injury mechanism. Univariate/multivariate analyses assessed associations of energy level with NVI and of patient characteristics with NVI within energy-level groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Rate of nerve and blood vessel injury. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four patients with KD were identified; 181 sustained ultra-low-energy mechanisms, 275 low-energy, and 868 high-energy. Nerve injury occurred in 6% of ultra-low-energy injuries, 7% in low-energy, and 3% in high-energy (P = 0.03). Vessel injury occurred in 21% of ultra-low-energy injuries, 17% in low-energy, and 13% in high-energy (P = 0.01). On multivariate analyses, obesity was associated with nerve injury in the ultra-low-energy group (OR 4.9; 95% CI 1.0-24.0) but not with other energy levels. Obesity was also associated with vessel injury in the ultra-low-energy group (OR 4.0; 95% CI 1.6-9.7). Smoking, hypertension, and diabetes were not associated with NVI. CONCLUSIONS: NVI following KD is more common after lower energy-level mechanisms. Obesity is associated with NVI in lower energy-level mechanisms. Physicians should be vigilant in screening for NVI in the setting of KD even with seemingly benign mechanisms of injury, especially in patients with obesity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Effects of driving distance and transport time on mortality among Level I and II traumas occurring in a metropolitan area.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of ambulance driving distance and transport time on mortality among trauma incidents occurring in the City of Chicago, a large metropolitan area. METHODS: We studied individuals 16 years or older who suffered a Level I or II injury and were taken to a Level I trauma center. The outcome was in-hospital mortality, including those dead on arrival but excluding those deemed dead on scene. Driving distance was calculated from the scene of injury to the trauma center where the patient was taken. Transport time was defined as the time from scene departure to arrival at the trauma center. Covariates included injury severity measures recorded at the scene. Logistic regression and instrumental variable probit regression models were used to examine the association between driving distance, transport time, and mortality, adjusting for injury severity. RESULTS: A total of 24,834 incidents were analyzed, including 1,464 deaths. Median driving distance was 3.9 miles, and median transport time was 13 minutes. Our findings indicate that increased driving distance is associated with a modest increase in mortality, with a covariate-adjusted odds ratio of 1.12 per 2-mile increase in distance (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.20). This corresponds to an increase in overall mortality of 0.26 percentage points per 2 miles (95% CI, 0.11-0.40). Using distance as an instrumental variable, we estimate a 0.51 percentage point increase in mortality per 5-minute increase in transport time (95% CI, 0.14-0.89). CONCLUSION: We find a modest effect of distance on mortality that is approximately linear over a range of 0 to 12 miles. Instrumental variables analysis indicated a corresponding increase in mortality with increasing transport time. Limitations of the study include the possibility of unmeasured confounders and the assumption that distance affects mortality only through its effect on transport time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Preoperative Opioid Use Is Associated with Higher Readmission and Revision Rates in Total Knee and Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid use is epidemic in the U.S. Recently, an association was demonstrated between preoperative opioid use and increased health-care utilization following abdominal surgeries. Given that primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are 2 of the most common surgical procedures in the U.S., we examined the association of preoperative opioid use with 30-day readmission and early revision rates. METHODS: We reviewed 2003 to 2014 data from 2 Truven Health MarketScan databases (commercial insurance and Medicare plus commercial supplemental insurance). Subjects were included if they had a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code for primary TKA or THA and were continuously enrolled in the database for at least 6 months prior to the index procedure. Preoperative opioid prescriptions were identified using National Drug Codes (NDCs). Rates of 30-day readmissions and revision arthroplasty were identified and compared among patients with stratified durations of preoperative opioid use in the 6 months preceding TKA or THA. RESULTS: The study included 324,154 patients in the 1-year follow-up group and 159,822 patients in the 3-year follow-up group. Opioid-naive TKA patients had a lower revision rate than did those with >60 days of preoperative opioid use (1-year cohort: 1.07% compared with 2.14%, p < 0.001; 3-year cohort: 2.58% compared with 5.00%, p < 0.001). A similar trend was noted among THA patients (1-year: 0.38% compared with 1.10%, p < 0.001; 3-year: 1.24% compared with 2.99%, p < 0.001). These trends persisted after adjusting for age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The 30-day readmission rate after TKA or THA was significantly lower for patients with no preoperative opioid use compared with those with >60 days of preoperative opioid use (TKA: 4.82% compared with 6.17%, p < 0.001; THA: 3.71% compared with 5.85%, p < 0.001). Again, this association persisted after adjusting for age, sex, and CCI. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative opioid use was associated with significantly increased risk of early revision and significantly increased risk of 30-day readmission after TKA and THA. This study illustrates the increased risk of poor outcomes and increased postoperative health-care utilization for patients with long-term opioid use prior to THA and TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Practice Patterns and Performance in U.S. Fracture Liaison Programs: An Analysis of >32,000 Patients from the Own the Bone Program.

BACKGROUND: We are not aware of any previous investigation assessing a national cohort of patients enrolled in a fracture liaison service (FLS) program in an open health-care system to ascertain prevalent practice patterns. The objective of this investigation was to determine, in a geographically diverse group of centers in a single FLS program, the percentage of patients for whom anti-osteoporosis treatment was recommended or started as well as to identify associations between patient and fracture variables and the likelihood of treatment being recommended. METHODS: The study utilized the Own the Bone program registry, which included 32,671 unique patient records with the required data. The primary outcome measure was whether a recommendation to start anti-osteoporosis treatment was made to the patient at the time of program enrollment. The associations between patient and fracture variables and the likelihood of having treatment recommended were calculated. RESULTS: Anti-osteoporosis treatment was recommended to 72.8% of patients and was initiated for 12.1%. A sedentary lifestyle and a parent who had sustained a hip fracture increased the likelihood of a treatment recommendation by 10% and 12%, respectively. While patients with a spinal fracture were 11% more likely to have received a treatment recommendation, those with a hip fracture were 2% less likely to have received such a recommendation. Age was not strongly associated with the likelihood of receiving a treatment recommendation but was associated with the initiation of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners at sites in the Own the Bone program recommend anti-osteoporosis treatment, at the time of initial evaluation, to about three-quarters of patients who present with a fragility fracture. This is a very strong improvement over previously reported national data. The findings that a hip fracture had the lowest association and age had very little association with the likelihood of recommending treatment were unexpected and perhaps deserve further investigation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: FLS programs and sites as well as all those who manage patients with a fragility fracture can utilize the information derived from this study to improve practice patterns for the care of these patients.

A Survey on Recent Medical School Graduate Comfort With the Level 1 Milestones.

OBJECTIVE: The Next Accreditation System implemented 5 levels of milestones for orthopedic surgery residents in 2013. The Level 1 milestones were noted as those "expected of an incoming resident." While the milestones were intended for assessing resident progression and readiness for independent practice, this designation can also be used to assess how well prepared graduating medical students are for beginning an orthopedic surgery residency. The primary objective of this paper is to measure recent medical school graduate comfort with the Level 1 milestones. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In June 2015, the program directors for the Midwest Orthopaedic Surgical Skills (MOSS) Consortium affiliated residency programs were sent an online survey for distribution to the recent medical school graduates who matched at their respective programs. The survey was about recent graduate comfort with the Level 1 milestone handles associated with 16 orthopedic milestones spanning multiple subspecialties. Responses were grouped based on comfort with individual milestone handles with orthopedic conditions (e.g., carpal tunnel) or with broader categories spanning orthopedic milestones (e.g., imaging). RESULTS: In all, 66 of 112 graduates (58.9%) responded. Of 60 milestone handles surveyed, respondents were "Comfortable" with an average of 31.6 ± 14.2 handles with some conditions performing much better than others. The median "Comfortable" response rate was 31 handles. The 8 broader categories had "Comfortable" response rates between 35% and 70%. All 8 orthopedic conditions had significantly higher "Comfortable" response rates for "Evaluation & Knowledge" handles than for "Decision Making & Treatment" handles. CONCLUSIONS: Most recent medical student graduates who matched into an orthopedic surgery residencies are only comfortable with about half of the Level 1 milestone handles even though they are expected to meet the Level 1 milestones upon beginning residency. This finding suggests the development of an assessment based on the Level 1 milestones would be appropriate to better inform both graduate and undergraduate medical education in orthopedic surgery.

Own the Bone, a System-Based Intervention, Improves Osteoporosis Care After Fragility Fractures.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the American Orthopaedic Association's Own the Bone secondary fracture prevention program in the United States. METHODS: The objective of this quality improvement cohort study was dissemination of Own the Bone and implementation of secondary prevention (osteoporosis pharmacologic and bone mineral density [BMD] test recommendations). The main outcome measures were the number of sites implementing Own the Bone and implementation of secondary prevention, i.e., orders for BMD testing and/or pharmacologic treatment. The 177 sites participating in the program were academic and community hospitals, orthopaedic surgery groups, and a health system; data were obtained from the first 125 sites utilizing its registry, between January 1, 2010, and March 31, 2015. It included all patients, aged 50 years or older, presenting with fragility fractures (n = 23,132) who were enrolled in the Own the Bone web-based registry. The interventions were education, development of program elements, dissemination, implementation, and evaluation of the Own the Bone program at participating sites. RESULTS: A growing number of institutions implemented Own the Bone (14 sites in 2005-2006 to 177 sites in 2015). After consultation, 53% of patients had a BMD test ordered and/or pharmacologic therapy for osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS: The Own the Bone intervention has succeeded in improving the behaviors of medical professionals in the areas of osteoporosis treatment and counseling, BMD testing, initiation of pharmacotherapy, and coordination of care for patients who have experienced a fragility fracture.

Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Treatment of Advanced Osteoarthritis of the Knee: Utilization and Cost in a National Population Sample.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of knee osteoarthritis is increasing in the aging U.S. POPULATION: The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) injections for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis are debated. In this study, we assessed the utilization and costs of HA injections in the 12 months preceding total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and evaluated the usage of HA injections in end-stage knee osteoarthritis management in relation to other treatments. METHODS: MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits databases (Truven Health Analytics) were reviewed to identify patients who underwent TKA from 2005 to 2012. The utilization of patient-specific osteoarthritis-related health care (including medications, corticosteroid injections, HA injections, imaging, and office visits) and payment information were analyzed for the 12 months preceding TKA. RESULTS: A total of 244,059 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of those, 35,935 (14.7%) had ≥1 HA injection in the 12 months preceding TKA. HA injections were responsible for 16.4% of all knee osteoarthritis-related payments, trailing only imaging studies (18.2%), and HA injections accounted for 25.2% of treatment-specific payments, a rate that was higher than that of any other treatment. Patients receiving HA injections were significantly more likely to receive additional knee osteoarthritis-related treatments compared with patients who did not receive HA injections. CONCLUSIONS: Despite numerous studies questioning the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of HA injections for osteoarthritis of the knee, HA injections are still utilized for a substantial percentage of patients. Given the paucity of data supporting the effectiveness of HA injections and the current cost-conscious health-care climate, decreasing their use among patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis may represent a substantial cost reduction that likely does not adversely impact the quality of care.

The Economic Impact of Acetabular Labral Tears: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis Comparing Hip Arthroscopic Surgery and Structured Rehabilitation Alone in Patients Without Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopic surgery has emerged as a successful procedure to manage acetabular labral tears and concurrent hip injuries, which if left untreated, may contribute to hip osteoarthritis (OA). Therefore, it is essential to analyze the economic impact of this treatment option. PURPOSE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of hip arthroscopic surgery versus structured rehabilitation alone for acetabular labral tears, to examine the effects of age on cost-effectiveness, and to estimate the rate of symptomatic OA and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in both treatment arms over a lifetime horizon. STUDY DESIGN: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis of hip arthroscopic surgery compared with structured rehabilitation for symptomatic labral tears was performed using a Markov decision model constructed over a lifetime horizon. It was assumed that patients did not have OA. Direct costs (in 2014 United States dollars), utilities of health states (in quality-adjusted life years [QALYs] gained), and probabilities of transitioning between health states were estimated from a comprehensive literature review. Costs were estimated using national averages of Medicare reimbursements, adjusted for all payers in the United States from a societal perspective. Utilities were estimated from the Harris Hip Score. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the effect of uncertainty on the model outcomes. RESULTS: For a cohort representative of patients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery at our facility, arthroscopic surgery was more costly (additional $2653) but generated more utility (additional 3.94 QALYs) compared with rehabilitation over a lifetime. The mean ICER was $754/QALY, well below the conventional willingness to pay of $50,000/QALY. Arthroscopic surgery was cost-effective for 94.5% of patients. Although arthroscopic surgery decreased in cost-effectiveness with increasing age, arthroscopic surgery remained more cost-effective than rehabilitation for patients in the second to seventh decades of life. The lifetime incidence of symptomatic hip OA was over twice as high for patients treated with rehabilitation compared with arthroscopic surgery. The preferred treatment was sensitive to the utility after successful hip arthroscopic surgery, although the utility at which arthroscopic surgery becomes less cost-effective than rehabilitation is far below our best estimate. For older patients, the lifetime cost of arthroscopic surgery was greater, while the lifetime utility of arthroscopic surgery was less, approaching that of the rehabilitation arm. CONCLUSION: Hip arthroscopic surgery is more cost-effective and results in a considerably lower incidence of symptomatic OA than structured rehabilitation alone in treating symptomatic labral tears of patients in the second to seventh decades of life without pre-existing OA.

How Effective is Physical Therapy for Common Low Back Pain Diagnoses?: A Multivariate Analysis of 4597 Patients.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the treatment of low back pain with physical therapy results in clinically significant improvements in patient-reported pain and functional outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Low back pain is a major cause of morbidity and disability in health care. Previous studies have found poor efficacy for surgery in the absence of specific indications. A variety of nonoperative treatments are available; however, there is scant evidence to guide the practitioner as to the efficacy of these treatments. METHODS: Four thousand five hundred ninety-seven patients who underwent physical therapy for the nonoperative treatment of low back pain were included. The primary outcome measures were pre-and post-treatment scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) during activity, and NPRS during rest. Previously published thresholds for minimal clinically important difference (MCID) were used to determine the proportion of patients meeting MCID for each of our outcomes. Patients with starting values below the MCID for each variable were excluded from analysis. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine patient risk factors predictive of treatment failure. RESULTS: About 28.5% of patients met the MCID for improvement in ODI. Presence of night symptoms, obesity, and smoking were predictors of treatment failure for ODI. Fifty-nine percent of patients met the MCID for improvement in resting NPRS, with a history of venous thromboembolism, night symptoms, psychiatric disease, workers' compensation status, smoking, and obesity predictive of treatment failure. Sixty percent of patients met the MCID for improvement in activity NPRS, with night symptoms, workers' compensation status, and smoking predictive of treatment failure. CONCLUSION: We observed that a substantial percentage of the population did not meet MCID for pain and function following treatment of low back pain with physical therapy. Common risk factors for treatment failure included smoking and presence of night symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Obesity is Not Associated with Increased Short-term Complications After Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have analyzed the association between elevated BMI and complications after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Previous studies have not consistently arrived at the same conclusion regarding whether obesity is associated with a greater number of postoperative complications. We used a national surgical database to compare the 30-day complication profile and hospitalization outcomes after primary TSA among patients in different BMI categories. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked: (1) Is obesity associated with an increased risk of complications within 30 days of primary TSA? (2) Is obesity associated with increased operative time? METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program(®) database for 2006 to 2012 was queried to identify all patients who underwent a primary TSA for osteoarthritis of the shoulder. The ACS-NSQIP(®) database was selected for this study as it is a nationally representative database that provides prospectively collected perioperative data and a comprehensive patient medical profile. Exclusion criteria included revision TSA, infection, tumor, or fracture. We analyzed 4796 patients who underwent a primary TSA for osteoarthritis of the shoulder. Patients who underwent a TSA were divided in four BMI categories: normal (18.5-25 kg/m(2)), overweight (25-30 kg/m(2)), obesity Class 1 (30-35 kg/m(2)), and obesity Class 2 or greater (> 35 kg/m(2)). Perioperative hospitalization data and 30-day postoperative complications were compared among different BMI classes. Differences in patient demographics, preoperative laboratory values, and preexisting patient comorbidities also were analyzed among different BMI groups, and multivariate analysis was used to adjust for any potential confounding variables. RESULTS: There was no association between BMI and 30-day complications after surgery (normal as reference, overweight group relative risk: 0.57 [95% CI, 0.30-1.06], p = 0.076; obesity Class 1 relative risk: 0.52 [95% CI, 0.26-1.03], p = 0.061; obesity Class 2 or greater relative risk: 0.54 [95% CI, 0.25-1.17], p = 0.117). However, greater BMI was associated with longer surgical times (for normal BMI control group: 110 minutes, SD, 42 minutes; overweight group: 115 minutes, SD, 46 minutes, mean difference to control: 5 minutes [95% CI, -1 to 10 minutes], p = 0.096; obesity Class 1: 120 minutes, SD, 43 minutes, mean difference: 10 minutes [95% CI, 5-15 minutes], p < 0.001; obesity Class 2 or greater: 122 minutes, SD, 45 minutes, mean difference: 12 minutes [95% CI, 6-18 minutes], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although the surgical time increased for patients with greater BMI, the 30-day complications and perioperative hospitalization data after TSA were not different in patients with increased BMI levels. Obesity alone should not be a contraindication for TSA, and obese patients can expect similar incidences of postoperative complications. The preoperative medical optimization plan should be consistent with that of patients who are not obese who undergo TSA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.