Home health care is associated with an increased risk of readmission and cost of care without reducing risk of complication following shoulder arthroplasty: a propensity-score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Home health services provide patients with additional professional care and supervision following discharge from the hospital to theoretically reduce the risk of complication and reduce health care utilization. The aim of this investigation was to determine if patients assigned home health services following total shoulder arthroplasty (anatomic [TSA] and reverse [RSA]) exhibited lower rates of medical complications, lower health care utilization, and lower cost of care compared with patients not receiving these services. METHODS: A national insurance database was retrospectively reviewed to identify all patients undergoing primary TSA and RSA from 2010 to 2019. Patients who received home health services were matched using a propensity score algorithm to a set of similar patients who were discharged home without services. We compared medical complication rates, emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and 90-day cost of care between the groups. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine the independent effect of home health services on all outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1119 patients received home health services and were matched to 11,190 patients who were discharged home without services. There was no significant difference in patients who received home health services compared with those who did not receive home health services with respect to rates of ED visits within 30 days (OR 1.293; P = .0328) and 90 days (OR 1.215; P = .0378), whereas the home health group demonstrated increased readmissions within 90 days (OR 1.663; P < .001). For all medical complications, there was no difference between cohorts. Episode-of-care costs for home health patients were higher than those discharged without these services ($12,521.04 vs. $9303.48; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients assigned home health care services exhibited higher cost of care and readmission rates without a reduction in the rate of complication or early return to the ED. These findings suggest that home health care services should be strongly analyzed on a case-by-case basis to determine if a patient may benefit from its implementation.

Patient Disparities and Provider Diversity in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Complex Relationship.

Disparities in the access to, utilization of, and outcomes after orthopaedic surgery are a notable problem in the field that limits patients' ability to access the highest level of care and achieve optimal outcomes. Disparities exist based on numerous sociodemographic factors, with sex and race/ethnicity being two of the most well-studied factors linked to disparities in orthopaedic care. These disparities cross all subspecialties and tend to negatively affect women and racial/ethnic minorities. The increased recognition of the disparities in orthopaedic care has been paralleled by an increased recognition of the lack of diversity among orthopaedic surgeons. Although efforts are being made to improve the representation of women and underrepresented minorities among orthopaedic surgeons, the numbers, particularly of racial and ethnic minorities, show little improvement. The lack of gender and racial diversity among orthopaedic surgeons may be one of many factors related to the gender and racial disparities seen in orthopaedic care. Patients may prefer a provider that they can better identify with and that may affect care. Orthopaedic surgery as a specialty must continue to work to foster an inclusive environment and make concerted efforts to improve diversity through the recruitment of women and underrepresented minorities, among others, for the benefit of patients, surgeons, and the continued growth of the field as a whole.

Payor type is associated with increased rates of reoperation and health care utilization after rotator cuff repair: a national database study.

BACKGROUND: Despite strong evidence supporting the efficacy of rotator cuff repair (RCR), previous literature has demonstrated that socioeconomic disparities exist among patients who undergo surgery. There is a paucity of literature examining whether payor type, including Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial insurance types, impacts early medical complications and rates of reoperation after RCR. METHODS: Patients with Medicare, Medicaid, or commercial payor-type insurance who underwent primary open or arthroscopic RCR between 2010 and 2019 were identified using a large national database. Ninety-day incidence of medical complications, emergency department (ED) visit, and hospital readmission, as well as 1-year incidence of revision repair, revision to arthroplasty, and cost of care were evaluated. Propensity-score matching was used to control for patient demographic factors and comorbidities as covariates. RESULTS: A total of 113,257 Medicare, 23,074 Medicaid, and 414,447 commercially insured patients were included for analysis. Medicaid insurance was associated with an increased 90-day risk of various medical complications, ED visit (odds ratio [OR]: 2.87; P < .001), and 1-year revision RCR (OR: 1.60; P < .001) compared with Medicare insurance. Medicaid insurance was also associated with an increased risk of various medical complications, ED visit (OR: 2.98; P < .001), and hospital readmission (OR: 1.56; P = .002), as well as 1-year risk of revision RCR (OR: 1.60; P < .001) and conversion to arthroplasty (OR: 1.4358; P < .001) compared with commercially insured patients. Medicaid insurance was associated with a decreased risk of conversion to arthroplasty compared with Medicare patients (OR: 0.6887; P < .001). Medicaid insurance was associated with higher 1-year cost of care compared with patients with both Medicare (P < .001) and commercial insurance (P < .001). DISCUSSION: Medicaid insurance is associated with increased rates of medical complications, health care utilization, and reoperation after rotator cuff surgery, despite controlling for covariates. Medicaid insurance is also associated with a higher 1-year cost of care. Understanding the complex relationship between sociodemographic factors, such as insurance status, medical comorbidities, and outcomes, is necessary to ensure optimal health care access for all patients and to allow for appropriate risk stratification.

Gender disparities in shoulder and elbow publications.

HYPOTHESIS/BACKGROUND: Female representation in orthopedics, and specifically shoulder and elbow surgery, lags behind other surgical subspecialities. There has been a growing interest in recent years to better characterize, and address, gender disparities in the field. The purpose of this investigation was to characterize gender trends in authorship in the shoulder and elbow literature from 2002 to 2020. METHODS: Articles published from January 2002 to December 2020 in 15 clinical orthopedic and shoulder- and elbow-specific journals were extracted from the online PubMed database. Articles that included the first name of the first and senior authors and contained keywords related to the shoulder and elbow subspecialty were included. The Genderize algorithm was used to determine each author's gender. Gender-based publication trends from 2002 to 2020 were analyzed using descriptive and significance testing as well as logistic regression. RESULTS: 34,695 articles met inclusion criteria and 52,497 unique authors were identified. Of these unique authors, 10,175 (19.4%) were female and 42,322 (80.6%) were male. On average, each unique female author published 1.7 ± 0.1 manuscripts since 2002 and each male author published 2.5 ± 0.2 (P < .001). Female representation in shoulder and elbow publications began at 10.2% in 2002 and rose to 15.9% in 2020 (P < .001). Female representation in the lead author position began at 4.1% in 2002 and rose to 5.8% in 2020 (P = .009). Female representation in the senior author position began at 6.0% in 2002 and rose to 9.1% in 2020 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Although female representation in first, senior, and general authorship lags behind male representation in the shoulder and elbow literature, female authorship has significantly increased since 2002. The same men tend to publish more frequently while the number of unique female authors surpasses the annual representation of female authorship. Efforts to improve female representation in the field of orthopedic surgery should include efforts directed at improving female representation in academic literature.

The relationship between academic influence, NIH funding, and industry payments among academic shoulder and elbow surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The effect of academic influence, or the volume and quality of a surgeon's publications, on industry payments and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding has recently been studied in some academic orthopedic subspecialities. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the relationship between academic influence, industry payments, and NIH funding among American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons accredited shoulder and elbow fellowship faculty. METHODS: Shoulder and elbow fellowships and affiliated faculty members were identified from the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons website. Academic influence, measured by the Hirsch (h)-index, and the number of articles published were determined for faculty members using the Scopus Database Author Identifier tool. Industry payments were derived from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database. NIH funding was determined using the NIH's Research Portfolio Online Reporting tool. Statistical analysis used Spearman correlations and the Mann-Whitney U-test with an alpha value of 0.05 (P < .05). RESULTS: A total of 146 faculty members were included. Twenty-two percent (42 of 146) received nonresearch payments, whereas 78% (114 of 146) received industry research funding averaging $6364 (standard deviation = $21,213). NIH funding averaged $272,589 (standard deviation = $224,635), and 5% received NIH funding (7 of 146). Faculty members who received NIH funding had a higher average h-index than those who did not (38 ± 22 vs. 22.64 ± 22.7, P = .02), whereas those receiving industry research payments had a greater number of publications than those who did not (127.97 ± 127.2 vs. 100.3 ± 122.3, P = .03). Industry nonresearch payments did not impact the number of publications or the h-index. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that academic influence among academic shoulder and elbow surgeons is not greater in those who receive nonresearch industry funding. However, surgeons with industry research funding did produce more publications, whereas NIH funding is associated with greater academic influence.

Leadership Trends in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Fellowship Directors: A Cross-sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to describe the demographic and professional backgrounds of current shoulder and elbow fellowship directors. METHODS: The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) 2021 to 2022 Fellowship Directory was reviewed to identify the 31 ASES-recognized US fellowship programs. Demographic and other data were obtained through an electronic survey and publicly available online resources from February 28, 2021, to March 5, 2021. RESULTS: Of the 31 fellowship directors, 97% (30) identified as male and 74% (23) as White, the mean age was 53 ± 7 years, and the mean Scopus h-index was 24.2 ± 13. Almost all (95%) held ASES committee leadership appointments in at least one committee. The mean time from completion of most recent fellowship to fellowship director appointment was 7.3 ± 6 years. About two-thirds of fellowship directors trained at one of five fellowship programs: Columbia University (n = 7), California Pacific Orthopaedics (n = 4), Washington University in St. Louis (n = 3), Mayo Clinic (n = 3), and Hospital for Special Surgery (n = 2). DISCUSSION: ASES fellowship directors share similar demographic and professional characteristics with high levels of research productivity and involvement in orthopaedic societies. There is a lack of diversity in shoulder and elbow fellowship directors, highlighting a need for priority consideration of this disparity by leaders in the field.

A concise shoulder outcome measure: application of computerized adaptive testing to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures enable quantitative and patient-centric assessment of orthopedic interventions; however, increased use of these forms has an associated burden for patients and practices. We examined the utility of a computerized adaptive testing (CAT) method to reduce the number of questions on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) instrument. METHODS: A previously developed ASES CAT system was applied to the responses of 2763 patients who underwent shoulder evaluation and treatment and had answered all questions on the full ASES instrument. Analyses to assess the accuracy of the CAT score in replicating the full-form score included the mean and standard deviation of both groups of scores, frequency distributions of the 2 sets of scores and score differences, Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficients, and Bland-Altman assessment of patterns in score differences. RESULTS: By tailoring questions according to prior responses, CAT reduced the question burden by 40%. The mean difference between CAT and full ASES scores was -0.14, and the scores were within 5 points in 95% of cases (a 12-point difference is considered the threshold for clinical significance) and were clustered around zero. The correlation coefficients were 0.99, and the frequency distributions of the CAT and full ASES scores were nearly identical. The differences between scores were independent of the overall score, and no significant bias for CAT scores was found in either a positive or negative direction. CONCLUSION: The ASES CAT system lessens respondent burden with a negligible effect on score integrity.