Factors Associated With Amputation Following Ankle Fracture Surgery.

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at increased risk of complications following ankle fracture surgery. Previous research suggests that patients of low socioeconomic status are at increased risk of amputation following orthopedic complications. The purpose of this research was to determine if low socioeconomic status increases risk of below-knee amputation (BKA) following ankle fractures among patients with DM. The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried from 2010 to 2014 to identify 125 diabetic patients who underwent ankle fracture surgical fixation followed by BKA. Two cohorts (BKA vs no BKA) and a multivariate logistic regression model were created to compare the effects of independent variables, including age, sex, race, primary payer, median household income by ZIP code, hospital location/teaching status, and comorbidities. The most predictive variables for BKA were concomitant peripheral vascular disease (odds ratio [OR] 5.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.51-8.15), history of chronic diabetes-related medical complications (OR 3.29, CI 2.16-5.01), age in the youngest quartile (OR 2.54, CI 1.38-4.67), and male sex (OR 2.28, CI 1.54-3.36). Patient race and median household income were not significantly associated with BKA; however, risk of BKA was greater among patients with Medicaid (OR 2.23, CI 1.09-4.53) or Medicare (OR 1.85, CI 1.03-3.32) compared to privately insured patients. Diabetic inpatients with Medicaid insurance are at over twice the odds of BKA compared to privately insured patients following ankle fracture. Furthermore, peripheral vascular diseases, uncontrolled diabetes, younger age, and male sex each independently increase risk of BKA.

Evaluation of the National Institutes of Health-Supported Relative Citation Ratio Among Fellowship-Trained American Orthopaedic Joint Reconstruction Surgery Faculty: A New Bibliometric Measure of Scientific Influence.

BACKGROUND: The relative citation ratio (RCR), a novel National Institutes of Health-Supported measure of research productivity, allows for accurate interdisciplinary comparison of publication influence. This study evaluates the RCR of fellowship-trained adult reconstructive orthopaedic surgeons with the goal of analyzing potentially influential physician demographics. METHODS: Adult Reconstruction Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education fellowship-trained faculty for orthopaedic residency programs were identified via departmental websites. The National Institutes of Health's iCite database was retrospectively reviewed for mean RCR, weighted RCR, and publication count by surgeon. Multivariate analyses were performed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and analyses of variance testing to compare sex, career length, academic rank, and professional degrees in addition to an MD or DO. Significance was considered P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 488 fellowship-trained adult reconstruction faculty from 144 programs were included in the analysis. Overall, the faculty recorded a median RCR of 1.65 (interquartile range: 1.01-2.28) and a median weighted RCR of 16.59 (interquartile range: 3.98-61.92). The weighted RCR and total number of publications were associated with academic rank and career longevity, while the mean RCR was associated with academic rank. The median RCR ranged from 1.12 to 1.87 for all subgroups. CONCLUSION: Adult reconstruction faculty are exceptionally productive and generate highly impactful studies as evidenced by the high median RCR value relative to the National Institutes of Health standard value of 1.0. Our data have important implications in the assessment of grant outcomes, promotion, and continued evaluation of research influence within the hip and knee community.

Preoperative allergy testing for patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies is economically justified in preventing infection after total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The use of alternative antibiotics to cefazolin has been associated with increased risk of infection after shoulder arthroplasty. Routine preoperative allergy testing in patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies increases the number able to receive cefazolin and may reduce the occurrence of infection after shoulder arthroplasty, but the financial viability of this practice is unclear. We used break-even modeling to determine the economic viability of routine preoperative allergy testing for infection prevention in total shoulder arthroplasty patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies. METHODS: Allergy testing cost ($248.24), infection rates after shoulder arthroplasty following use of noncefazolin antibiotics (3.09%), and infection-related care costs ($55,243) were derived from the literature. A break-even equation using these variables was developed to determine the absolute risk reduction (ARR) in the infection rate that would economically justify the routine implementation of preoperative allergy testing. The number needed to treat was calculated from the ARR. RESULTS: Preoperative allergy testing is considered economically justified if it prevents at least 1 infection out of 223 shoulder arthroplasties (ARR = 0.45%). These protocols remained economically viable at varying allergy testing costs, initial infection rates, and infection-related care costs. CONCLUSIONS: Routine preoperative penicillin allergy testing is an economically justified infection prevention strategy among patients reporting penicillin and cephalosporin allergies in the setting of elective shoulder arthroplasty. Widespread implementation of this practice may considerably reduce the economic and societal burden associated with prosthetic infections.

Strong Public Desire for Quality and Price Transparency in Shoulder Arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Concerted efforts to optimize outcomes and data transparency in shoulder arthroplasty have led to the creation of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Shoulder and Elbow Registry, the first nationwide registry of its kind. We used online crowdsourcing to explore the general public's perceptions and beliefs toward the disclosure of quality and price data in shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: A total of 498 participants recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) completed a survey regarding beliefs about public disclosure of quality and price data in shoulder arthroplasty. The MTurk is an online marketplace for crowdsourcing tasks (e.g., answering surveys) to a pool of over 500,000 registered workers in exchange for financial compensation. Requesters post human-intelligence tasks, and workers can respond to those that they are interested in completing. This web-based platform is an efficient survey tool for medical research, with comparable national representativeness to traditional convenience samples. RESULTS: The majority (95%) of respondents believed surgeons and hospitals should share their data with national registries such as the AAOS Shoulder and Elbow Registry. Most believed that patients considering shoulder arthroplasty should have public access to surgeons' outcomes and complication rates (96%), years of experience (95%), and case volume (92%). Most respondents desired price transparency in implant costs (95%), surgeon reimbursement (80%), and hospital reimbursement (84%). In decreasing order of importance, the top three factors guiding surgeon choice were: (1) surgeon included in the insurer's network, (2) annual case volume, and (3) publicly available outcomes. CONCLUSION: Increased quality and price transparency in shoulder arthroplasty may empower patients to make better-informed decisions about their care and ultimately enhance value. Given the strong public desire for data transparency and the notion that public disclosure of data is intrinsically associated with performance improvement, surgeons and hospitals should strongly consider submitting their data to national registries such as the AAOS Shoulder and Elbow Registry.

Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage does not predict outcomes or cost after elective shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that the variation in value of shoulder arthroplasty may be mediated by factors external to surgery. We sought to determine if neighborhood-level socioeconomic deprivation is associated with postoperative outcomes and cost among patients undergoing elective shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: We identified 380 patients undergoing elective total shoulder arthroplasty (anatomic or reverse) between 2015 and 2018 in our institutional registry with minimum 2-year follow-up. Each patient's home address was mapped to the area deprivation index in order to determine the level of socioeconomic disadvantage. The area deprivation index is a validated composite measure of 17 census variables encompassing income, education, employment, and housing conditions. Patients were categorized into 3 groups based on socioeconomic disadvantage (least disadvantaged [deciles 1-3], middle group [4-6], and most disadvantaged [7-10]). Bivariate analysis was performed to determine associations between the level of socioeconomic deprivation with hospitalization time-driven activity-based costs and 2-year postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and pain intensity scores. RESULTS: Overall 19% of patients were categorized as most disadvantaged. These patients were found to have equivalent preoperative pain intensity (P = .51), SANE (P = .50), and ASES (P = .72) scores compared to the middle and least disadvantaged groups, as well as similar outcome improvement at 2 years postoperatively (ASES): least disadvantaged group [35.7-84.3], middle group [35.1-82.4], and most disadvantaged group [37.1-84.0] [P = .56]; SANE: least disadvantaged group [31.8-87.1], middle group [30.8-84.8], and most disadvantaged group [34.2-85.1] [P = .42]; and pain: least disadvantaged group [6.0-0.97], middle group [6-0.97], and most disadvantaged group [5.6-0.80] [P = .88]. No differences in hospitalization costs were noted between groups (P = .77). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing elective shoulder arthroplasty residing in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods demonstrate equivalent preoperative and postoperative outcomes as others, without incurring higher costs. These findings support continued efforts to provide equitable access to orthopedic care across the socioeconomic spectrum.

Evaluation of the National Institutes of Health-supported relative citation ratio among American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons fellowship faculty: a new bibliometric measure of scientific influence.

BACKGROUND: Publication metrics are used to evaluate and compare research productivity among academic faculty. However, traditional bibliometrics, such as the Hirsch index and article citation count, are limited by lack of field-normalization and yield inaccurate cross-specialty comparisons. Herein, we evaluate the use of a new field-normalized article-level metric developed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), known as the relative citation ratio (RCR), among American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) fellowship faculty and analyzed physician factors associated with RCR values. METHODS: A retrospective data analysis was performed using the iCite database for all shoulder and elbow surgery fellowship faculty listed on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) directory as of November 14, 2021. Mean RCR, weighted RCR, and total publication count were compared by sex, career duration, academic rank, and presence of additional degrees. Mean RCR represents the total number of article citations per year of a publication divided by the average number of citations per year received by NIH-funded papers in the same field; mean RCR serves as a measure of overall research impact. A value of 1.0 is the NIH-funded field-normalized standard. The weighted RCR represents the sum of all article-level RCR scores and is a measure of overall research productivity. Student t tests were used for two-group analyses whereas analyses of variance were used for between-group comparisons of 3 or more subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 145 ASES fellowship faculty members from 33 fellowship programs were included in the analysis. Overall, ASES fellowship faculty produced highly impactful research with a median RCR of 1.8 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.4-2.3) and a median weighted RCR of 67.0 (IQR 21.1-212.7). Advanced academic rank and career longevity were associated with increased weighted RCR and total publication count. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1.0. CONCLUSIONS: ASES fellowship faculty are exceptionally productive and produce highly impactful research, as evidenced by the high median RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1.0. This information can be used as a standard to assess the improvement of grant outcomes, promotion, fellowship education, and continued evaluation of research productivity in the shoulder and elbow community.