Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Reduces Rotational Laxity When Combined With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the addition of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction would provide greater control of rotational laxity and improved clinical outcomes compared with ACL reconstruction alone. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched 9 databases for randomized and nonrandomized clinical studies comparing ACL reconstruction plus LET versus ACL reconstruction alone in a human adult population. All years and 5 languages were included. Animal and cadaveric studies, revision or repair surgical techniques, and studies focused on biomechanical outcomes were excluded. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed with the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Outcomes of interest included the pivot-shift test, KT-1000/-2000 measurements (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA), and International Knee Documentation Committee scores. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 3,612 articles. After titles and abstracts were reviewed, 106 articles were selected for full-text review, of which 29 studies met the inclusion criteria (8 randomized and 21 nonrandomized studies). Of the 8 randomized studies, 3 concluded that the results were nonsignificant between treatment groups, 4 were in favor of the extra-articular tenodesis, and 1 was in favor of the ACL reconstruction alone. The Cochrane Collaboration tool showed an unclear to high risk of bias for most articles. A meta-analysis showed a statistically significant difference for the pivot-shift test (P = .002, I2 = 34%) in favor of ACL reconstruction with LET. No difference was found between the groups for International Knee Documentation Committee scores (P = .75, I2 = 19%) and KT-1000/-2000 measurements (P = .84, I2 = 34%). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in pivot shift in favor of the combined procedure. Studies lacked sufficient internal validity, sample size, methodologic consistency, and standardization of protocols and outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level I, II, and III studies.

Are patients satisfied with a web-based followup after total joint arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: A web-based followup assessment may be a feasible, cost-saving alternative of tracking patient outcomes after total joint arthroplasty. However, before implementing a web-based program, it is important to determine patient satisfaction levels with the new followup method. Satisfaction with the care received is becoming an increasingly important metric, and we do not know to what degree patients are satisfied with an approach to followup that does not involve an in-person visit with their surgeons. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined (1) patient satisfaction and (2) patients' preferences for followup method (web-based or in-person) after total joint arthroplasty. METHODS: We randomized patients who were at least 12 months after primary THA or TKA to complete a web-based followup or to have their appointment at the clinic. There were 410 eligible patients contacted for the study during the recruitment period. Of these, 256 agreed to participate, and a total of 229 patients completed the study (89% of those enrolled, 56% of those potentially eligible; 111 in the usual-care group, 118 in the web-based group). Their mean age was 69 years (range, 38-86 years). There was no crossover between groups. All 229 patients completed a satisfaction questionnaire at the time of their followup appointments. Patients in the web-based group also completed a satisfaction and preference questionnaire 1 year later. Only patients from the web-based group were asked to indicate preference as they had experienced the web-based and in-person followup methods. We used descriptive statistics to summarize the satisfaction questionnaires and compared results using Pearson's chi-square test. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients (82.0%) in the usual-care group indicated that they were either extremely or very satisfied with the followup process compared with 90 patients (75.6%) who were in the web-based group (p < 0.01; odds ratio [OR] = 3.95; 95% CI, 1.79-8.76). Similarly, patients in the usual care group were more satisfied with the care they received from their surgeon, compared with patients in the web-based group (92.8% versus 73.9%; p < 0.01, OR = 1.37; 95% CI, 0.73-2.57). Forty-four percent of patients preferred the web-based method, 36% preferred the usual method, and 16% had no preference (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show moderate to high satisfaction levels with a web-based followup assessment. Patients who completed the usual method of in-person followup assessment reported greater satisfaction; however, the difference was small and may not outweigh the additional cost and time-saving benefits of the web-based followup method. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Effect of Osteochondroplasty on Time to Reoperation After Arthroscopic Management of Femoroacetabular Impingement: Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: A subset of patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) fail arthroscopic management. It is not clear which patients will fail surgical management; however, several surgical and patient factors, such as type of procedure and age, are thought to be important predictors. Purpose: This time-to-event analysis with a 27-month follow-up analysis compared the effect of (1) arthroscopic osteochondroplasty with or without labral repair versus (2) arthroscopic lavage with or without labral repair on the time to reoperation in adults aged 18 to 50 years with FAI. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Eligible participants had been randomized in a previous study trial to a treatment of arthroscopic osteochondroplasty or arthroscopic lavage with or without labral repair. Using the comprehensive data set from the Multinational Femoroacetabular Impingement Randomized controlled Trial, all reoperations until 27 months after surgery were identified. The analysis was conducted using a Cox proportional hazards model, with percentage of patients with a reoperation evaluated in a time-to-event analysis as the outcome. The independent variable was the procedure, with age and impingement subtype explored as potential covariates. The effects from the Cox model were expressed as the hazard ratio (HR). All tests were 2-sided, with an alpha level of .05. Results: A total of 108 patients in the osteochondroplasty group and 106 patients in the lavage group were included. The mean age of the patients included in the study was 36 ± 8.5 years. Overall, 27 incident reoperations were identified within the 27-month follow-up, with an incidence rate of 6 per 100 person-years. Within the osteochondroplasty group, 8 incident reoperations were identified (incidence rate, 3.4 per 100 person-years), while within the lavage group, 19 incident reoperations were identified (incidence rate, 8.7 per 100 person-years). The hazard of reoperation for patients undergoing osteochondroplasty was 40% of that of patients undergoing lavage (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.17-0.91] P = .029). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that for adults between the ages of 18 and 50 years with FAI, arthroscopic osteochondroplasty was associated with a 2.5-fold decrease in the hazard of reoperation at any point in time compared with arthroscopic lavage. Registration: NCT01623843 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Osteochondroplasty and Labral Repair for the Treatment of Young Adults With Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a condition known to cause hip pain in young adults. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of the surgical correction of FAI via arthroscopic osteochondroplasty with or without labral repair compared with arthroscopic lavage of the hip joint with or without labral repair. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 220 male and female participants aged 18 to 50 years with nonarthritic FAI suitable for surgical treatment were recruited for the trial at 10 clinical centers in Canada, Finland, and Denmark between October 2012 and November 2017, of whom 214 were included in the final analysis. In the osteochondroplasty group, cam- and/or pincer-type lesions were resected using fluoroscopic guidance. In the lavage group, the joint was washed out with 3 L of normal saline. Surgeons were instructed to repair the labrum in both groups if it was mechanically unstable once probed, showing visible displacement or chondrolabral separation. The primary outcome was patient-reported pain (using the 100-point visual analog scale [VAS]) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included hip function (Hip Outcome Score [HOS] and International Hip Outcome Tool), physical and mental health (12-Item Short Form Health Survey), and health utility (EuroQol-5 Dimensions) at 12 months as well as any reoperations and other hip-related adverse events at 24 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, there was no difference in pain (VAS) between the groups (mean difference [MD], 0.11 [95% CI, -7.22 to 7.45]; P = .98). Also, 88.3% (189/214) of participants had a labral tear, of which 60.3% were repaired. For the secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between treatment groups, with the exception of the HOS activities of daily living domain in which lavage showed significant improvement compared with osteochondroplasty (MD, -5.03 [95% CI, -10.40 to -0.03]; P = .049). By 24 months, there were significantly fewer reoperations reported in the osteochondroplasty group (8/105) than the lavage group (19/104) (odds ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.15-0.89]; P = .026). The primary reasons for a reoperation included hip pain (15/27; 55.6%) and a reinjury of the labrum (11/27; 40.7%). CONCLUSION: Both the osteochondroplasty and the lavage groups with or without labral repair for FAI had significantly improved pain or function significantly at 1 year. By 2 years, the reoperation rate was significantly lower in the osteochondroplasty group. REGISTRATION: NCT01623843 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Preparing the Next Generation of Code Blue Leaders Through Simulation: What's Missing?

INTRODUCTION: Despite the increasing reliance on simulation to train residents as code blue leaders, the perceived role and effectiveness of code blue simulations from the learners' perspective have not been explored. A code blue Simulation Program (CBSP), developed based on evidence-based simulation principles, was implemented at our institution. We explored the role of simulation in code blue training and the differences between real and simulated code blues from the learner perspective. METHODS: Using a thematic analysis approach and a purposeful sampling strategy, residents who participated in the CBSP were invited to participate in one of the three focus groups. Data were collected through small group discussions guided by semistructured interviews. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Interview transcripts were coded to assess underlying themes. RESULTS: Thematic analysis revealed that participants believed that the CBSP enhanced preparedness by capturing aspects of real codes (eg, inclusion of precode scenarios with awake patients, lack of readily available information) and facilitating automatization of code blue processes. Despite efforts to develop a high-fidelity simulation, participants noted that they experienced more anxiety, observed more chaos in the environment, and encountered different communication challenges in real codes. CONCLUSIONS: The CBSP enhanced resident preparedness to serve as code blue leaders. Learners highlighted that they valued the CBSP; however, differences remain between simulated and real codes that could be addressed to enhance the fidelity of future simulations.