Clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of septic arthritis of the native hip joint: a 20-year retrospective review.

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this retrospective case series was to describe the prevalence and outcomes of single-stage hip arthroplasty in patients who were previously treated for septic arthritis of the native hip at our institution over a 20-year period. This study also examined rates of persistent or recurrent infection, reoperation, and mortality for septic arthritis of the native hip. METHODS: Adult patients treated for septic arthritis of the native hip at our institution from 1995 to 2015 were retrospectively identified. Exclusion criteria included age <18 years, missing or incomplete medical records, treatment at an outside institution, and prior surgery of the hip. RESULTS: 97 patients were included in this study. 3 patients (3.1%) who were previously treated for septic arthritis of the native hip underwent single-stage hip arthroplasty an average of 40 ± 25 months from the date of infection. 3 of the 18 (16.7%) patients who were treated with resection arthroplasty underwent second-stage joint reconstruction. There were no cases of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). 1 patient who underwent single-stage arthroplasty experienced implant-induced metallosis, necessitating removal of the implant. There were no other cases of revision arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of single-stage hip arthroplasty in patients with a history of septic arthritis of the native hip joint was 3.1%, which is higher than the prevalence of hip arthroplasty in the United States general population, suggesting that a history of septic arthritis may increase the risk of requiring hip arthroplasty. In the small number of patients who went on to receive a hip replacement, there were no reported cases of PJI. This study suggests that hip arthroplasty is a viable option for patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis and a history of septic arthritis of their hip.

Time-to-Surgery and Short-Term Outcomes of Trimalleolar Ankle Fracture During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Introduction During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a rapid and significant transformation in patient management occurred across the healthcare system in order to mitigate the spread of the disease and address resource constraints. Numerous surgical cases were either postponed or canceled, permitting only the most critical and emergent cases to proceed. The impact of these modifications on patient outcomes remains uncertain. The purpose of this study was to compare time-to-surgery and outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation for trimalleolar ankle fractures during the pandemic to a pre-pandemic group. We hypothesized that the pandemic group would have a prolonged time-to-surgery and worse outcomes compared to the pre-pandemic cohort. Materials and methods This retrospective cohort study was conducted within a single healthcare system, examining the treatment of trimalleolar ankle fractures during two distinct periods: April to July 2020 (COVID-19 group) and January to December 2018 (2018 group). Cases were identified using Current Procedural Terminology code 27822. Information on demographics, fracture characteristics, and outcomes was obtained through chart review. Outcomes analyzed included time-to-surgery, mean visual analog scale scores, ankle strength and range of motion, and complications. Results COVID-19 and 2018 groups consisted of 32 and 100 patients, respectively. No significant difference was observed in group demographics and comorbidities (p > 0.05). Fracture characteristics were similar between groups apart from tibiofibular syndesmosis injury, 62.5% (20/32) in COVID-19 vs 42.0% (42/100) in 2018 (p = 0.03). Time-to-surgery was not significantly different between the two groups (8.84 ± 6.78 days in COVID-19 vs 8.61 ± 6.02 days in 2018, p = 0.85). Mean visual analog scale scores, ankle strength, and ankle range of motion in plantarflexion were not significantly different between the two groups at three and six months postoperatively (p > 0.05). Dorsiflexion was significantly higher in the COVID-19 group at three months (p = 0.03), but not six months (p = 0.94) postoperatively. No significant difference in postoperative complication was seen between groups, 25.0% (8/32) COVID-19 group compared to 15.0% (15/100) 2018 group (p = 0.11). Conclusions Patients who underwent surgery during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic did not experience prolonged time-to-surgery and had similar outcomes compared to patients treated prior to the pandemic.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Humeral Shaft Fracture Management and Its Outcomes.

Background and objective The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated a sudden and drastic shift in patient management throughout the healthcare system, to curb the spread of the disease and deal with resource limitations. Many surgical cases were canceled or delayed with only the most urgent and emergent cases taken up for treatment. It is unknown if and how these alterations affected patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare time to fracture care and outcomes between patients treated for humeral shaft fractures prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and those treated during the pandemic. We hypothesized that the pandemic cohort would have a prolonged time to fracture care and worse outcomes than the pre-pandemic cohort. Materials and methods This was a retrospective cohort study performed within a single healthcare system. All humeral shaft fractures treated from March to June 2019 (pre-pandemic cohort) and March to June 2020 (pandemic cohort) were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes and ICD-10-CM codes as well as Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Data on demographics, fracture characteristics, treatment, and outcomes were collected via chart and radiograph review. Outcomes analyzed included time to being made weight-bearing as tolerated (WBAT), radiographic union, and final follow-up; range of motion (ROM) at radiographic union and final follow-up; and rate of complications. Results The pre-pandemic cohort (n=19) was significantly younger with a mean age of 29 years than the pandemic cohort (n=17) with a mean age of 49 years (p=0.010). There were no other significant differences in demographics, fracture characteristics, or treatment type between the groups. Time to fracture care was not significantly different in the pre-pandemic cohort (five days) versus the pandemic cohort (four days). Time to being made WBAT, radiographic union, and final follow-up were not significantly different between the pre-pandemic (86, 113, and 98 days) and the pandemic cohorts (77, 106, and 89.5 days). ROM measurements in abduction at radiographic union were significantly different between the cohorts: in the pre-pandemic cohort, 100% of patients reached greater than 160 degrees; in the pandemic cohort, only 16.7% of patients reached greater than 160 degrees (p=0.048). There was a non-significant decrease in the proportion of patients who achieved the maximal category of ROM measurements in forward elevation and extension at radiographic union and abduction, forward elevation, and extension at final follow-up, as well as a non-significant increase in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at final follow-up between cohorts. There were no significant differences in the rate of complications. Conclusions Despite limited resources, reduced operating room availability, and increased utilization of virtual visits due to the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with humeral shaft fractures may not have faced delays in fracture care or worse outcomes compared to the pre-pandemic period. The pandemic cohort may have experienced significantly decreased ROM compared to the pre-pandemic cohort, which may reflect the decreased availability of physical therapy services and overall decreased activity levels due to the quarantine orders. However, we could not identify any other significant differences in the type of treatment, pain, complications, or time to union.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Various Treatment Options for Distal Radius Fractures.

Purpose: To conduct a cost-effectiveness study of nonsurgical and surgical treatment options for distal radius fractures using distinct posttreatment outcome patterns. Methods: We created a decision tree to model the following treatment modalities for distal radius fractures: nonsurgical management, external fixation, percutaneous pinning, and plate fixation. Each node of the model was associated with specific costs in dollars, a utility adjustment (quality-adjusted life year [QALY]), and a percent likelihood. The nodes of the decision tree included uneventful healing, eventful healing and no further intervention, carpal tunnel syndrome, trigger finger, and tendon rupture as well as associated treatments for each event. The percent probabilities of each transition state, QALY values, and costs of intervention were gleaned from a systematic review. Rollback and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analyses were conducted to identify optimal treatment strategies. Threshold values of $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY were used to distinguish the modalities in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis. Results: Both the rollback analysis and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis revealed nonsurgical management as the predominant strategy when compared with the other operative modalities. Nonsurgical management dominated external fixation and plate fixation, although it was comparable with percutaneous fixation, yielding a $2,242 lesser cost and 0.017 lesser effectiveness. Conclusions: The cost effectiveness of nonsurgical management is driven by its decreased cost to the health care system. Plate and external fixation have been shown to be both more expensive and less effective than other proposed treatments. Percutaneous pinning has demonstrated more favorable effectiveness in the literature than plate and external fixation and, thus, may be more cost effective in certain circumstances. Future studies may find value in investigating further clinical aspects of distal radius fractures and their association with nonsurgical management versus that with plate fixation. Type of study/level of evidence: Economic/decision analysis II.

Perceived effectiveness of video interviews for orthopaedic surgery residency during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: During the 2020-21 residency interview season, interviews were conducted through virtual platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study is to assess the general perceptions of applicants, residents and attendings at a single, large, metropolitan orthopaedic residency with regards to the video interview process before and after the interview season. METHODS: Surveys were sent to all orthopaedic applicants, residents, and attendings before the interview season. Applicants who received interviews and responded to the first survey (46) and faculty who responded to the first survey (28) were sent a second survey after interviews to assess how their perceptions of video interviews changed. RESULTS: Initially, 50% of applicants (360/722) and 50% of faculty and residents (28/56) responded before interview season. After interviews, 55% of interviewees (25/46) and 64% of faculty and residents (18/28) responded. Before interviews, 91% of applicants stated they would prefer in-person interviews and 71% were worried that video interviews would prevent them from finding the best program fit. Before interviews, 100% of faculty and residents stated they would rather conduct in-person interviews and 86% felt that residencies would be less likely to find applicants who best fit the program. Comparing responses before and after interviews, 16% fewer applicants (p = 0.01) perceived that in-person interviews provide a better sense of a residency program and faculty and residents' perceived ability to build rapport with interviewees improved in 11% of respondents (p = 0.01). However, in-person interviews were still heavily favored by interviewees (84%) and faculty and residents (88%) after the interview season. CONCLUSIONS: In-person interviews for Orthopaedic Surgery Residency are perceived as superior and are preferred among the overwhelming majority of applicants, residents, and interviewers. Nevertheless, perceptions toward video interviews improved in certain domains after interview season, identifying potential areas of improvement and alternative interview options for future applicants.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurements Information System (PROMIS) upper extremity and pain interference do not significantly predict rotator cuff tear dimensions.

BACKGROUND: Proper diagnosis of rotator cuff tears is typically established with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); however, studies show that MRI-derived measurements of tear severity may not align with patient-reported pain and shoulder function. The purpose of this study is to investigate the capacity for the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurements Information System (PROMIS) computer adaptive tests to predict rotator cuff tear severity by correlating preoperative tear morphology observed on MRI with PROMIS upper extremity (UE) and pain interference (PI) scores. This is the first study to investigate the relationship between tear characteristics and preoperative patient-reported symptoms using PROMIS. Considering the essential roles MRI and patient-reported outcomes play in the management of rotator cuff tears, the findings of this study have important implications for both treatment planning and outcome reporting. METHODS: Two PROMIS-computer adaptive test forms (PROMIS-UE and PROMIS-PI) were provided to all patients undergoing rotator cuff repair by one of three fellowship-trained surgeons at a single institution. Demographic information including age, sex, race, employment status, body mass index, smoking status, zip code, and preoperative PROMIS-UE and -PI scores was prospectively recorded. A retrospective chart review of small to large full- or partial-thickness rotator cuff tears between May 1, 2017 and February 27, 2019 was used to collect each patient's MRI-derived tear dimensions and determine tendon involvement. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 180 patients (56.7% male, 43.3% female) with an average age of 58.9 years (standard deviation, 9.0). There was no significant difference in PROMIS-UE or -PI scores based on which rotator cuff tendons were involved in the tear (P > .05). Neither PROMIS-UE nor PROMIS-PI significantly correlated with tear length or retraction length of the supraspinatus tendon (P > .05). The sum of tear lengths in the anterior-posterior and medial-lateral directions was weakly correlated with PROMIS-UE (P = .042; r = -0.152, r2 = 0.031) and PROMIS-PI (P = .027; r = 0.165, r2 = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Rotator cuff tear severity does not significantly relate to preoperative PROMIS-UE and -PI scores. This finding underscores the importance of obtaining a balanced preoperative assessment of rotator cuff tears that acknowledges the inconsistent relationship between rotator cuff tear characteristics observed on MRI and patient-reported pain and physical function.