Surgeons Receiving Information About Patient Language Reflecting Unhelpful Thoughts or Distress About Their Symptoms Identify Such Language More Often Than Those Who Do Not Receive This Information.

BACKGROUND: Unhelpful thoughts and feelings of distress regarding symptoms account for a large proportion of variation in a patient's symptom intensity and magnitude of capability. Clinicians vary in their awareness of this association, their ability to identify unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms, and the skills to help address them. These nontechnical skills are important because they can improve treatment outcomes, increase patient agency, and foster self-efficacy without diminishing patient experience. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this survey-based study, we asked: (1) Are there any factors, including exposure of surgeons to information about language reflecting unhelpful thoughts about symptoms, associated with the total number of identified instances of language rated as reflecting unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms in transcripts of patient encounters? (2) Are there any factors, including exposure of surgeons to information about language reflecting unhelpful thoughts about symptoms, associated with the interobserver reliability of a surgeon's identification of language rated as reflecting unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms in transcripts of patient encounters? METHODS: Surgeons from an international collaborative consisting of mostly academic surgeons (Science of Variation Group) were invited to participate in a survey-based experiment. Among approximately 200 surgeons who participate in at least one experiment per year, 127 surgeons reviewed portions of transcripts of actual new musculoskeletal specialty encounters with English-speaking patients (who reported pain and paresthesia as primary symptoms) and were asked to identify language believed to reflect unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms. The included transcripts were selected based on the rated presence of language reflecting unhelpful thinking as assessed by four independent researchers and confirmed by the senior author. We did not study accuracy because there is no reference standard for language reflecting unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms. Observers were randomized 1:1 to receive supportive information or not regarding definitions and examples of unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms (referred to herein as "priming") once at the beginning of the survey, and were not aware that this randomization was occurring. By priming, we mean the paragraph was intended to increase awareness of and attunement to these aspects of human illness behavior immediately before participation in the experiment. Most of the participants practiced in the United States (primed: 48% [29 of 60] versus not primed: 46% [31 of 67]) or Europe (33% [20 of 60] versus 36% [24 of 67]) and specialized in hand and wrist surgery (40% [24 of 60] versus 37% [25 of 67]) or fracture surgery (35% [21 of 60] versus 28% [19 of 67]). A multivariable negative binomial regression model was constructed to seek factors associated with the total number of identified instances of language believed to reflect unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms. To determine the interobserver agreement, Fleiss kappa was calculated with bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals (resamples = 1000) and standard errors. RESULTS: After controlling for potential confounding factors such as location of practice, years of experience, and subspecialty, we found surgeons who were primed with supportive information and surgeons who had 11 to 20 years of experience (compared with 0 to 5 years) identified slightly more instances of language believed to reflect unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms (regression coefficient 0.15 [95% CI 0.020 to 0.28]; p = 0.02 and regression coefficient 0.19 [95% CI 0.017 to 0.37]; p = 0.03). Fracture surgeons identified slightly fewer instances than hand and wrist surgeons did (regression coefficient -0.19 [95% CI -0.35 to -0.017]; p = 0.03). There was limited agreement among surgeons in their ratings of language as indicating unhelpful thoughts or feelings of distress regarding symptoms, and priming surgeons with supportive information had no influence on reliability (kappa primed: 0.25 versus not primed: 0.22; categorically fair agreement). CONCLUSION: The observation that surgeons with brief exposure to supportive information about language associated with unhelpful thoughts and feelings of distress regarding symptoms identified slightly more instances of such language demonstrates the potential of training and practice to increase attunement to these important aspects of musculoskeletal health. The finding that supportive information did not improve reliability underlines the complexity, relative subjectivity, and imprecision of these mental health concepts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Nylon and Chromic Gut Sutures After Minor Hand Surgery.

PURPOSE: We sought to compare overall satisfaction with treatment and satisfaction with initial wound healing after closure of office hand and upper extremity surgery wounds using polyamide compared to Chromic gut sutures. METHODS: We compared 62 patients randomized to polyamide suture closure of an office hand and upper extremity incision (mostly carpal tunnel release and trigger finger release) to 50 patients closed with Chromic gut suture. Patients rated overall treatment satisfaction, satisfaction with initial healing, pain intensity, and upper extremity-specific activity tolerance. RESULTS: Accounting for potential confounding in multivariable linear and logistic regression analysis, we found the following: (1) overall satisfaction with care was unrelated to suture type; (2) satisfaction with initial wound healing and appearance was lower among people with no other comorbidities, but unrelated to suture type; (3) there were no factors independently associated with pain intensity; and (4) excisional biopsy was associated with greater activity tolerance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggests that Chromic sutures are a viable alternative to polyamide sutures after office hand surgery, provided that the care team anticipates and develops strategies for concerns that may arise if the sutures take an extended period to fall off. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.

A Comparison of Nerve-Specific, Condition-Specific, and Upper Extremity-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients With Carpal and Cubital Tunnel Syndrome.

PURPOSE: Arm-, region-, tissue-, and condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are available to address idiopathic mononeuropathy. This study compared PROMs with varying specificities in patients with idiopathic neuropathy of the upper extremity with respect to correlations with each another, sources of variation in scores, and floor and ceiling effects. METHODS: One hundred fifty patients (130 with carpal tunnel syndrome, 30 with cubital tunnel syndrome, and 10 with both conditions) completed a nerve-specific PROM (Impact of Hand Nerve Disorders), a condition-specific PROM (Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire and/or Patient-Rated Ulnar Nerve Evaluation), and an upper extremity-specific PROM (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Upper Extremity 7). We also gathered demographic and condition-related data (side, electrodiagnostic studies present, muscle atrophy, static loss of sensibility), and patients completed questionnaires measuring self-efficacy, kinesiophobia, and symptoms of depression. Correlation of the PROMs with each another and factors accounting for their variation were assessed, as well as the number of items to complete, time to complete, and floor and ceiling effects. RESULTS: Pearson correlations between PROMs were moderate to strong (0.56-0.90). Self-reported symptoms of depression were best able to account for the variations in symptom intensity and activity intolerance on all PROMs (adjusted R2 between 0.09 and 0.31). The Impact of Hand Nerve Disorders is a long questionnaire and took the most time to complete. All instruments had comparable floor effects; Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Upper Extremity had a ceiling of effect of 16%. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the evidence that specific and general PROMs correlate with each another, perhaps in part through their correlation with mental health. Based on this line of evidence and pending testing of potentially greater responsiveness in specific settings, we prefer to use a single simple, brief, and general PROM to quantify symptom intensity and activity intolerance for both routine patient care and research. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.

The Interobserver Reliability of Grading of Distal Radius Volar Plate Prominence.

PURPOSE: The 3-category rating of volar plate prominence in relation to the most volar edge of the distal radius (the watershed line) on lateral radiographs was reliable among a small group of surgeons and associated with the probability of flexor tendon irritation and potential rupture. Classifications are often less reliable when tested among a large group of practicing surgeons in different environments. METHODS: In this survey-based experiment, an international group of 115 fracture and upper extremity surgeons viewed 1 of 4 sets of 24 lateral radiographs (96 unique lateral radiographs) of patients with distal radius fractures who underwent volar plating in the practice of a single surgeon using 2 types of plates. Surgeons were asked to rate the following metrics: (1) the grade of plate prominence according to Soong, (2) whether the plate was more prominent than the watershed line, (3) whether the plate was separate from the bone distally, and (4) whether there is more than 5° of dorsal angulation of the distal radius articular surface. RESULTS: The interobserver agreement of the classification was "fair" (κ = 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27-0.36), and grading was more reliable among surgeons who do not supervise trainees. Volar prominence was less reliable (κ = 0.034; 95% CI = 0.013-0.055) than plate separation from bone (κ = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.42-0.59) and more than 5° of dorsal angulation (κ = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.35-0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Among a large number of international practicing surgeons, the classification of volar plate prominence in 3 categories was fair. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The diagnosis of plate prominence might develop toward criteria with moderate reliability, such as separation of the plate from the bone and residual angulation of the distal radius.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Decision Aids for Upper-Extremity Conditions.

PURPOSE: Decision aids (DAs) are tools designed to correct misconceptions, help people weigh the pros and cons of each option, and choose an option consistent with their values. This randomized controlled trial tested the difference in decision regret between patients who reviewed a DA at the end of the visit and those who did not. Secondary study questions addressed differences in pain self-efficacy, pain intensity, satisfaction, physical function, and treatment choice. METHODS: We enrolled 147 patients who visited an orthopedic upper-extremity surgeon for a condition that could be treated surgically or nonsurgically. We randomized 76 of these patients to review a DA as part of the visit (52%). At baseline, we measured results using the Pain Self-Efficacy short form, PROMIS Physical Function computer adaptive test, pain intensity on an 11-point ordinal scale, and satisfaction with the visit on an 11-point ordinal scale, as well as whether patients understood all received information and felt adequately educated to decide (no/yes), and choice of surgery, injection, or another treatment. Four to six weeks later, the survey by phone consisted of the PROMIS Physical Function computer adaptive test, pain intensity, satisfaction with the visit, the sense of a well-informed decision, and the Decision Regret Scale. We assessed factors independently associated with each measure. RESULTS: People who reviewed a DA had significantly less decision regret 4 to 6 weeks after the visit compared with those who did not. High pain self-efficacy was associated with lower likelihood to choose surgery during the initial visit, better physical function rates, and lower reported pain. CONCLUSIONS: Decision aids reduce decision regret, which suggests that they help people organize their thoughts and make decisions more consistent with their values. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Hand surgeons can consider the use of DAs as a method for improving the quality of shared decisions.

Does Intolerance of Uncertainty Affect the Magnitude of Limitations or Pain Intensity?

BACKGROUND: Intolerance of uncertainty-the tendency to overestimate the chance of and be unwilling to accept potential, but unlikely, negative outcomes in uncertain situations-is a cognitive construct that has been shown to affect symptoms and limitations for patients with traumatic and nontraumatic upper-extremity conditions. Cognitive flexibility and tolerance of uncertainty can be trained and practiced, with the potential to increase musculoskeletal health. However, to our knowledge, the degree to which intolerance of uncertainty might be associated with symptom intensity and the magnitude of limitations in adults with upper-extremity problems has not been characterized. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: After accounting for personal and social factors, is intolerance of uncertainty independently associated with (1) the magnitude of physical limitations and (2) pain intensity? METHODS: In this cross-sectional, observational study, 139 new and returning patients presenting to one of four orthopaedic offices in a large urban area completed the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (a validated measure of the level of comfort with uncertain situations), the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function Upper Extremity computer adaptive test (to measure the magnitude of limitations), and an 11-point ordinal measure of pain intensity. The mean age of the 139 participants was 51 years ± 16 years and 55% (76 of 139) were men. Participants presented to the clinics with a wide variety of upper-extremity conditions, such as trigger finger, distal radius fractures, lateral epicondylitis, or non-specific shoulder pain. We also assessed sex, race, marital status, education level, income, public versus private insurance, area deprivation index, and the participant's self-perception of their healthcare experience through a multiple-choice question (answer choices: none, some, a little, and a lot of experience). The following patient characteristics were more common in our study participants: white, employed, part of a married or unmarried couple, and private insurance coverage. We created two multivariable linear regression models to assess factors independently associated with the magnitude of limitations and pain intensity. RESULTS: After controlling for potentially confounding variables including sex, insurance, area deprivation index, and type of visit, we found that fewer physical limitations were associated with a greater intolerance of uncertainty (regression coefficient [ß] -0.30; 95% confidence interval, -0.50 to -0.10; p = 0.003; semi-partial r = 0.07; adjusted r for the full model = 0.16), as was being a man (ß 3.2; 95% CI, 0.08-6.3; p = 0.045; semi-partial r = 0.03) and having private insurance coverage (ß 5.2; 95% CI, 2.1-8.2; p = 0.001; semi-partial r = 0.08). After controlling for one important potentially confounding variable, the level of education, greater pain intensity was associated with a greater intolerance of uncertainty (ß 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.14; p = 0.009; semi-partial r = 0.05; adjusted r for the full model = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Intolerance of uncertainty-a byproduct of cognitive bias and error, which are elements of the normal functioning of the human mind-increases limitations and pain intensity across diagnoses, independent of demographic and social factors. Future studies can address the effect of strategies that incorporate mindset training (for example, cognitive behavioral therapy and its derivatives) on musculoskeletal symptoms and limitations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study.

Do Patients Unconsciously Associate Suggestions for More-invasive Treatment with Better Care?

BACKGROUND: It seems common for patients to conceive of care in physical terms, such as medications, injections, and procedures rather than advice and support. Clinicians often encounter patients who seem to prefer more testing or invasive treatments than expertise supports. We wanted to determine whether patients unconsciously associate suggestions for invasive treatments with better care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do patients have (A) an implicit preference and (B) an expressed preference for a physical intervention (such as a pill, an injection, or surgery) over supportive care (such as reassurance and education)? (2) What factors are independently associated with both an implicit and an expressed preference for a physical intervention over supportive care? (3) Is there a relationship between a patient's implicit preference toward or away from a physical intervention and his/her expressed preference on that subject? METHODS: In this study, we approached 129 new patients in a large urban area visiting one of 13 participating surgeons divided among six upper and lower extremity specialist offices. After excluding four patients based on our exclusion criteria, 125 patients (97%) completed a survey of demographics and their expressed preference about receiving either physical treatment or support. Treatment was defined as any surgery, procedure, injection, or medication; support was defined as reassurance, conversation, and education, but no physical treatment. Patients then completed the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to evaluate implicit preferences toward treatment or support. Although other IATs have been validated in numerous studies, the IAT used in this study was specifically made for this study. Scores (D scores) range from -2 to 2, where 0 indicates no implicit preference, positive scores indicate a preference toward receiving a physical treatment is good care, and negative scores indicate a preference toward receiving supportive care is good care. According to the original IAT, break points for a slight (± 0.15 to 0.35), moderate (± 0.35 to 0.65), and strong preference (± 0.65 to 2) were selected conservatively according to psychological conventions for effect size. Patients' mean age was 50 ± 15 years (range, 18-79 years) and 56 (45%) were men. The patients had a broad spectrum of upper and lower extremity musculoskeletal conditions, ranging from trigger finger to patellofemoral syndrome. RESULTS: We found a slight implicit association of good care with support (D = -0.17 ± 0.62; range, -2 to 1.2) and an expressed preference for physical treatment (mean score = 0.63 ± 2.0; range, -3 to 3). Patients who received both physical and supportive treatment had greater implicit preference for good care, meaning supportive care, than patients receiving physical care alone (ß = -0.42; 95% CI, -0.73 to -0.11; p = 0.008; semipartial R = 0.04; adjusted R full model = 0.13). Gender was independently associated with a greater expressed preference for physical treatment, with men expressing this preference more than women (ß = 1.0; 95% CI, 0.31-1.7; p = 0.005; semipartial R = 0.06; adjusted R full model = 0.08); receiving supportive treatment was independently associated with more expressed preference for support (ß = -0.98; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.23; p = 0.011; semipartial R = 0.05). An expressed preference for treatment was not associated with implicit preference (ß = 0.01; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.06; p = 0.721). CONCLUSIONS: Although surgeons may sometimes feel pressured toward physical treatments, based on our results and cutoff values, the average patient with upper or lower extremity symptoms has a slight implicit preference for supportive treatment and would likely be receptive. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study.

Patient Perspectives on Decision Making for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

PURPOSE: Interventions that improve a patient's understanding of the problem and their options might reduce surgeon-to-surgeon variation, activate healthier patient behaviors and mindset, and optimize stewardship of resources while improving quality of care. Patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) have more uncertainty about which course of action to take (so-called decision conflict) than hand surgeons. We studied patient preferences regarding shared decision making (SDM) for different parts of the treatment for CTS. We assessed the following hypotheses: (1) Younger age does not correlate with a preference for greater involvement in decisions; (2) Demographic and socioeconomic factors are not independently associated with (A) preferences for decision making (separated into preoperative, operative, postoperative, and the full SDM scale) and (B) the Control Preference Scale; (3) the SDM scale does not correlate with the Control Preference Scale. METHODS: We prospectively invited 113 new and postoperative patients with CTS to participate in the study. We recorded their demographics and they completed the SDM scale and the Control Preference Scale. RESULTS: The full SDM scale and all subsets showed a patient preference toward sharing the decisions for treatment with the surgeon with a moderate tendency toward patients wanting more surgeon involvement in decision making. On multivariable analysis, having commercial insurance compared with Medicare was independently associated with a preference for less surgeon involvement (ie, higher SDM scores) in decision making (regression coefficient, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-1.2). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CTS generally prefer to share decisions with their surgeon with a tendency for more surgeon involvement especially in the operative and postoperative period. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Decision aids and preference elicitation tools used to ensure diagnostic and treatment decisions for CTS that are aligned with patient preferences are needed. Future studies might address the routine use of these tools on patient outcomes.

Satisfaction With Specific and Nonspecific Diagnoses.

PURPOSE: Nonspecific upper extremity illnesses (eg,. wrist pain, forearm pain)-where no objectively verifiable pathology is detectable-are common and usually self-limiting. For some patients, a nonspecific diagnosis can contribute to mistrust and disappointment. METHODS: This study tested the primary null hypothesis that there is no difference in mean overall satisfaction between patients given a specific compared with a nonspecific diagnosis. Second, we assessed factors associated with satisfaction and with nonspecific upper extremity diagnosis. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between mean satisfaction with nonspecific and specific diagnoses in bivariate analysis. However, when treated as a categorical variable, 22% of the patients with a nonspecific diagnosis had a satisfaction score of 8 or lower compared with 11% of the patients given a specific diagnosis. First visit and greater pain intensity were significantly associated with a nonspecific diagnosis in bivariate analysis. In the multivariable models, no factors were independently associated with satisfaction or with nonspecific diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Although nonspecific diagnoses can sometimes be frustrating for both physician and patient, in this small study using a satisfaction measure with a strong ceiling effect, they were no less satisfying to patients on average and corresponded with slightly greater pain intensity than specific diagnoses. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The degree to which nonspecific diagnoses (perhaps in combination with compassionate care and incremental monitoring) can be part of a satisfying treatment experience merits additional investigation.

The Effect of the Content of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Patient Perceived Empathy and Satisfaction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine whether positively or negatively phrased Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) prior to a visit with the hand surgeon affect patient perceived empathy and patient satisfaction (Patient-Reported Experience Measures [PREMs]). METHODS: Between June 2017 and July 2017, we enrolled 134 patients who presented to 3 hand surgeons at 2 outpatient offices. They were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: completion of negatively framed questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-2], Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS-4], and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] depression Computer Adaptive Test [CAT]) or completion of positively framed questionnaires (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire [PSEQ-2]) prior to the visit. At the end of the visit, all patients completed questionnaires on patient-perceived physician empathy and patient satisfaction. Five patients were excluded from the analysis after randomization. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant differences between groups on patient-perceived physician empathy and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the content of psychological questionnaires completed prior to the visit does not affect patient satisfaction and perceived empathy recorded after the visit. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given the degree to which PROMs are influenced by psychosocial factors, and prior evidence that PROMs are primed by negatively framed questionnaires, it is reassuring that negatively framed PROMs did not affect PREMs, but more research is merited.

Does lidocaine reduce pain intensity during corticosteroid injection? A double-blind randomized controlled equivalence trial.

Of the strategies considered to limit the discomfort of corticosteroid injection, one is to inject without lidocaine to reduce the total volume and avoid acidity. In a Bayesian trial, adults receiving corticosteroid injections were randomized to receive 0.5 mL of triamcinolone with or without 0.5 mL of lidocaine. Serial analysis was performed until a 95% probability of presence or absence of a 1.0-point difference in pain intensity on the 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale was reached. Injections with lidocaine were associated with a median of 2.4-point lower pain intensity during injection with a 95% probability of at least a 1-point reduction. The 95% probability was confirmed in 90% of the repeated analysis (36/40). Lidocaine is associated with lower immediate pain intensity during corticosteroid injection for hand and wrist conditions.Level of evidence: I.

Correlation of the I-HaND Scale with Other Musculoskeletal Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Scores.

Background Experiments can determine if nerve-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can outperform regional or condition-specific PROMs. We compared a nerve-specific PROM of the upper extremity, the Impact of Hand Nerve Disorders (I-HaND) scale, to other validated measures quantifying activity intolerance and sought to assess interquestionnaire correlations and factors independently associated with activity intolerance and pain intensity. Methods One hundred and thirty patients with any upper extremity nerve-related condition completed measures of demographics, psychological limitations, quality of life, activity intolerance, and pain intensity. To quantify activity intolerance, we used the I-HaND, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Upper Extremity, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand short form. Results Strong interquestionnaire correlations were found between the activity intolerance measures ( r between 0.70 and 0.91). Multivariable analysis revealed that greater activity intolerance and greater pain intensity correlated most with greater symptoms of depression on all scales, with symptoms of depression accounting for 53 to 84% of the variability in the PROMs. Conclusion There is no clear advantage of the nerve-specific I-HaND over shorter, regional PROMs, perhaps because they are all so closely tied to mental health. Unless an advantage relating to responsiveness to treatment is demonstrated, we support using a brief arm-specific PROM for all upper extremity conditions. Level of Evidence Level II; Prognostic.

Contralateral Arm Pain as a Sign of Distress Regarding Symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Pain intensity and magnitude of incapability are associated with common unhelpful thoughts about symptoms such as catastrophic thinking and kinesiophobia. To determine whether reports of pain in the upper limb contralateral to a non-trauma condition were associated with unhelpful thoughts, we measured the relationship between pain intensity in the opposite limb and levels of unhelpful thinking. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 152 new and return patients seeking care of an upper-limb musculoskeletal condition completed measures of upper-extremity-specific magnitude of capability, pain intensity of the involved and contralateral arms, unhelpful thoughts regarding symptoms, symptoms of distress regarding symptoms, and general symptoms of depression. Factors associated with contralateral and ipsilateral pain intensity and upper-extremity-specific magnitude of capability were assessed using multivariable statistics. RESULTS: In bivariate analysis, contralateral arm pain was associated with symptoms of distress regarding pain, but not in multivariable analysis. Accounting for potential confounding in negative binominal regression analysis, greater pain intensity of the affected side was independently associated with greater feelings of distress regarding symptoms and no prior surgery. Greater upper-extremity-specific capability was independently associated with less distress regarding symptoms, married/partnered, men, and no prior surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The observation that greater pain intensity in the opposite arm was associated with greater distress regarding symptoms suggests that, in combination with other verbal and non-verbal signs of distress, patient concerns about pain in the contralateral limb can help direct patients and surgeons to evidence-based care strategies for alleviating stress regarding symptoms.

Moderators and Mediators of the Relationship of Shared Decision-Making and Satisfaction.

Background:Evidence suggests that health literacy, perceived availability of information and guidance to adapt to challenges (informational support), and symptoms of depression all have the potential to mediate or moderate the relationship between patient-rated involvement in decisions and satisfaction with care. If so these could be useful targets for improving patient experience. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 130 new adult patients visiting an orthopedic surgeon over a 4-month period. All patients were asked to complete measures of satisfaction with care (21-item Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale), perceived involvement in decisions (9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire), symptoms of depression (the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Scale [PROMIS] Depression Computerized Adaptive Test [CAT]), perceived availability of information and guidance to adapt to challenges (PROMIS Informational Support CAT), and the Newest Vital Sign test of health literacy. Results: The strong correlation between satisfaction with care (ρ = 0.60, P < .001) and perceived involvement in decisions was neither mediated nor moderated by health literacy, perceived availability of information and guidance, and symptoms of depression. Conclusions: The observation that patient-rated shared decision-making is strongly related to satisfaction with an office visit, independent of health literacy, perceived support, and symptoms of depression, is consistent with evidence that various measures of patient experience tend to correlate and emphasizes the importance of the patient-clinician relationship. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective study.

A Large Number of Reviews on Physician Rating Websites May Reflect Reputation Management.

Background: Physicians with a large number of reviews and a high rating may be employing reputation management strategies. Specialists may be more likely than non-specialists to employ such strategies. This should be apparent in a study of online physician reviews on physician rating websites (PRW). Methods: Using one physician rating website, we gathered orthopedic surgeon and family physician reviews. We measured Spearman correlations between the number of reviews and average numerical rating and used chi-squared to test threshold relationships. Results: There were very small negative Spear-man correlations between the number of online reviews and the average numerical rating for orthopedic surgeons (p= -0.097, p-value=<0.001) family medicine physicians (p= -0.170, p-value=<0.001; Figure 2). Physicians with more than 100 reviews had a greater average numerical rating than physicians with fewer than 50 reviews. Orthopedic surgeons are more likely than family medicine physicians to have a large number of reviews and average numerical rating greater than 3. Conclusion: The small fraction of physician with a high number of reviews may be utilizing reputation management strategies, and this seems relatively specific to specialists rather than non-specialists. Level of Evidence: III.

Psychosocial Factors Are Associated With Risk Acceptance in Upper Extremity Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients who help choose their health strategies are more adherent and achieve better health. An important role of the clinician is to verify that a patient's expressed preferences are consistent with what matters most to the patient and not muddled by common misconceptions about symptoms or conditions. Patient choices are influenced by estimation of the potential benefits and potential harms of a given intervention. One method for quantifying these estimations is the concept of maximum acceptable risk (MAR), or the maximum risk that subjects are willing to accept in exchange for a given therapeutic benefit. This study addressed the hypothesis that misconceptions due to unhelpful cognitive bias regarding pain are associated with risk acceptance among people seeking care for an upper extremity condition. METHODS: We invited 140 new adult patients visiting an upper extremity specialist to complete a survey including demographics, pain intensity, depression and anxiety symptoms, catastrophic thinking, activity limitations, and MAR. Trauma or nontrauma diagnosis was obtained from the treating clinician and recorded by the research assistant. We used bivariate and linear regression analyses to identify factors associated with MAR among this population. RESULTS: Accounting for potential confounding in multivariable analysis, higher MAR was associated with older age and greater catastrophic thinking. CONCLUSIONS: Specialists can be aware that people with more unhelpful cognitive biases may be willing to take more risk. Vigilance for common misconceptions and gentle, incremental reorientation of those misconceptions can increase the probability that people will choose options consistent with what matters most to them.

Patient and Surgeon Factors Associated With Prosthetic Replacement Rather Than With Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of a Radial Head Fracture.

Background: The decision between radial head arthroplasty and open reduction internal fixation in the context of a terrible triad elbow fracture-dislocation is debated. This study investigated both surgeon and patient factors associated with surgeons' recommendations to use arthroplasty. Methods: One hundred fifty-two surgeon members of the Science of Variation Group participated. Surgeons were asked to complete an online survey that included surgeon demographics and 16 patient scenarios. The patient scenarios were randomized using 2 patient variables and 2 anatomical variables. Multilevel logistic mixed regression analysis was performed to identify surgeon and patient variables associated with recommendations for radial head arthroplasty. Results: We found that radial head replacement was recommended in 38% of the scenarios. Scenarios with older patients, with fractures of the whole head, and those involving 3 fracture fragments were independently associated with radial head replacement. Conclusion: We found that most surgeons recommended radial head fracture fixation rather than arthroplasty. Surgeons were more likely to recommend fixation for younger patients with partial articular fractures or with fractures with 3 or fewer fracture fragments. It seems that surgeons are uneasy about using a prosthesis in a young active patient.

Radiographs and Corticosteroid Injections at a New Patient Visit for Care of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Ulnar Neuropathy at the Elbow.

Introduction The benefit of radiographs or steroid injection for idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) or ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE) is open to debate. We assessed: (1) Radiographs ordered and injections performed at a new patient visit for patients presenting with either idiopathic CTS or UNE; (2) The estimated payment reduction if we omit these interventions; and (3) Patient age, sex, geographic region, and work status associated with radiographs or injections at a new patient visit for patients presenting with either idiopathic CTS or UNE. Materials and Methods Using a large database of commercial insurance claims, we identified patients with a new visit for either CTS ( N = 9,522), UNE ( N = 2,507), or both ( N = 962; 8.7%). We identified injections and radiographs, and estimated total payments for these interventions. We created three multivariable logistic regression models for each diagnosis to identify factors associated with the interventions. Results Nearly one third of patients had radiographs at a new patient visit (30% and 32% for idiopathic CTS and UNE, respectively). Nearly 10% of patients with CTS and 2.6% with UNE received an injection. Both radiographs and injections representing annual minimum payments of over $345,000 and $294,000, respectively. Among people with CTS, radiographs were independently more common in the South and less common in the West. Injection for CTS was associated with younger age; North, Central, and South regions; and retired employment status. For people with UNE, radiographs were independently associated with younger age; South or West region; and retired or working employment status. Injection for UNE was associated with retired employment status. Conclusion The prevalence of radiographs and injections suggests opportunities for savings, which might benefit clinicians with bundled or capitated payments and patients with large copayments or deductibles. The observed variation may reflect debate about whether these interventions are worthwhile. Level of Evidence Diagnostic; Retrospective Database Level III study.

Pain during physical examination of a healing upper extremity fracture.

The evidence that symptom intensity and magnitude of limitations correlate with thoughts and emotions means that subjective signs, such as pain with physical examination, reflect both physical and mental health. During a 1-month evaluation of a rapidly healing upper extremity fracture with no risk of nonunion, 117 people completed measures of adaptiveness to pain and pain during the physical examination. Greater pain during examination correlated with less adaptive responses to pain and older age. This finding raises questions about using tenderness to assess fracture union.Level of evidence: II.

Using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia Short Form in Patients With Upper Extremity Specific Limitations.

Background: The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) is used to quantify fear of painful movement. A shorter form with only 4 questions (TSK-4) can be used by physicians to look for fear of movement independent of catastrophic thinking with less responder and survey burden. We assessed the difference explained in amount of variation in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Upper Extremity (PROMIS PF UE) between the TSK and TSK-4. Additionally, we looked for other factors that were associated with the PROMIS PF UE, and we assessed reliability and validity of the TSK and TSK-4 by looking at mean scaled scores, internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, interquestionnaire correlations, and collinearity with the Pain Catastrophizing Scale short form (PCS-4), PROMIS Depression, and PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS PI). Methods: One hundred forty eight new and follow-up patients were seen at 5 orthopedic clinics in a large urban area and given the TSK, PROMIS PF UE, PROMIS Depression, PROMIS PI, and PCS-4 questionnaires. Results: Both long and short measures of greater fear of painful movement were independently associated with less physical function (PROMIS PF UE). The longer version accounted for more of the variation in physical function than the short version (TSK, semipartial R2 = 0.12, adjusted R2 full model 0.25; TSK-4, semipartial R2 = 0.03, adjusted R2 full model = 0.16, respectively). The shorter measure had slight floor and ceiling effects. There was high internal consistency for both the TSK and TSK-4. Conclusions: A short measure of fear of painful movement may be an adequate screen in the care of patients with upper extremity problems. Using this short form can help decrease questionnaire burden while accounting for kinesiophobia along with catastrophic thinking.Level of Evidence: Prognostic, level II.