Presentation and Management of the Pediatric Trigger Finger: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Pediatric trigger finger (PTF) is an acquired condition that is uncommon and anatomically complex. Currently, the literature is characterized by a small number of retrospective case series with limited sample sizes. This investigation sought to evaluate the presentation, management, and treatment outcomes of PTF in a large, multicenter cohort. METHODS: A retrospective review of pediatric patients with a diagnosis of PTF between 2009 and 2020 was performed at three tertiary referral hospitals. Patient demographics, PTF characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes were abstracted from the electronic medical records. Patients and families also were contacted by telephone to assess the downstream persistence or recurrence of triggering symptoms. RESULTS: In total, 321 patients with 449 PTFs were included at a mean follow-up of 3.9 ± 4.0 years. There were approximately equal numbers of boys and girls, and the mean age of symptom onset was 5.4 ± 5.1 years. The middle (34.7%) and index (11.6%) fingers were the most and least commonly affected digits, respectively. Overall, PTFs managed operatively achieved significantly higher rates of complete resolution compared with PTFs managed nonsurgically (97.1% vs 30.0%). Seventy-five percent of PTFs that achieved complete resolution with nonsurgical management did so within 6 months, and approximately 90% did so within 12 months. Patients with multidigit involvement, higher Quinnell grade at presentation, or palpable nodularity were significantly more likely to undergo surgery. There was no significant difference in the rate of complete resolution between splinted versus not splinted PTFs or across operative techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Only 30% of the PTFs managed nonsurgically achieved complete resolution. Splinting did not improve resolution rates in children treated nonsurgically. In contrast, surgical intervention has a high likelihood of restoring motion and function of the affected digit. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Association of Thoracic MRI Findings With Specialty and Training.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. OBJECTIVE: To compare the rate of positive pathology on thoracic MRI ordered by surgical spine specialists to those ordered by nonsurgical spine specialists. METHODS: Outpatient thoracic MRIs from January-March 2019 were evaluated from a single academic health care system. Studies without a known ordering provider, imaging report, or patients with known presence of malignancy, multiple sclerosis, recent trauma, or surgery were excluded (n = 320). Imaging studies were categorized by type of provider placing the order (resident, attending, or advanced practice practitioner) and department. MRIs were deemed positive if they showed relevant pathology that correlated with indication for exam as determined by a radiologist. One-sided chi-squared analysis was performed to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: Overall, our data demonstrated 17.2% of studies with positive pathology. Compared to nonspecialty clinicians, subspecialists showed 35/184 (19.0%) positivity rate versus the non-specialist with 20/136 (14.7%) positivity rate (P = .156). Posthoc analysis demonstrated that surgical specialists who order thoracic MRIs yield significantly higher positivity rates at 19/79 (24.0%) compared to nonsurgical specialists at 36/241 (14.9%) (P < .05). Overall, neurosurgery demonstrated the highest rate of positive thoracic MRIs at 14/40 (35.0%). Comparison between the rate of positivity between physicians and advanced practitioners was insignificant (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical diagnosis of symptomatic thoracic spine degenerative disease requires an expert physical exam combined with careful attention to radiology findings. Although the percent of relevant pathology on thoracic MRI is low, our data suggests evaluation by a surgical specialist should precede ordering a thoracic spine MRI.

Implicit Racial Bias in Pediatric Orthopaedic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Racial and ethnic minority patients continue to experience disparities in health care. It is important to understand provider-level factors that may contribute to these inequities. This study aims to evaluate the presence of implicit racial bias among pediatric orthopaedic surgeons and determine the relationship between bias and clinical decision making. METHODS: A web-based survey was distributed to 415 pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. One section measured for potential implicit racial bias using a child-race implicit association test (IAT). IAT scores were compared with US physicians and the US general population using publicly available data. Another section consisted of clinical vignettes with associated questions. For each vignette, surgeons were randomly assigned a single race-version, White or Black. Vignette questions were grouped into an opioid recommendation, management decision, or patient perception category for analysis based on subject tested. Vignette answers from surgeons with IAT scores that were concordant with their randomized vignette race-version (ie, surgeon with pro-White score assigned White vignette version) were compared with those that were discordant. RESULTS: IAT results were obtained from 119 surveyed surgeons (29% response rate). Overall, respondents showed a minor pro-White implicit bias ( P <0.001). Implicit bias of any strength toward either race was present among 103/119 (87%) surgeons. The proportion of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons with a strong pro-White implicit bias (29%) was greater than that of US physicians overall (21%, P =0.032) and the US general population (19%, P =0.004). No differences were found in overall opioid recommendations, management decisions, or patient perceptions between concordant and discordant groups. CONCLUSION: Most of the pediatric orthopaedic surgeons surveyed demonstrated implicit racial bias on IAT testing, with a large proportion demonstrating strong pro-White bias. Despite an association between implicit bias and clinical decision making in the literature, this study observed no evidence that implicit racial bias affected the management of pediatric fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program Social Media Presence During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In light of away rotation and in-person interview cancellations for the 2020 to 2021 application cycle, social media has become a popular tool for orthopaedic surgery residency programs to highlight their strengths, curricula, and social life to prospective applicants. The authors sought to explore the proliferation and utilization of 3 popular social media platforms by both orthopaedic surgery departments and residencies. METHODS: Orthopaedic surgery departmental and residency program social media accounts and their creation dates across Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram were identified using a standardized search methodology. Residency Instagram accounts were further evaluated for the number of posts, followers, likes, and comments. Both departments and residency programs were cohorted by affiliation with a US News &World Report (USNWR) top 50 American hospital for orthopaedics or by status as a Doximity top 20 program based on reputation. RESULTS: Across a total of 192 residency programs included for analysis, Instagram was the most popular social media platform (61.5%), followed by Twitter (19.8%) and Facebook (10.4%). Conversely, orthopaedic departments more frequently used Facebook (33.9%) and Twitter (28.1%) over Instagram (17.2%). Of the 118 residency Instagram accounts, 102 (86.4%) were created after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Larger residency programs (≥6 spots/year) and those programs in the Doximity top 20 or affiliated with USNWR top 50 orthopaedic hospitals had a greater number of followers as well as likes and comments per post (p < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Given the recruitment challenges faced by residency programs because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Instagram has rapidly become a prominent platform for attracting orthopaedic surgery applicants. These accounts have a large number of followers, particularly for residency programs with higher Doximity reputation rankings.