Outcomes of arthroscopic-assisted lateral tibial plateau fixation: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate and summarize the current literature on outcomes of arthroscopic-assisted tibial plateau fixation (AATPF) when applied for only lateral tibial plateau fractures. METHODS: A comprehensive search of nine databases was conducted: ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library via Wiley, Embase and MEDLINE via Ovid, Global Index Medicus, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus via EBSCO, and Web of Science Core Collection. The study was performed in concordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies eligible for inclusions included Schatzker I-III lateral tibial plateau fractures with a minimum of 6-month follow-up. Data extraction was performed by two authors independently using a predesigned form. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies, 7 prospective and 10 retrospective, including 565 patients (age 15-82 years old) treated with AATPF were included in this review with follow-up ranging from 6 to 138 months. All 10 studies that used categorical functional outcomes demonstrated excellent/very good or good outcomes in > 90% of patients. When compared to patients managed with the traditional open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), patients treated with AATPF had statistically significantly better range of motion mean difference [5.21° (95% CI - 2.50 to 12.92, p < 0.0001)], lower blood loss [66.19 mL (95% confidence interval (CI) 32.54-99.84 mL, p < 0.0001)], shorter hospital stay [- 1.41 days (95% CI - 3.39 to 0.58 days, p < 0.0001)], better Hospital Special Surgery score [11.31 (95% CI 6.49-16.12, p < 0.0001)], and higher Rasmussen radiographic score [1.26 (95% CI - 0.72 to 3.23, p < 0.0001)]. CONCLUSION: AATPF is a promising treatment of lateral tibial plateau fractures with some advantages over the traditional ORIF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III.

Personalized outcomes for hip and knee replacement: the patients point of view.

BACKGROUND: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being incorporated into clinical and surgical care for assessing outcomes. This study examined outcomes important to patients in their decision to have hip or knee replacement surgery, their perspectives on PROMs and shared decision-making, and factors they considered important for postoperative care. METHODS: A cross-sectional study employing survey methods with a stratified random sample of adult orthopedic patients who were scheduled for or recently had hip or knee replacement surgery. RESULTS: In a representative sample of 226 respondents, patients identified personalized outcomes important to them that they wanted from their surgery including the ability to walk without pain/discomfort, pain relief, and returning to an active lifestyle. They preferred a personalized outcome (54%) that they identified, compared to a PROM score, for tracking progress in their care and thought it important that their surgeon know their personal outcomes (63%). Patients also wanted to engage in shared decision-making (79%) about their post-surgical care and identified personal factors important to their aftercare, such as living alone and caring for pets. CONCLUSIONS: Patients identified unique personalized outcomes they desired from their care and that they wanted their orthopedic surgeons to know about. Asking patients to identify their personalized outcomes could add value for both patients and surgeons in clinical care, facilitating more robust patient involvement in shared decision-making.

Unplanned Emergency and Urgent Care Visits After Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: This study sought to determine (1) incident risk, (2) chief report, (3) risk factors, and (4) total cost of unplanned healthcare visits to an emergency and/or urgent care (ED/UC) facility within 30 days of an outpatient orthopaedic procedure. METHODS: This was a retrospective database review of 5,550 outpatient surgical encounters from a large metropolitan healthcare system between 2012 and 2016. Statistical analysis consisted of measuring the ED/UC incident risk, respective to the procedures and anatomical region. Patient-specific risk factors were evaluated through multigroup comparative statistics. RESULTS: Of the 5,550 study patients, 297 (5.4%) presented to an ED/UC within 30 days of their index procedure, with 23 (0.4%) needing to be readmitted. Native English speakers, patients older than 45 years, and nonsmokers had significant reduced relative risk of unplanned ED or UC visit within 30 days of index procedure (P < 0.01). In addition, hand tendon repair/graft had the greatest risk incidence for ED/UC visit (11.0%). Unplanned ED/UC reimbursements totaled $146,357.34, averaging $575.65 per visit. DISCUSSION: This study provides an evaluation of outpatient orthopaedic procedures and their relationship to ED/UC visits. Specifically, this study identifies patient-related and procedural-related attributes that associate with an increased risk for unplanned healthcare utilization.

The Proportion of Abstracts Presented at the 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting Ultimately Published.

As attendees of orthopedic meetings consider how to integrate presented information into their practice, it is helpful to consider the quality of the data presented. One surrogate metric is the proportion of and changes to presented abstracts that become journal publications. With this study, using the 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Annual Meeting abstracts, the authors sought to answer the following questions: Did the publications following abstract presentations differ in terms of the conclusions, study subjects, or coauthors? What proportion of abstracts was published? What are the most common subtopics and journals, and what is the most common author country? Keywords and authors from the 2010 AAOS Annual Meeting proceedings program (698 podium and 548 poster abstracts) were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. If a publication resulted, differences in the conclusion, number of study subjects, and authorship between the abstract and the journal publication were tabulated. The proportion of abstracts published, specialty subtopics, authorship country, and journals of publication were collected. At journal publication, 1.7% of podium and 1.7% of poster conclusions changed. Mean number of authors for podium and poster increased significantly (P<.001), and 30% of podium and 44% of poster had a change in the number of study subjects. The overall journal publication percentage was 61% (68% podium and 53% poster). The majority of the authors were from the United States. The most common journal was The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. It is important to evaluate the usefulness and clinical applicability of meetings, especially the final disposition of conference abstracts, from various angles to ensure that they are as worthwhile and educational as possible. [Orthopedics. 2020;xx(x):xx-xx.].

Complementary and Alternative Medicine for Postoperative Pain: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of postoperative pain is an ongoing challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Poorly controlled pain is associated with poorer patient outcomes, and the prescription of opioids may lead to prolonged, nonmedical use. Complementary and alternative medicine is widely adopted by the general public, and its use in chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions has been studied; however, its efficacy in a postoperative context has not yet been established. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review of 10 databases to identify all relevant publications. We extracted variables related to pain measurement and postoperative opioid prescriptions. RESULTS: We identified 8 relevant publications from an initial pool of 2,517 items. Of these, 5 were randomized studies and 3 were nonrandomized studies. All 8 studies addressed postoperative pain, with 5 showing significant decreases (p < 0.05) in postoperative pain. Also, 5 studies addressed postoperative opioid use, with 2 showing significant differences (p < 0.05) in opioid consumption. Substantial heterogeneity among the studies precluded meta-analysis. No articles were found to be free of potential bias. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of complementary and alternative medicines for postoperative pain management or as an alternative to opioid use following orthopaedic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Not All Garden-I and II Femoral Neck Fractures in the Elderly Should Be Fixed: Effect of Posterior Tilt on Rates of Subsequent Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Internal fixation is currently the standard of care for Garden-I and II femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. However, there may be a degree of posterior tilt (measured on preoperative lateral radiograph) above which failure is likely, and primary arthroplasty would be preferred. The purpose of this analysis was to determine the association between posterior tilt and the risk of subsequent arthroplasty following internal fixation of Garden-I and II femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. METHODS: This study is a preplanned secondary analysis of data collected in the FAITH (Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures) trial, an international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing the sliding hip screw with cannulated screws in the treatment of femoral neck fractures in patients ≥50 years old. For each patient who sustained a Garden-I or II femoral neck fracture and had an adequate preoperative lateral radiograph, the amount of posterior tilt was categorized as <20° or ≥20°. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to assess the association between posterior tilt and subsequent arthroplasty during the 2-year follow-up period, controlling for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of the 555 patients in the study sample, 67 (12.1%) had posterior tilt ≥20° and 488 (87.9%) had posterior tilt <20°. Overall, 73 (13.2%) of 555 patients underwent subsequent arthroplasty in the 24-month follow-up period. In the multivariable analysis, patients with posterior tilt ≥20° had a significantly higher risk of subsequent arthroplasty compared with those with posterior tilt <20° (22.4% [15 of 67] compared with 11.9% [58 of 488]; hazard ratio, 2.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.24 to 4.00; p = 0.008). The other factor associated with subsequent arthroplasty was age ≥80 years (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients with Garden-I and II femoral neck fractures, posterior tilt ≥20° was associated with a significantly increased risk of subsequent arthroplasty. Primary arthroplasty may be considered for Garden-I and II femoral neck fractures with posterior tilt ≥20°, especially among older patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Functional Outcomes of Symptomatic Implant Removal Following Ankle Fracture Open Reduction and Internal Fixation.

BACKGROUND: Orthopedic implant removal following open reduction internal fixation of a fracture is a common procedure, especially in the foot and ankle. The purpose of this study was to evaluate functional change after the removal of symptomatic implants following ankle fracture open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) using the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) outcome score. We hypothesized that implant removal after ankle fracture would result in improved functional outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data on patients with a closed ankle fracture between 2013 and 2016 was performed. Inclusion criteria were skeletal maturity, symptomatic ankle implants and completion of the SMFA questionnaire prior to and 6 months after removal. Exclusion criteria were development of a nonunion, prior or current infection, peripheral neuropathy or ongoing litigation surrounding the surgery. The primary outcome was change in SMFA score from baseline to follow-up using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Additional logistic regression models evaluated the effects of age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, and patient American Society of Anesthesiologists scores. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 43 patients. There was a statistically significant improvement in function, represented by a decrease in SMFA scores from baseline to the 6-month follow-up period (∆ = -4.1 [95% confidence interval, -7.0, -1.3]; P = .003). Secondary outcome measures of the bother index and daily activities domain also demonstrated significant improvements ( P = .005 and P = .002, respectively). Additional logistical regression models identified no significant effects by assessed covariates for change in SMFA scores. CONCLUSION: Patients with symptomatic implants following ankle fracture ORIF had a statistically significant improvement in function following implant removal. There appears to be value in removing implants from the ankle in patients who report discomfort during daily activities. Further investigation into the specific indications for implant removal and the impact of injury and fracture pattern on outcomes is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

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.