Analysis of the diversity pipeline for the orthopedic trauma surgeon workforce in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of research on the state of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce. The purpose of this study was to analyze the training pathway for diverse candidates in orthopedic trauma as it relates to race, ethnicity, and sex. METHODS: Self-reported demographic data were compared among allopathic medical students, orthopedic surgery residents, orthopedic trauma fellows, and the general population in the United States (2013-2022). Race categories consisted of White, Asian, Black, and Native American/Alaskan Native (NA/AN), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NH/PI). Ethnicity categories were Hispanic/Latino or non-Hispanic/Latino. Sex categories were male and female. Representation was calculated at each stage of accredited training. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) quantified the equitable representation of demographic groups in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce relative to the US population. PPR thresholds were used to classify representation as overrepresented (PPR > 1.2), equitable (PPR = 0.8-1.2), and underrepresented (PPR < 0.8). RESULTS: Relative to medical school and orthopedic surgery residency, fewer female (48.5 % vs 16.7 % vs 18.7 %, P < 0.001), Hispanic (6.1 % vs 4.5 % vs 2.6 %, P < 0.001), Black (6.9 % vs 5.0 % vs 3.1 %, P < 0.001), and Asian (24.0 % vs 14.3 % vs 12.2 %, P < 0.001) trainees existed in orthopedic trauma fellowship training. In contrast, more male (51.5 % vs 83.3 % vs 81.3 %, P < 0.001) and White (62.8 % vs 79.1 % vs 84.0 %, P < 0.001) trainees existed in orthopedic trauma fellowship relative to earlier training stages. There were zero NA/AN or NH/PI trainees in orthopedic trauma (PPR = 0). Relative to the US population, Hispanic (PPR = 0.14), Black (PPR = 0.25), and female (PPR = 0.37) trainees were underrepresented in orthopedic trauma. In contrast, Asian (PPR = 2.04), male (PPR = 1.64), and White (PPR = 1.36) trainees were overrepresented in orthopedic trauma. CONCLUSION: Women, racial, and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce relative to the US population, and earlier stages of training. Targeted recruitment and guided mentorship of these groups may lead to greater interest, engagement, and diversity in orthopedic trauma.

Establishing surgical volume benchmarks for Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)-accredited fellowship training.

INTRODUCTION: Case volumes of trauma centers and surgeons influence clinical outcomes following orthopaedic trauma surgery. This study quantifies surgical volume benchmarks for Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)-accredited fellowship training in the United States. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of orthopaedic trauma fellows graduating between 2018 and 2019 to 2022-2023. Case volume percentiles were calculated across categories and variability defined as the fold-difference between 90th and 10th percentiles. Temporal trends were assessed with linear regression. RESULTS: 446 orthopaedic trauma fellows were included in this study. Mean reported case volume increased from 898 ± 245 in 2018-2019 to 974 ± 329 in 2022-2023 (P = 0.066). Mean case volume was 924 over the study period and mostly consisted of other (418 cases, 45 %), subtrochanteric/intertrochanteric femoral neck (84 cases, 9 %), open fracture debridement (72 cases, 8 %), pelvic ring disruption / fracture (55 cases, 6 %), acetabular fracture (41 cases, 4 %), tibial shaft fracture (39 cases, 4 %), and femoral shaft fracture (38 cases, 4 %) cases. Overall variability in total reported case volume was 2.0. Variability was greatest in distal radius fracture (14.8), amputation (9.5), fasciotomy (8.0), and proximal humerus repair (5.0). CONCLUSION: Graduates from OTA-accredited fellowship training perform 924 cases on average, which exceeds the current minimum requirement of 600 cases. Case volume benchmarks can assist trainees and faculty align training goals with fellowship program strengths. More research is needed to determine evidence-based case minimum requirements for core competency training in orthopaedic trauma surgery.

Orthopedic Surgery Volume Trends During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Postvaccination Era: Implications for Healthcare Planning.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic decreased surgical volumes, but prior studies have not investigated recovery through 2022, or analyzed specific procedures or cases of urgency within orthopedic surgery. The aims of this study were to (1) quantify the declines in orthopedic surgery volume during and after the pandemic peak, (2) characterize surgical volume recovery during the postvaccination period, and (3) characterize recovery in the 1-year postvaccine release period. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 27,476 orthopedic surgeries from January 2019 to December 2022 at one urban academic quaternary referral center. We reported trends over the following periods: baseline pre-COVID-19 period (1/6/2019 to 1/4/2020), COVID-19 peak (3/15/2020 to 5/16/2020), post-COVID-19 peak (5/17/2020 to 1/2/2021), postvaccine release (1/3/2021 to 1/1/2022), and 1-year postvaccine release (1/2/2022 to 12/30/2022). Comparisons were performed with 2 sample t-tests. RESULTS: Pre-COVID-19 surgical volume fell by 72% at the COVID-19 peak, especially impacting elective procedures (P < .001) and both hip and knee joint arthroplasty (P < .001) procedures. Nonurgent (P = .024) and urgent or emergency (P = .002) cases also significantly decreased. Postpeak recovery before the vaccine saw volumes rise to 92% of baseline, which further rose to 96% and 94% in 2021 and 2022, respectively. While elective procedures surpassed the baseline in 2022, nonurgent and urgent or emergency surgeries remained low. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic substantially reduced orthopedic surgical volumes, which have still not fully recovered through 2022, particularly nonelective procedures. The differential recovery within an orthopedic surgery program may result in increased morbidity and can serve to inform department-level operational recovery.

Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Among Patients With Hip Fracture Is Not an Indication to Delay Surgical Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes in patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) treated within 48 hours of last preoperative dose with those with surgical delays >48 hours. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Three academic Level 1 trauma centers. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients 65 years of age or older on DOACs before hip fracture treated between 2010 and 2018. Patients were excluded if last DOAC dose was >24 hours before admission, patient suffered from polytrauma, and/or delay to surgery was not attributed to DOAC. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Primary outcome measures were the postoperative complication rate as determined by diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolus, wound breakdown, drainage, or infection. Secondary outcomes included transfusion requirement, perioperative bleeding, length of stay, reoperation rates, readmission rates, and mortality. RESULTS: Two hundred five patients were included in this study, with a mean cohort age of 81.9 years (65-100 years), 64% were (132/205) female, and a mean Charlson Comorbidity Index of 6.4 (2-20). No significant difference was observed among age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, or fracture pattern between cohorts (P > 0.05 for all comparisons). Seventy-one patients had surgery <48 hours after final preoperative DOAC dose; 134 patients had surgery >48 hours after. No significant difference in complication rate between the 2 cohorts was observed (P = 0.30). Patients with delayed surgical management were more likely to require transfusion (OR 2.39, 95% CI, 1.05-5.44; P = 0.04). Patients with early surgical management had significantly shorter lengths of stay (5.9 vs. 7.6 days, P < 0.005). There was no difference in estimated blood loss, anemia, reoperations, readmissions, 90-day mortality, or 1-year mortality (P > 0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Geriatric patients with hip fracture who underwent surgical management within 48 hours of their last preoperative DOAC dose required less transfusions and had decreased length of stay, with comparable mortality and complication rates with patients with surgery delayed beyond 48 hours. Providers should consider early intervention in this population rather than adherence to elective procedure guidelines. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Degree of articular injury as measured by CT cross sectional area is associated with physical function following the treatment of bicondylar tibial plateau fractures.

BACKGROUND: Bicondylar tibial plateau fractures are complex injuries that commonly require surgical repair. Long-term clinical outcome has been associated with discrepancies in leg alignment, instability and condylar width abnormalities. While intuitive, the degree of articular damage at time of injury has not been linked to outcomes in patients with bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. The aim of this study was to quantify percentage of articular surface cross sectional area disruption and assess for correlation between the degree of articular injury and patient reported physical function. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study at two level 1 trauma centers. 57 consecutive patients undergoing surgical repair for bicondylar tibial plateau fractures between 2013 and 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Preoperative CT scans were reviewed, and the percentage of articular surface disruption cross sectional area was calculated. PROMIS® scores were collected from patients at a minimum of 2 years. RESULTS: 57 patients with an average age of 58 ± 14.3 years were included. The average PROMIS® score was 45.5. There was a correlation between percentage of articular surface disruption and total PROMIS® scores (0.4, CI: 0.2-0.5, p = .007) and the physical function of the PROMIS® score (0.4, CI: 0.2-0.6, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Our method for calculating articular surface disruption on CT is a simple, reproducible and accurate method for assessing the degree of articular damage in patients with bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. We found that the percentage of cross-sectional articular surface disruption correlates with patient reported outcomes and physical function.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak on ACGME-accredited orthopaedic trauma fellowship training.

INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 viral outbreak created unprecedented challenges in surgical education. Yet, its impact on reported case volume during orthopaedic trauma fellowship training remains poorly understood. We hypothesized that cases performed during orthopaedic trauma fellowship training would decrease by 8 %-17 % during the 2019-2020 academic year corresponding to the 1-2 month moratorium of non-essential cases during the initial SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in the United States. METHODS: We designed a retrospective cohort study of orthopaedic trauma fellows at Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited training programs (2018-2019 to 2021-2022). Mean case volumes were compared by case category across academic years. RESULTS: There was a -13 % year-over-year decrease in reported case volume during the 2019-2020 academic year (505 ± 126 vs 441 ± 94, P = 0.079, Fig. 1). Case categories with the greatest percentage declines were Treatment of Nonunion / Malunion (-31 %), Fasciotomy (-25 %), External Fixation (-21 %), Forearm / Wrist (-21 %), and Intra-articular Distal Humerus Fracture (-17 %). There was a 7 % year-over-year increase in case volume during the subsequent 2020-2021 academic year with near universal increases in case volume across case categories. CONCLUSION: There was a 13 % decrease in orthopaedic trauma case volume during the 2019-2020 academic year, corresponding to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. Certain trauma case categories experienced the greatest negative impact, which subsequently recovered during the next academic year. These results may help inform accrediting bodies and surgical educators on the impact of future viral outbreaks on orthopaedic trauma fellowship training.

External validation of a predictive algorithm for in-hospital and 90-day mortality after spinal epidural abscess.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Mortality in patients with spinal epidural abscess (SEA) remains high. Accurate prediction of patient-specific prognosis in SEA can improve patient counseling as well as guide management decisions. There are no externally validated studies predicting short-term mortality in patients with SEA. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to externally validate the Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) stochastic gradient boosting algorithm for prediction of in-hospital and 90-day postdischarge mortality in SEA. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective, case-control study at a tertiary care academic medical center from 2003 to 2021. PATIENT SAMPLE: Adult patients admitted for radiologically confirmed diagnosis of SEA who did not initiate treatment at an outside institution. OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital and 90-day postdischarge mortality. METHODS: We tested the SORG stochastic gradient boosting algorithm on an independent validation cohort. We assessed its performance with discrimination, calibration, decision curve analysis, and overall performance. RESULTS: A total of 212 patients met inclusion criteria, with a short-term mortality rate of 10.4%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of the SORG algorithm when tested on the full validation cohort was 0.82, the calibration intercept was -0.08, the calibration slope was 0.96, and the Brier score was 0.09. CONCLUSIONS: With a contemporaneous and geographically distinct independent cohort, we report successful external validation of a machine learning algorithm for prediction of in-hospital and 90-day postdischarge mortality in SEA.

The role of geographic disparities in outcomes after orthopaedic trauma surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare disparities linked to patient rurality and socioeconomic status are known to exist, but few studies have examined the effect of urban versus rural status on outcomes after orthopedic trauma surgery. The aim of this study was to examine the correlation between patient rurality, socioeconomic status, and outcomes after orthopedic trauma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with a hip or long bone fracture between January 2016 and December 2017. Data were collected from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), a 20% weighted sample of 95% of the U.S. inpatient population. Patients were stratified into 3 groups: isolated hip fracture, isolated long bone fracture, and polytrauma. Bivariate analysis was completed using chi-squared tests for categorical variables and t-tests for continuous variables. Multivariable analysis was completed using population-weighted logistic regression models, based on a conceptual model derived selection of covariates. RESULTS: We included 235,393 patients diagnosed with a hip or extremity fracture. These were weighted to represent 1,176,965 patients nationally. In the hip fracture group, rural patient status was associated with higher odds of mortality (OR 1.32, P < 0.001) but not complications (OR 0.95, P = 0.082). In the extremity fracture and polytrauma groups, rural patient status was not associated with significantly higher odds of mortality or complications. In the urban polytrauma group, zip code with below-median income was associated with increased odds of mortality (OR 1.23, P = 0.002) but not complications. In the rural polytrauma group, zip code with below-median income was not associated with significantly increased odds of mortality or complications. In the hip fracture and extremity fracture groups, below-median income was not associated with significantly higher odds of mortality. CONCLUSION: We found that rural patients with hip fracture have higher mortality compared to urban patients and that socioeconomic disparities in mortality after a polytrauma exist in urban settings. These results speak to the ongoing need to develop objective measures of disparity-sensitive healthcare and optimize trauma systems to better serve low-income patients and patients in rural areas.

Analyzing risk factors for treatment failure in fracture-related infection.

INTRODUCTION: Fracture-related infection (FRI) represents a challenging clinical scenario. Limited evidence exists regarding treatment failure after initial management of FRI. The objective of our investigation was to determine incidence and risk factors for treatment failure in FRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients treated for FRI between 2011 and 2015 at three level 1 trauma centers. One hundred and thirty-four patients treated for FRI were identified. Demographic and clinical variables were extracted from the medical record. Treatment failure was defined as the need for repeat debridement or surgical revision seven or more days after the presumed final procedure for infection treatment. Univariate comparisons were conducted between patients who experienced treatment failure and those who did not. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to identify independent associations with treatment failure. RESULTS: Of the 134 FRI patients, 51 (38.1%) experienced treatment failure. Patients who failed were more likely to have had an open injury (31% versus 17%; p = 0.05), to have undergone implant removal (p = 0.03), and additional index I&D procedures (3.3 versus 1.6; p < 0.001). Most culture results identified a single organism (62%), while 15% were culture negative. Treatment failure was more common in culture-negative infections (p = 0.08). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was the most common organism associated with treatment failure (29%; p = 0.08). Multivariate regression demonstrated a statistically significant association between treatment failure and two or more irrigation and debridement (I&D) procedures (OR 13.22, 95% CI 4.77-36.62, p < 0.001) and culture-negative infection (OR 4.74, 95% CI 1.26-17.83, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of treatment failure following FRI continues to be high. Important risk factors associated with treatment failure include open fracture, implant removal, and multiple I&D procedures. While MRSA remains common, culture-negative infection represents a novel risk factor for failure, suggesting aggressive treatment of clinically diagnosed cases remains critical even without positive culture data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort study; Level III.

Sustained Improvement in Quality of Patient Handoffs After Orthopaedic Surgery I-PASS Intervention.

PURPOSE: The I-PASS tool has been shown to decrease medical errors in patient handoffs in nonorthopaedic surgery fields. We prospectively studied the implementation of a version of this handoff tool modified for orthopaedic surgery patients in an academic practice at two level I trauma centers. METHODS: This was a prospective study of a multicenter handoff improvement program. Handoffs were evaluated preintervention and at 1, 6, 9, and 18 months postintervention for key data elements defined by I-PASS. Rates of adverse clinical outcomes were compared before and after the handoff intervention. RESULTS: Seven hundred five electronic patient handoffs were analyzed. From preintervention to the 18-month time point, notable improvement was observed in 8 of 9 targeted quality elements. In Poisson regression analysis, adherence to the standardized handoff format was sustained at markedly improved levels throughout all postintervention time points. No statistically significant differences were observed between rates of 30-day readmission, 90-day readmission, urinary tract infection, pulmonary embolism/deep vein thrombosis, surgical site infection, or delirium before and after the intervention. CONCLUSION: Introduction of an orthopaedic-specific I-PASS tool produced sustained adherence from a group of over 50 orthopaedic providers. Objective quality of handoffs improved markedly as defined by the I-PASS standard, and 86% of the providers supported the ongoing use of the tool. Despite the improvement in handoff quality, we were unable to demonstrate a notable change in measured clinical outcomes. Methods for the development and implementation of the orthopaedic-specific I-PASS tool are described. Orthopaedic residency programs should consider using a version of I-PASS to standardize care.

Sociodemographic Factors Are Associated with Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Completion in Orthopaedic Surgery: An Analysis of Completion Rates and Determinants Among New Patients.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and, specifically, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), are increasingly utilized for clinical research, clinical care, and health-care policy. However, completion of these outcome measures can be inconsistent and challenging. We hypothesized that sociodemographic variables are associated with the completion of PROM questionnaires. The purposes of the present study were to calculate the completion rate of assigned PROM forms and to identify sociodemographic and other variables associated with completion to help guide improved collection efforts. Methods: All new orthopaedic patients at a single academic medical center were identified from 2016 to 2020. On the basis of subspecialty and presenting condition, patients were assigned certain PROMIS forms and legacy PROMs. Demographic and clinical information was abstracted from the electronic medical record. Bivariate analyses were performed to compare characteristics among those who completed assigned PROMs and those who did not. A multivariable logistic regression model was created to determine which variables were associated with successful completion of assigned PROMs. Results: Of the 219,891 new patients, 88,052 (40%) completed all assigned PROMs. Patients who did not activate their internet-based patient portal had a 62% increased likelihood of not completing assigned PROMs (odds ratio [OR], 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58 to 1.66; p < 0.001). Non-English-speaking patients had a 90% (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.00; p < 0.001) increased likelihood of not completing assigned PROMs at presentation. Older patients (≥65 years of age) and patients of Black race had a 23% (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.27; p < 0.001) and 24% (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.30; p < 0.001) increased likelihood of not completing assigned PROMs, respectively. Conclusions: The rate of completion of PROMs varies according to sociodemographic variables. This variability could bias clinical outcomes research in orthopaedic surgery. The present study highlights the need to uniformly increase completion rates so that outcomes research incorporates truly representative cohorts of patients treated. Furthermore, the use of these PROMs to guide health-care policy decisions necessitates a representative patient distribution to avoid bias in the health-care system. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Single versus dual incision approaches for dual plating of bicondylar tibial plateau fractures have comparable rates of deep infection and revision surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The use of one midline incision versus dual medial/lateral incisions for dual plating of bicondylar tibial plateau (BTP) fractures is controversial. This study aimed to compare rates of infection and secondary surgery in patients treated with dual plating for a BTP fracture using a single versus double incisions. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Two Level-1 trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Patients > 18 years with a closed AO/OTA 41-C BTP fracture without compartment syndrome treated with a single midline or dual incision (lateral with medial or posteromedial) approach for dual plating. INTERVENTION: Dual plating through either a single anterior incision, or dual medial/lateral incisions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Rates of deep infection and reoperation were compared using Chi-square analysis (p-value of < 0.05). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: In total 636 AO/OTA 41-C BTP fractures treated between 1/1/01 and 12/31/18 were identified and assessed. After exclusions for limited follow up, other techniques, open fracture and the need for fasciotomies, 346 patients were studied. Of these 254 had been treated with a single plate / single approach technique while 92 had been dual plated, 41 through a single anterior incision while 51 had dual plating through separate lateral and medial or posteromedial incisions. For these 92 fractures, there was no significant difference in the rate of deep infection (22.0% vs 23.5%, s=0.858) or reoperation (31.7% vs 31.4%, p=0.973) between the single and dual incision groups. Injuries that had been treated with single plating via a single incision had comparably lower rates of deep infection (10.2% vs. 22.8%, p=0.003) and reoperation (12.2% vs. 31.5%, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in any demographic parameters between patients undergoing single versus dual plating. Although retrospective, not randomized and subject to single surgeon bias these data suggest that these complications are more based on injury than the approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Development and external validation of predictive algorithms for six-week mortality in spinal metastasis using 4,304 patients from five institutions.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Historically, spine surgeons used expected postoperative survival of 3-months to help select candidates for operative intervention in spinal metastasis. However, this cutoff has been challenged by the development of minimally invasive techniques, novel biologics, and advanced radiotherapy. Recent studies have suggested that a life expectancy of 6 weeks may be enough to achieve significant improvements in postoperative health-related quality of life. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop a model capable of predicting 6-week mortality in patients with spinal metastases treated with radiation or surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A retrospective review was conducted at five large tertiary centers in the United States and Taiwan. PATIENT SAMPLE: The development cohort consisted of 3,001 patients undergoing radiotherapy and/or surgery for spinal metastases from one institution. The validation institutional cohort consisted of 1,303 patients from four independent, external institutions. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was 6-week mortality. METHODS: Five models were considered to predict 6-week mortality, and the model with the best performance across discrimination, calibration, decision-curve analysis, and overall performance was integrated into an open access web-based application. RESULTS: The most important variables for prediction of 6-week mortality were albumin, primary tumor histology, absolute lymphocyte, three or more spine metastasis, and ECOG score. The elastic-net penalized logistic model was chosen as the best performing model with AUC 0.84 on evaluation in the independent testing set. On external validation in the 1,303 patients from the four independent institutions, the model retained good discriminative ability with an area under the curve of 0.81. The model is available here: https://sorg-apps.shinyapps.io/spinemetssurvival/. CONCLUSIONS: While this study does not advocate for the use of a 6-week life expectancy as criteria for considering operative management, the algorithm developed and externally validated in this study may be helpful for preoperative planning, multidisciplinary management, and shared decision-making in spinal metastasis patients with shorter life expectancy.

What Is the Clinical Benefit of Common Orthopaedic Procedures as Assessed by the PROMIS Versus Other Validated Outcomes Tools?

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), are increasingly used to measure healthcare value. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is a metric that helps clinicians determine whether a statistically detectable improvement in a PROM after surgical care is likely to be large enough to be important to a patient or to justify an intervention that carries risk and cost. There are two major categories of MCID calculation methods, anchor-based and distribution-based. This variability, coupled with heterogeneous surgical cohorts used for existing MCID values, limits their application to clinical care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In our study, we sought (1) to determine MCID thresholds and attainment percentages for PROMIS after common orthopaedic procedures using distribution-based methods, (2) to use anchor-based MCID values from published studies as a comparison, and (3) to compare MCID attainment percentages using PROMIS scores to other validated outcomes tools such as the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). METHODS: This was a retrospective study at two academic medical centers and three community hospitals. The inclusion criteria for this study were patients who were age 18 years or older and who underwent elective THA for osteoarthritis, TKA for osteoarthritis, one-level posterior lumbar fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis or spondylolisthesis, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis or rotator cuff arthropathy, arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, or arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. This yielded 14,003 patients. Patients undergoing revision operations or surgery for nondegenerative pathologies and patients without preoperative PROMs assessments were excluded, leaving 9925 patients who completed preoperative PROMIS assessments and 9478 who completed other preoperative validated outcomes tools (HOOS, KOOS, numerical rating scale for leg pain, numerical rating scale for back pain, and QuickDASH). Approximately 66% (6529 of 9925) of patients had postoperative PROMIS scores (Physical Function, Mental Health, Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, and Upper Extremity) and were included for analysis. PROMIS scores are population normalized with a mean score of 50 ± 10, with most scores falling between 30 to 70. Approximately 74% (7007 of 9478) of patients had postoperative historical assessment scores and were included for analysis. The proportion who reached the MCID was calculated for each procedure cohort at 6 months of follow-up using distribution-based MCID methods, which included a fraction of the SD (1/2 or 1/3 SD) and minimum detectable change (MDC) using statistical significance (such as the MDC 90 from p < 0.1). Previously published anchor-based MCID thresholds from similar procedure cohorts and analogous PROMs were used to calculate the proportion reaching MCID. RESULTS: Within a given distribution-based method, MCID thresholds for PROMIS assessments were similar across multiple procedures. The MCID threshold ranged between 3.4 and 4.5 points across all procedures using the 1/2 SD method. Except for meniscectomy (3.5 points), the anchor-based PROMIS MCID thresholds (range 4.5 to 8.1 points) were higher than the SD distribution-based MCID values (2.3 to 4.5 points). The difference in MCID thresholds based on the calculation method led to a similar trend in MCID attainment. Using THA as an example, MCID attainment using PROMIS was achieved by 76% of patients using an anchor-based threshold of 7.9 points. However, 82% of THA patients attained MCID using the MDC 95 method (6.1 points), and 88% reached MCID using the 1/2 SD method (3.9 points). Using the HOOS metric (scaled from 0 to 100), 86% of THA patients reached the anchor-based MCID threshold (17.5 points). However, 91% of THA patients attained the MCID using the MDC 90 method (12.5 points), and 93% reached MCID using the 1/2 SD method (8.4 points). In general, the proportion of patients reaching MCID was lower for PROMIS than for other validated outcomes tools; for example, with the 1/2 SD method, 72% of patients who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy reached the MCID on PROMIS Physical Function compared with 86% on KOOS. CONCLUSION: MCID calculations can provide clinical correlation for PROM scores interpretation. The PROMIS form is increasingly used because of its generalizability across diagnoses. However, we found lower proportions of MCID attainment using PROMIS scores compared with historical PROMs. By using historical proportions of attainment on common orthopaedic procedures and a spectrum of MCID calculation techniques, the PROMIS MCID benchmarks are realizable for common orthopaedic procedures. For clinical practices that routinely collect PROMIS scores in the clinical setting, these results can be used by individual surgeons to evaluate personal practice trends and by healthcare systems to quantify whether clinical care initiatives result in meaningful differences. Furthermore, these MCID thresholds can be used by researchers conducting retrospective outcomes research with PROMIS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Racial Differences in Orthopedic Trauma Surgery.

Racial discrepancies among patients in the United States undergoing orthopedic trauma surgery have not been investigated. Issues relating to socioeconomic status and access to care have played a role in the health outcomes of racial groups. In orthopedic surgery, recent joint arthroplasty literature has shown significant racial differences in the use of elective joint arthroplasty. Furthermore, studies also suggest increased rates of early complication in racial minority groups. In general, little information exists on the postoperative outcomes of racial minority groups in orthopedic surgery. We retrospectively queried the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify patients undergoing orthopedic trauma surgery between 2008 and 2016. Patients of all ages who underwent orthopedic trauma surgery were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Patients classified as either Black or White were included in the study. Demographic data, comorbidities, and basic surgical data were compared between the groups. Adverse outcomes in the initial 30 days postoperative were also examined. Higher frequencies of deep wound infection (0.5% vs 0.3%, P=.002) were noted among Black patients, with decreased mortality (0.3% vs 0.6%, P=.004) and postoperative transfusion (2.7% vs 3.8%, P<.001) rates, compared with White patients. Clear differences exist in the demographic, surgical, and outcome data between Black and White patients undergoing orthopedic trauma surgery. More epidemiological studies are required to further investigate racial differences in orthopedic trauma surgery. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(2):71-76.].

Computed tomography-based body composition profile as a screening tool for geriatric frailty detection.

OBJECTIVE: To assess prevalence of CT imaging-derived sarcopenia, osteoporosis, and visceral obesity in clinically frail and prefrail patients and determine their association with the diagnosis of frailty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was constructed using our institution's pelvic trauma registry and ambulatory database registry. The study included all elderly pelvic trauma patients and ambulatory outpatients between May 2016 and March 2020 who had a comprehensive geriatric assessment and CT abdomen/pelvis within 1 year from the date of the assessment. Patients were dichotomized in prefrail or frail groups. The study excluded patients with history of metastatic disease or malignancy requiring chemotherapy. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 151 elderly female and 65 male patients. Each gender population was subdivided into frail (114 female [75%], 51 male [78%]) and prefrail (37 female [25%], 14 male [22%]) patients. CT-imaging-derived diagnosis of osteoporosis (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI: 1.2-5.5) and sarcopenia (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% CI: 1.2-5.6) were associated with frailty in females, but did not reach statistical significance in males. BMI and subcutaneous adipose tissue at L3 level were statistically lower in the frail male group compared to the prefrail group. BMI showed strong correlation with the subcutaneous area at the L3 level in both genders (Spearman's coefficient of 0.8, p < 0.001). Hypoalbuminemia and visceral obesity were not associated with frailty in either gender. CONCLUSION: This proof-of-concept study demonstrates the feasibility of using CT-derived body-composition parameters as a screening tool for frailty, which can offer an opportunity for early medical intervention.

Is It Safe to Prep the External Fixator In Situ During Staged ORIF of Bicondylar Tibial Plateau Fractures? A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the risk of deep infection and unplanned reoperation after staged open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of bicondylar tibial plateau (BTP) fractures whether elements of the temporizing external fixator were prepped into the surgical field or completely removed before definitive fixation. DESIGN: Retrospective comparative cohort study. SETTING: Two academic Level 1 trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One hundred forty-seven OTA/AO 41-C (Schatzker 6) BTP fractures treated with a 2-stage protocol of acute spanning ex-fix followed by definitive ORIF between 2001 and 2018. INTERVENTION: Seventy-eight fractures had retained elements of the original ex-fix prepped in situ during surgery for definitive internal fixation, and 69 had the ex-fix construct completely removed before prepping and draping. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Deep infection and unplanned reoperation. RESULTS: Among 147 patients treated with staged ORIF, the overall deep infection rate was 26.5% and the reoperation rate was 33.3%. There were high rates of deep infection (26.9% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.909) and unplanned reoperation (30.8% vs. 36.2%, P = 0.483) in both groups, but no difference whether the ex-fix was prepped in or completely removed. Within the retained ex-fix group, there was no difference in infection with retention of the entire ex-fix compared with only the ex-fix pins (28.1% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.842). CONCLUSIONS: We observed high complication rates in this cohort of OTA/AO 41C BTP fractures treated with staged ORIF, but prepping in the ex-fix did not lead to a significant increase in rates of infection or reoperation. This study provides the treating surgeon with clinical data about a common practice used to facilitate definitive fixation of unstable BTP fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.