Return to Golf After Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

CONTEXT: Patients experiencing pain from femoral acetabular impingement and considering hip arthroscopy may be concerned about their timeline to resume activities they enjoy, such as golf. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to review current literature on return-to-play data after hip arthroscopy and to provide clinicians with data to set proper expectations with patients. DATA SOURCES: The following terms were used to search PubMed and Embase electronic databases on October 18, 2023: hip, arthroscopy, arthroscopic, golf. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they were in the English language, of Level 1 to 4 evidence, and contained data specific to golfers undergoing hip arthroscopy. Studies were excluded if they did not designate participants as golfers or did not specify return-to-play data. Editorials, case reports, and review articles were excluded. Screening was completed by 2 authors in a blind and duplicate manner. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II. DATA EXTRACTION: The following datapoints were extracted from each study: hip pathology and arthroscopic procedure data; number of players returning to golf and time from surgery to return; outcome score(s); and rehabilitation details. Descriptive statistics were calculated using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. RESULTS: The search returned 400 studies, of which 4 were included for analysis. Of these 4 studies, 2 specified return-to-play time. Of 95 golfers, 90 (94.7%) returned to golf successfully after arthroscopic hip surgery. Subjective and objective outcome scores improved postoperatively, including an increased average drive distance. CONCLUSION: Return to golf after hip arthroscopy is highly probable, with approximately 95% of patients throughout literature returning to play. A mean return time of 4.7 months for professional golfers and 7.2 months for amateurs, alongside improved subjective outcomes and performance metrics postsurgery, suggest patients can expect a relatively quick return to the course with similar or improved performance.

Inadequate harms reporting among randomized controlled trials cited as supporting evidence in the AAOS management of hip fractures in older adults clinical practice guideline recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Recommendations within clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are heavily influenced by results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Therefore, it is imperative that all RCT outcomes are reported thoroughly to ensure CPGs are created using accurate information. Here, we evaluate the quality of harms reporting using the CONSORT Extension for Harms in RCTs underpinning recommendations in the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) Management of Hip Fractures in Older Adults CPG. METHODS: Each RCT cited as evidence for recommendations in the AAOS Management of Hip Fractures in Older Adults CPG was evaluated using the CONSORT Extension for Harms to determine the quality of harms reporting. Descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, 95 % confidence intervals) were used to summarize adherence to CONSORT Harms items. A linear regression model was used to evaluate the CONSORT Harms influence on the quality of reporting over time. RESULTS: Among the 156 RCTs identified, there were a total of 31,848 participants. Most RCTs were conducted at a single center (137; 87.8 %) and in a single-blind manner (130; 83.3 %). Fifty-four (34.6 %) RCTs did not provide funding statements. Trials adequately reported an average of 6.65 out of 18 CONSORT Extension for Harms items (37.0 %). One RCT adequately reported all items, while five reported zero items. Forty-seven RCTs (30.1 %) reported ≥ 50 % of items and 73 (46.8 %) reported ≤ 33.3 % of items. The linear regression model demonstrated no significant increase in mean adherence over time (adjusted R2 = -0.006; p = 0.563). CONCLUSION: Our results highlight inadequate harms reporting among RCTs in the AAOS Management of Hip Fractures in Older Patients CPG. While the CONSORT Harms Extension was intended to enhance reporting, the linear regression model did not demonstrate significant improvements over time.

The top sports medicine influencers on X (formerly Twitter).

BACKGROUND: With increasing sports medicine content on social media, we sought to identify the top sports medicine influencers on X (formerly Twitter) and analyse their common characteristics. METHODS: X influence scores for "Sports Medicine" were collected in November 2021 from Right Relevance. Accounts were then screened in a blind, duplicate manner for personal and X profile characteristics. RESULTS: Physical therapists/physiotherapists made up 48% of the top sports science and medicine influencers. Locations in the U.S. and U.K. were listed for half of the influencers. The mean h-index was 30.2 (95% CI = [24.8-35.6]) with a median of 22.0 (range = 1-101). Most individuals reported multiple practice settings (63%), with 60% associated with an academic setting. Professional (62%) and Olympic (49%) level athletics were most frequently mentioned, with soccer (48%) and rugby (30%) as the most common sports. Among 76 profiles with URLs, most were linked to personal websites (57.9%). CONCLUSION: The top influencers on X consisted of accredited sports science and medicine professionals across various locations and occupations, providing ample networking and collaboration opportunities. The relatively high h-index in this study suggests sports science and medicine influencers on X are notable contributors to academic literature.

Suburban firefighter perceptions of health and wellness using patient-reported outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: Firefighting is among the most dangerous professions and requires exceptional physical fitness and focus while working. Patient-reported outcomes are a commonly used method to evaluate subjective health information and may be utilized by fire departments to identify the health status of firefighters and provide insight to promote their health and wellness. OBJECTIVE: This study is a novel analysis of firefighters' self-reported health to potentially identify musculoskeletal dysfunction, assist in therapeutic intervention, and improve overall health and wellness. METHODS: Firefighters were evaluated using seven different self-reported health surveys to assess various physical capabilities and quality of life. The questionnaires were delivered via online format and administered once to provide a snapshot of a suburban Oklahoma fire department. RESULTS: Using the Disablement in the Physically Active Scale, 14 of the 35 firefighters answered "slight, moderate, or severe" for the pain and motion variables. Only two of the firefighters indicated no stiffness or soreness after activity on the Nirschl Phase Rating Scale. The firefighters mean rating for "energy/fatigue" via the RAND-36 was 54.14 out of 100. CONCLUSION: Firefighters frequently report pain, impaired motion, and soreness, indicating areas in which health and wellness interventions may be helpful. The incorporation of periodic health surveys into firefighter health and wellness programming can highlight the presence of concerns, as well as intervention effectiveness by subjective health status reporting. By combining the health surveys with aerobic and core strength exercises, fire departments may be able to monitor and improve firefighter health.

Harms-related data are poorly reported among randomized controlled trials underpinning the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons clinical practice guideline recommendations for rotator cuff injuries.

BACKGROUND: Results produced from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) help guide clinical decision making and health policy. Therefore, it is essential that RCT outcomes- including harms (eg, adverse events)-are adequately reported such that clinicians, patients, and policy makers are equipped with all necessary information to complete risk-benefit assessment of the RCT's intervention. Here, we evaluated the quality of reporting of harms (eg, adverse events) in RCTs cited as supporting evidence for recommendations in the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Management of Rotator Cuff Injuries clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Extension for Harms Checklist. METHODS: To quantify adherence to CONSORT Extension for Harms items, each RCT was screened for pertinent information satisfying each checklist item. Screening of CPG reference sections for RCTs underpinning CPG recommendations, as well as data extraction from each of the included RCTs, was performed in a blind and duplicate manner. Descriptive statistics-including frequencies, percentages, and 95% confidence intervals-were used to summarize overall percent adherence to checklist items. A linear regression model assessed the relationship of CONSORT Harms reporting over time. RESULTS: Ninety-nine RCTs were included in our final sample. Fifty-seven RCTs (of 99; 57.6%) were conducted at a single center. Common funding sources included private (nonindustry) (17/99; 17.2%), private (industry) (8/99; 8.1%), and public (7/99; 7.1%) sources. Sample size for each trial most often consisted of <50 participants (29/99; 29.3%) or 51-100 participants (50/99; 50.5%). The average number of CONSORT Extension for Harms items adequately reported across all included RCTs was 5.7 (of 18; 31.7%). None of the included trials reported all 18 items. Twenty-six RCTs (of 99; 26.3%) adequately reported ≥50% of eligible checklist items. Fifty-nine RCTs (of 99; 59.6%) adequately reported ≤33% of eligible checklist items. Items with ≥50% adherence included item 2, item 7a, and item 8a. Items with ≤20% adherence included item 3b, item 4d, and item 5. Results from our linear regression demonstrated a slight, yet nonsignificant, improvement in adherence to the Harms Extension over time (R2 = 0.009; P = .407). CONCLUSIONS: Our results illustrate the poor state of harms reporting within RCTs cited as supporting evidence for the AAOS Management of Rotator Cuff Injuries CPG. Efforts to address these gaps in reporting are warranted, as complete knowledge of potential harms is critical to patients, clinicians, and health policy makers when determining best practice decisions in orthopedic surgery.

Inadequate Reporting of Complications in Randomized Controlled Trials Cited as Supporting Evidence Underpinning AAOS CPG Recommendations for Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: Application of the CONSORT Harms Checklist.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been shown to influence clinical decision-making and health policy. Therefore, it is essential that trial outcomes-including harms-are completely reported. METHODS: We included all RCTs cited as supporting evidence for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee, Osteoarthritis of the Knee, and Osteoarthritis of theHip Clinical Practice Guideline recommendations. Manuscripts were analyzed for compliance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Extension for Harms items. We determined the Extension for Harms' influence on harms reporting by comparing RCTs published before and after the extension's release. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-three RCTs were included, of which 81 (47%) adequately reported ≥50% of the checklist and 75 (43%) reported ≤33% of the checklist items. The mean number of checklist items reported was 8 items (of 18; 45%). Our interrupted time-series analysis suggests the implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Harms did not have a statistically significant effect on the completeness of harms reporting (P = .35; 95% Confidence interval = -0.0041 to 0.0014). CONCLUSION: Harms-related data are poorly reported within RCTs cited as supporting evidence for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons management for hip and knee OA Clinical Practice Guideline. Our time series analysis illustrates the failure of the CONSORT Extension for Harms on improving the reporting of harms-related data. Future efforts to improve the quality of harms reporting is crucial for patients, clinicians, and policy makers to perform thorough risk-benefit appraisals as RCT results directly influence clinical decision-making in orthopaedic surgery.