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

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

Evaluation of Systemwide Improvement Programs to Optimize Time to Surgery for Patients With Hip Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Longer time to surgery (TTS) for hip fractures has been associated with higher rates of postoperative complications and mortality. Given that more than 300 000 adults are hospitalized for hip fractures in the United States each year, various improvement programs have been implemented to reduce TTS with variable results, attributed to contextual patient- and system-level factors. Objective: To catalog TTS improvement programs, identify their results, and categorize program strategies according to Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC), highlighting components of successful improvement programs within their associated contexts and seeking to guide health care systems in implementing programs designed to reduce TTS. Evidence Review: A systematic review was conducted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline. Three databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Trials) were searched for studies published between 2000 and 2021 that reported on improvement programs for hip fracture TTS. Observational studies in high-income country settings, including patients with surgical, low-impact, nonpathological hip fractures aged 50 years or older, were considered for review. Improvement programs were assessed for their association with decreased TTS, and ERIC strategies were matched to improvement program components. Findings: Preliminary literature searches yielded 1683 articles, of which 69 articles were included for final analysis. Among the 69 improvement programs, 49 were associated with significantly decreased TTS, and 20 programs did not report significant decreases in TTS. Among 49 successful improvement programs, the 5 most common ERIC strategies were (1) assess for readiness and identify barriers and facilitators, (2) develop a formal implementation blueprint, (3) identify and prepare champions, (4) promote network weaving, and (5) develop resource-sharing agreements. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review, certain components (eg, identifying barriers and facilitators to program implementation, developing a formal implementation blueprint, preparing intervention champions) are common among improvement programs that were associated with reducing TTS and may inform the approach of hospital systems developing similar programs. Other strategies had mixed results, suggesting local contextual factors (eg, operating room availability) may affect their success. To contextualize the success of a given improvement program across different clinical settings, subsequent investigation must elucidate the association between interventional success and facility-level factors influencing TTS, such as hospital census and type, teaching status, annual surgical volume, and other factors.

Outcomes and complications of primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty with minimum of 2 years' follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is an effective treatment option for reducing pain and improving function for patients with rotator cuff tear arthropathy, irreparable rotator cuff tears, glenoid deformity, and other challenging clinical scenarios, including fracture sequelae and revision shoulder arthroplasty. There has been a wide range of reported outcomes and postoperative complication rates reported in the literature. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide an updated review of the clinical outcomes and complication rates following primary rTSA. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate outcomes and complications following primary rTSA according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Demographics, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form [ASES] and Constant scores), number of complications, and revisions were extracted, recorded, and analyzed from the included articles. RESULTS: Of the 1415 studies screened, 52 studies met the inclusion criteria comprising a total of 5824 shoulders. The mean age at the time of surgery was 72 years (range: 34-93), and the mean follow-up was 3.9 years (range: 2-16). Patients demonstrated a mean improvement of 56° in active flexion, 50° in active abduction, and 14° in active external rotation. Regarding functional outcome scores, rTSA patients demonstrated a mean clinically significant improvement of 37 in Constant score (minimal clinically important difference [MCID] = 5.7) and ASES score (42.0; MCID = 13.6). The overall complication rate for rTSA was 9.4% and revision rate of 2.6%. Complications were further subdivided into major medical complications (0.07%), shoulder- or surgical-related complications (5.3%), and infections (1.2%). The most frequently reported shoulder- or surgical-related complications were scapular notching (14.4%), periprosthetic fracture (0.8%), glenoid loosening (0.7%), and prosthetic dislocation (0.7%). DISCUSSION: Primary rTSA is a safe and reliable procedure with low complication, revision, infection, and scapular notching rates. Additionally, patients demonstrated clinically significant improvements in both range of motion and clinical outcome scores.

Is Frailty Associated with Adverse Outcomes After Orthopaedic Surgery?: A Systematic Review and Assessment of Definitions.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence supporting the association between frailty and adverse outcomes after surgery. There is, however, no consensus on how frailty should be assessed and used to inform treatment. In this review, we aimed to synthesize the current literature on the use of frailty as a predictor of adverse outcomes following orthopaedic surgery by (1) identifying the frailty instruments used and (2) evaluating the strength of the association between frailty and adverse outcomes after orthopaedic surgery. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify articles that reported on outcomes after orthopaedic surgery within frail populations. Only studies that defined frail patients using a frailty instrument were included. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Study demographic information, frailty instrument information (e.g., number of items, domains included), and clinical outcome measures (including mortality, readmissions, and length of stay) were collected and reported. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 630 articles. Of these, 177 articles underwent full-text review; 82 articles were ultimately included and analyzed. The modified frailty index (mFI) was the most commonly used frailty instrument (38% of the studies used the mFI-11 [11-item mFI], and 24% of the studies used the mFI-5 [5-item mFI]), although a large variety of instruments were used (24 different instruments identified). Total joint arthroplasty (22%), hip fracture management (17%), and adult spinal deformity management (15%) were the most frequently studied procedures. Complications (71%) and mortality (51%) were the most frequently reported outcomes; 17% of studies reported on a functional outcome. CONCLUSIONS: There is no consensus on the best approach to defining frailty among orthopaedic surgery patients, although instruments based on the accumulation-of-deficits model (such as the mFI) were the most common. Frailty was highly associated with adverse outcomes, but the majority of the studies were retrospective and did not identify frailty prospectively in a prediction model. Although many outcomes were described (complications and mortality being the most common), there was a considerable amount of heterogeneity in measurement strategy and subsequent strength of association. Future investigations evaluating the association between frailty and orthopaedic surgical outcomes should focus on prospective study designs, long-term outcomes, and assessments of patient-reported outcomes and/or functional recovery scores. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Preoperatively identifying high-risk orthopaedic surgery patients through frailty instruments has the potential to improve patient outcomes. Frailty screenings can create opportunities for targeted intervention efforts and guide patient-provider decision-making.