Educating residents in spine surgery: A study of Entrustable professional activities in neurosurgery and orthopedic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for spinal disorders represents some of the commonest surgical procedures performed in many countries worldwide, carried out by neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. Residency training is shifting to competency-based medical education, which requires setting standards for graduating residents and their assessments. However, gaps exist in the literature regarding the parameters used for assessment and the mastery levels expected of graduating residents in the performance of common spinal procedures as defined in Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). The objectives of the study were to describe the assessment parameters used for residents, identify the standard of performance expected of graduating residents of EPAs of spinal procedures, and identify factors predicting the expected standard of competent performance of graduating residents. METHODS: The survey was sent to neurosurgery and orthopedic surgery Faculty requesting their recommendations on parameters of assessment and the expected standard competence performance for EPAs related to spinal procedures using our entrustment scale (A-E). RESULTS: Based on total responses, the recommended number of assessments and assessors for each EPA was 5 and 2, respectively. Regarding each specialty, there was no significant difference in the recommended number of assessments for each EPA. However, neurosurgery Faculty recommended higher number of assessors(n = 3) than orthopedic surgery Faculty(n = 2) for both posterior spinal decompression EPA(PSD) (p = 0.01) and spinal instrumentation EPA(SI) (p = 0.04). Based on total responses, 83% felt PSD was appropriate to the general practice, 86.8% considered it not too broad, and 62.3% expected entrustment level E as a graduation target. The proportions of these ratings were slightly lower for SI at 58.5%, 71.7% and 56.6%, respectively. Both specialties indicated that the EPAs were not too broad. In contrast, neurosurgery Faculty were more likely to consider these EPAs appropriate for general practice than orthopedic surgery Faculty for both PSD (94.7% vs 53.3%, p = 0.0003) and SI (68.4% vs 33.3%, p = 0.02). Moreover, neurosurgery Faculty had a higher expected standard of performance as a graduation target for both PSD (Level E 76.3% vs 26.7%, p = 0.001) and SI (Level E 65.8% vs 33.3%, p = 0.03) than orthopedic surgery Faculty. Expectations of entrustment level E for PSD was associated with the belief that the current EPA was appropriate for the general practice of their specialty with an odds ratio of 8.35 (p = 0.01, 95%CI 1.53-45.67). CONCLUSIONS: A difference exists in parameters of assessment and expected standard competence performance of spine procedures among spinal surgery specialties. In our opinion, there should be efforts to develop consensus between specialties for the sake of uniform delivery of high-quality care for patients regardless of the specialty of their surgeon. Our results will be particularly valuable to certification bodies in the assessment of spinal milestones. This study has important implications for the design of residency and fellowship education in spinal surgery internationally.

A Bone Health Optimization Framework for Malaysia: a position paper by the Malaysian Bone Health Optimization Network (MyBONe).

This position paper aims to establish and standardise Bone Health Optimization (BHO) strategies for older patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgeries in Malaysia. It emphasises pre-, intra-, and post-operative assessments and tailored management. Adopting the "5IQ" approach, it proposes clinical standards and a registry to improve surgical outcomes and patient care. PURPOSE: Osteoporosis and osteopenia are highly prevalent among older patients scheduled for elective arthroplasties and spinal surgeries. This position paper aims to establish, promote, and standardise effective Bone Health Optimization (BHO) strategies for such patients within orthopaedic practices in Malaysia. It emphasises the need for bone health assessments to be undertaken at the pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative stages, with tailored management strategies to meet individual patient needs. METHODOLOGY: A comprehensive literature review was conducted, focusing on articles published from 2019 to 2024. Twelve broad themes were defined including definitions and importance of BHO, epidemiological data, assessment techniques, risk stratification, management strategies, and outcome metrics. RESULTS: Elective surgeries on patients with poor bone health are associated with adverse outcomes, such as periprosthetic fractures, aseptic loosening of implants, and complications after spinal surgeries. This position paper advocates for routine bone health assessments and monitoring during the pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative phases. It provides summaries of imaging modalities, risk assessment tools, and techniques for each phase. By adapting the successful "5IQ" approach from secondary fracture prevention, we propose 5IQ-based Clinical Standards for BHO, including 18 Key Performance Indicators. A Malaysian BHO Registry is proposed to benchmark care in real-time and support a national quality improvement programme. Practical resources, such as a BHO algorithm and key practice points, are included. CONCLUSION: This position paper proposes a paradigm shift in the management of bone health for patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery in Malaysia, aiming to improve surgical outcomes and patient care through standardised BHO strategies.

Establishing surgical volume benchmarks for Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)-accredited fellowship training.

INTRODUCTION: Case volumes of trauma centers and surgeons influence clinical outcomes following orthopaedic trauma surgery. This study quantifies surgical volume benchmarks for Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)-accredited fellowship training in the United States. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of orthopaedic trauma fellows graduating between 2018 and 2019 to 2022-2023. Case volume percentiles were calculated across categories and variability defined as the fold-difference between 90th and 10th percentiles. Temporal trends were assessed with linear regression. RESULTS: 446 orthopaedic trauma fellows were included in this study. Mean reported case volume increased from 898 ± 245 in 2018-2019 to 974 ± 329 in 2022-2023 (P = 0.066). Mean case volume was 924 over the study period and mostly consisted of other (418 cases, 45 %), subtrochanteric/intertrochanteric femoral neck (84 cases, 9 %), open fracture debridement (72 cases, 8 %), pelvic ring disruption / fracture (55 cases, 6 %), acetabular fracture (41 cases, 4 %), tibial shaft fracture (39 cases, 4 %), and femoral shaft fracture (38 cases, 4 %) cases. Overall variability in total reported case volume was 2.0. Variability was greatest in distal radius fracture (14.8), amputation (9.5), fasciotomy (8.0), and proximal humerus repair (5.0). CONCLUSION: Graduates from OTA-accredited fellowship training perform 924 cases on average, which exceeds the current minimum requirement of 600 cases. Case volume benchmarks can assist trainees and faculty align training goals with fellowship program strengths. More research is needed to determine evidence-based case minimum requirements for core competency training in orthopaedic trauma surgery.

Improving Pain Self-Efficacy in Orthopedic Surgery Patients Through Video-Based Education: A Quality Improvement Project.

BACKGROUND: Effective pain management following discharge is critical for postoperative recovery, with pain self-efficacy serving as a crucial component in this process. Patient education plays a key role in enhancing self-efficacy. Among various educational modalities, a growing body of evidence supports the efficacy of video-based methods. LOCAL PROBLEM: A lack of evidence-based pain education programs for patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery was identified at an urban academic hospital on the East Coast of the United States. This quality improvement project aimed to develop and assess a video-based pain education program, focusing on pain self-efficacy and self-reported preparedness among adult patients prescribed opioids for postsurgical pain. METHODS: This project adopted a pretest-posttest design, utilizing the knowledge-to-action framework. Data collection spanned 3 months. Among the 69 patients screened for eligibility, 13 participants were included in the analysis. The primary intervention consisted of a 15-minute educational video covering essential pain management aspects. Following the intervention, pain self-efficacy and self-reported preparedness were evaluated using the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire and a five-point Likert scale, respectively. RESULTS: Median (IQR) scores on the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire increased significantly from 20 (16) to 32 (14) (p < .01). Mean (SD) scores for patients' self-reported preparedness also increased from 21.92 (6.53) to 31.85 (2.41) (p < .01). All participants reported being satisfied or very satisfied with the educational intervention. CONCLUSION: Video-based education is a time-efficient and cost-effective approach. Healthcare providers can consider integrating video education to enhance pain self-efficacy in the postoperative phase, thus enhancing postsurgical pain outcomes and overall recovery experience.

Appraisal of the clinical practice guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic procedures; Do we AGREE (II)?

OBJECTIVE: Optimal thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic procedures is crucial in an attempt to lower the risk of venous thromboembolism, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. We aim to: 1) identify clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and recommendations (CPRs) on thromboprophylaxis in adult patients undergoing orthopaedic procedures, and 2) assess the methodological quality and reporting clarity of these guidelines. METHODS: The study was conducted following the 2020 PRISMA guidelines for a systematic review and has been registered on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number (CRD42023406988). An electronic search was conducted using Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Google Scholar and medRxiv. The search terms used were ""adults", "orthopedic surgery", "orthopedic surgeries", "orthopedic surgical procedure", "orthopedic surgical procedures" "english language", "venous thromboembolism", in all possible combinations (January 2013 to March 2023). The eligible studies were evaluated by four blind raters, employing the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE-II) analysis tool. RESULTS: The literature research resulted in 931 studies. Finally, a total of 16 sets of guidelines were included in the current analysis. There were 8 national and 8 international CPGs. Eight CPGs made specific recommendations for orthopaedic surgery and referred mostly to joints; one guideline focused on pelvi-acetabular trauma, while the rest were more inclusive and non-specific. Four guidelines, one from the American Society of Hematology (ASH), two from the United Kingdom (UK) and one from India were found to have the highest methodological quality and reporting clarity according to the AGREE-II tool. Inter-rater agreement was very good with a mean Cohens Kappa 0.962 (95 % CI, 0.895-0.986) in the current analysis. So, the reliability of the measurements can be interpreted as good to excellent. CONCLUSION: Optimal thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic procedures is crucial. The available guidelines were found to be mostly of high methodological quality and inter-rater agreement was very good, according to our study.

Establishing case volume benchmarks for ACGME-accredited orthopedic surgery of the spine fellowship training.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: There has been increasing scrutiny on the standardization of surgical training in the US. PURPOSE: This study provides case volume benchmarks for Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopedic spine surgery fellowship training. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of fellows at ACGME-accredited orthopedic spine surgery fellowships (2017-2022). PATIENT SAMPLE: N/A. OUTCOME MEASURES: Reported case volume during fellowship training. METHODS: Case volume percentiles were calculated across ACGME-defined case categories and temporal changes assessed via linear regression. Variability between the highest and lowest deciles by case volume was calculated as fold-differences (90th percentile/10th percentile). Sensitivity analyses were performed to identify potential targets for case minimum requirements. RESULTS: A total of 163 spine surgery fellows were included in this study. Total mean reported spine surgery case volume increased from 313.2±122 in 2017 to 382.0±164 in 2022 (p=.19). Most cases were classified as adult (range, 97.2%-98.0%) over pediatric cases (range, 2.0%-2.8%). An average of 322.0 cases were reported and most were classified as laminectomy (32%), posterior arthrodesis (29%), and anterior arthrodesis (20%). Overall variability in total case volume was 2.4 and the greatest variability existed for posterior instrumentation (38.1), application of cage (34.6), anterior instrumentation (20.8), and fractures and dislocations (17.3). If case minimum requirements for total reported cases was assumed at 200 cases, then all spine fellows included in this study would achieve this requirement. However, if case minimum requirements were assumed at 250 total cases, then approximately thirty percent of fellows (n=49) would not achieve this requirement for graduation. CONCLUSIONS: Increasingly, national societies and accrediting bodies for surgical education recognize the need for standardized training. This study provides benchmarks to inform potential case minimum requirements and help reduce variability during spine fellowship training. Future studies are needed to establish case minimum requirements for spine surgery fellowship training across comprehensive and granular case categories that cover the full gamut of orthopedic spine surgery.

Evaluating compliance with the best practice guidelines for wrong-level surgery prevention in high-risk pediatric spine surgery.

PURPOSE: In 2018, Best Practice Guidelines (BPGs) were published for preventing wrong-level surgery in pediatric spinal deformity, but successful implementation has not been established. The purpose of this study was to evaluate BPG compliance 5 years after publication. We hypothesized higher compliance among BPG authors and among surgeons with more experience, higher caseload, and awareness of the BPGs. METHODS: We queried North American and European surgeons, authors and nonauthors, and members of pediatric spinal study groups on adherence to BPGs using an anonymous survey consisting of 18 Likert scale questions. Respondents provided years in practice, yearly caseload, and guideline awareness. Mean compliance scores (MCS) were developed by correlating Likert responses with MCS scores ("None of the time" = no compliance = MCS 0, "Sometimes" = weak to moderate = MCS 1, "Most of the time" = high = MCS 2, and "All the time" = perfect = MCS 3). RESULTS: Of the 134 respondents, 81.5% reported high or perfect compliance. Average MCS for all guidelines was 2.4 ± 0.4. North American and European surgeons showed no compliance differences (2.4 vs. 2.3, p = 0.07). Authors and nonauthors showed significantly different compliance scores (2.8 vs 2.4, p < 0.001), as did surgeons with and without knowledge of the BPGs (2.5 vs 2.2, p < 0.001). BPG awareness and compliance showed a moderate positive correlation (r = 0.48, p < 0.001), with non-significant associations between compliance and both years in practice (r = 0.41, p = 0.64) and yearly caseload (r = 0.02, p = 0.87). CONCLUSION: Surgeons reported high or perfect compliance 81.5% of the time with BPGs for preventing wrong-level surgery. Authorship and BPG awareness showed increased compliance. Location, study group membership, years in practice, and yearly caseload did not affect compliance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V-expert opinion.

Assessing Telemedicine Efficiency in Follow-up Care With Video Consultations for Patients in Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery in Germany: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine can help mitigate important health care challenges, such as demographic changes and the current COVID-19 pandemic, in high-income countries such as Germany. It gives physicians and patients the opportunity to interact via video consultations, regardless of their location, thus offering cost and time savings for both sides. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether telemedicine can be implemented efficiently in the follow-up care for patients in orthopedic and trauma surgery, with respect to patient satisfaction, physician satisfaction, and quality of care. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial in a German university hospital and enrolled 60 patients with different knee and shoulder conditions. For follow-up appointments, patients received either an in-person consultation in the clinic (control group) or a video consultation with their physician (telemedicine group). Patients' and physicians' subsequent evaluations of these follow-up appointments were collected and assessed using separate questionnaires. RESULTS: On the basis of data from 52 consultations after 8 withdrawals, it was found that patients were slightly more satisfied with video consultations (mean 1.58, SD 0.643) than with in-clinic consultations (mean 1.64, SD 0.569), although the difference was not statistically significant (P=.69). After excluding video consultations marred by technical problems, no significant difference was found in physician satisfaction between the groups (mean 1.47, SD 0.516 vs mean 1.32, SD 0.557; P=.31). Further analysis indicated that telemedicine can be applied to broader groups of patients and that patients who have prior experience with telemedicine are more willing to use telemedicine for follow-up care. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine can be an alternative and efficient form of follow-up care for patients in orthopedic and trauma surgery in Germany, and it has no significant disadvantages compared with in-person consultations in the clinic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00023445; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00023445.

Recommendations for Orthopedic Surgeons during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Toward the end of 2019, the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic began to create turmoil for global health organizations. The illness, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), spreads by droplets and fomites and can rapidly lead to life-threatening lung disease, especially for the old and those with health co-morbidities. Treating orthopedic patients, who presented with COVID-19 while avoiding nosocomial transmission, became of paramount importance. OBJECTIVES: To present relevant methods for pandemic control and hospital accommodation with emphasis on orthopedic surgery. METHODS: We searched search PubMed and Google Scholar electronic databases using the following keywords: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, screening tools, personal protective equipment, and surgery triage. RESULTS: We included 25 records in our analysis. The recommendations from these records were divided into the following categories: COVID-19 disease, managing orthopedic surgery in the COVID-19 era, general institution precautions, triage of orthopedic surgeries, preoperative assessment, surgical room setting, personal protection equipment, anesthesia, orthopedic surgery technical precautions, and department stay and rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: Special accommodations tailored for each medical facility, based on disease burden and available resources can improve patient and staff safety and reduce elective surgery cancellations. This article will assist orthopedic surgeons during the COVID-19 medical crisis, and possibly for future pandemics.

Management of patients with hip fracture receiving anticoagulation: What are we doing in Canada?

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are rapidly replacing warfarin for therapeutic anticoagulation; however, many DOACs are irreversible and may complicate bleeding in emergent situations such as hip fracture. In this setting, there is a lack of clear guidelines for the timing of surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current practices of Canadian orthopedic surgeons who manage patients with hip fracture receiving anticoagulation. METHODS: In January-March 2018, we administered a purpose-specific cross-sectional survey to all currently practising orthopedic surgeons in Canada who had performed hip fracture surgery in 2017. The survey evaluated approaches to decision-making and timing of surgery in patients with hip fracture receiving anticoagulation. RESULTS: A total of 280 surgeons representing a mix of academic and community practice, seniority and fellowship training responded. Nearly one-quarter of respondents (66 [23.4%]) were members of the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society (COTS). Almost three-quarters (206 [73.6%]) felt that adequate clinical guidelines for patients with hip fracture receiving anticoagulation did not exist, and 177 (61.9%) indicated that anesthesiology or internal medicine had a greater influence on the timing of surgery than the attending surgeon. A total of 117/273 respondents (42.9%) indicated that patients taking warfarin should have immediate surgery (with or without reversal), compared to 63/270 (23.3%) for patients taking a DOAC (p < 0.001). Members of COTS were more likely than nonmembers to advocate for immediate surgery in all patients (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: There is wide variability in Canada in the management of patients with hip fracture receiving anticoagulation. Improved multidisciplinary communication, prospectively evaluated treatment guidelines and focus on knowledge translation may add clarity to this issue. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Cervical lymphatic malformations amenable to transhairline robotic surgical excision in children: A case series.

ABSTRACT: Lymphatic malformations are rare benign malformations that predominantly occur in the head and neck region. The advent of surgical robots in head and neck surgery may provide beneficial outcomes for pediatric patients. Here, we describe our experiences with transhairline incisions for robot-assisted surgical resection of cervical lymphatic malformations in pediatric patients.In this prospective longitudinal cohort study, we recruited consecutive patients under 18 years of age who were diagnosed with congenital cervical lymphatic malformations and scheduled for transhairline approach robotic surgery at a single medical center. We documented the docking times, console times, surgical results, complications, and postoperative follow-up outcomes.The studied patients included 2 with mixed-type lymphatic malformations and 2 with macrocystic-type lymphatic malformations. In all 4 patients, the incision was hidden in the hairline; the incision length was <5 cm in 3 patients but was extended to 6 cm in 1 patient. Elevating the skin flap and securely positioning it with Yang retractor took <1 hour in all cases. The mean docking time was 5.5 minutes, and the mean console time was 1 hour and 46 minutes. All 4 surgeries were completed endoscopically with the robot. The average total drainage volume in the postoperative period was 21.75 mL. No patients required tracheotomy or nasogastric feeding tubes. Neither were adverse surgery-associated neurovascular sequelae observed. All 4 patients were successfully treated for their lymphatic malformations, primarily with robotic surgical excisions.Cervical lymphatic malformations in pediatric patients could be accessed, properly visualized, and safely resected with transhairline-approach robotic surgery. Transhairline-approach robotic surgery is an innovative method for meeting clinical needs and addressing esthetic concerns.

Minimum Clinically Important Difference: A Metric That Matters in the Age of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

➤: As the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is increasingly utilized in orthopaedic research and clinical practice, there is not a consensus regarding the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) calculation. ➤: The varied MCID calculation methods can lead to a range of possible values, which limits the translatability of research efforts. ➤: The completion rate and follow-up period also influence MCID values and should be reported alongside study results.

Extensile lateral versus sinus tarsi approach for calcaneal fractures: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Calcaneal fractures are the most common tarsal bone fracture, and are often accompanied by heel pain, local swelling, tenderness, and inability to walk or stand. Surgical intervention results in better reconstruction of the calcaneal anatomy and reduces future complications; however, the optimal incision approach is still controversial. The incision is exposed better with extensile lateral approach (ELA), while the sinus tarsi approach (STA) causes fewer complications. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes of STA and ELA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Published trials comparing ELA and STA in calcaneal fractures were included in our analysis. The quality of each study was assessed using the revised Jadad scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Two researchers (CP and BY) independently extracted data from all selected studies. Fixed- or random-effects models with mean differences and odds ratios were used to pool the continuous and dichotomous variables to determine the heterogeneity of the included studies. RESULTS: Calcaneal height and calcaneal width had high heterogeneity. Results showed that the incidence of incision complications in STA was lower than that in ELA (P < .001). There was high heterogeneity in operative time (I2 = 97%), length of hospital stay (I2 = 98%), Böhler angle (I2 = 80%), Gissane angle (I2 = 98%), and American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society scores (I2 = 73%). No source of heterogeneity was found by sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, or regression analysis, and the random-effects model was used. STA operative time was significantly shorter than ELA (P < .001). Length of hospital stay after STA was significantly shorter than after ELA (P = .002). There was no statistical difference in the Böhler and Gissane angles between STA and ELA. Postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society scores after STA were higher than after ELA (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Results show that, compared with ELA, STA is superior for treating calcaneal fractures due to anatomical reduction of the calcaneus, reduction of incision complications incidence, and shortened operative time and postoperative stay.

[How to Resume Elective Orthopaedic Surgical Procedures during the COVID-19 Pandemic?] / Como Retomar a Atividade Cirúrgica Eletiva em Ortopedia durante a Pandemia COVID-19?

This document was prepared by the College of Orthopedics of the Portuguese Medical Association with the aim of developing the guidelines on the resumption of elective surgical activity in Orthopedics during the COVID-19 pandemic. It sets the criteria that allow the prioritization of surgeries according to the severity of the clinical situation, based on existing and published classifications. Moreover, it provides an organizational model for patient preparation and describes the patient pathways in the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative periods. It also describes safety rules for elective surgery and a model for monitoring patients after discharge according to scientific evidence.

Este documento foi elaborado pelo Colégio de Ortopedia da Ordem dos Médicos com o objetivo de estabelecer as orientações sobre a retoma da atividade cirúrgica programada em Ortopedia durante a pandemia COVID-19. As presentes normas de orientação: a) definem os critérios que permitem a priorização das cirurgias de acordo com a gravidade da situação clínica, com base em classificações existentes e publicadas; b) fornecem um modelo de organização para a preparação dos doentes, descrevendo os circuitos do doente nos períodos pré-operatório, intraoperatório e pós-operatório; c) realçam as regras de segurança para a realização de cirurgias e desenham um modelo de acompanhamento após a alta de acordo com a evidência científica.

A Call for a Standardized Approach to Reporting Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Clinical Relevance Ratio.

ABSTRACT: A shift toward a value-driven health-care model has made prospective collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) inextricably tied to measuring the success of orthopaedic surgery and patient satisfaction. While progress has been made in optimizing the utilization of PROM data, including establishing appropriate PROMs for a procedure and determining the clinical importance of unique tools, if these PROMs are not accurately analyzed and reported, a proportion of patients who do not reach the clinical thresholds may go unnoticed. Furthermore, parameters are unclear for setting a statistically and clinically important PROM threshold along with a minimum period for follow-up data collection.In this forum, we walk through simulated data sets modeling PROMs with the example of total joint arthroplasty. We discuss how the commonly used method of reporting PROMs by mean change can overestimate the treatment effects for the cohort as a whole and fail to capture distinct populations that are below a clinically relevant threshold. We demonstrate that when a study's outcome is PROMs, clinical importance should be reported using clinical thresholds such as the minimum clinically important difference (MCID), the smallest change in the treatment outcome that a patient perceives as beneficial, and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), the highest level of symptoms beyond which a patient considers himself or herself well. Finally, we propose a standardized reporting of PROMs that incorporates both the MCID and the PASS, and introduce a "clinical relevance ratio," which relies on a clinically relevant threshold to dichotomize outcomes and reports the number of patients achieving clinical importance at a given time point divided by the total number of patients included in the study. Unlike other common PROM-reporting approaches, the clinical relevance ratio is not skewed by patients who are lost to follow-up with increased time.

Do standards of care and early outcomes of periprosthetic fractures change during the COVID-19 pandemic? A multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) are a growing matter for orthopaedic surgeons, and patients with PPFs may represent a frail target in the case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether hospital reorganisations during the most severe phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic affected standards of care and early outcomes of patients treated for PPFs in Northern Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were retrieved from a multicentre retrospective orthopaedics and traumatology database, including 14 hospitals. The following parameters were studied: demographics, results of nasopharyngeal swabs, prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), comorbidities, general health status (EQ-5D-5L Score), frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale, CFS), pain (visual analogue scale, VAS), anaesthesiologic risk (American Society of Anaesthesiology Score, ASA Score), classification (unified classification system, UCS), type of operation and anaesthesia, in-hospital and early complications (Clavien-Dindo Classification, CDC), and length of stay (LOS). Data were analysed by means of descriptive statistics. Out of 1390 patients treated for any reason, 38 PPFs were included. RESULTS: Median age was 81 years (range 70-96 years). Twenty-three patients (60.5%) were swabbed on admission, and two of them (5.3%) tested positive; in three patients (7.9%), the diagnosis of COVID-19 was established on a clinical and radiological basis. Two more patients tested positive post-operatively, and one of them died due to COVID-19. Thirty-three patients (86.8%) presented a proximal femoral PPF. Median ASA Score was 3 (range, 1-4), median VAS score on admission was 3 (range, 0-6), median CFS was 4 (range, 1-8), median EQ-5D-5L Score was 3 in each one of the categories (range, 1-5). Twenty-three patients (60.5%) developed post-operative complications, and median CDC grade was 3 (range, 1-5). The median LOS was 12.8 days (range 2-36 days), and 21 patients (55.3%) were discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PPFs did not seem to change during the lockdown. Patients were mainly elderly with comorbidities, and complications were frequently recorded post-operatively. Despite the difficult period for the healthcare system, hospitals were able to provide effective conventional surgical treatments for PPFs, which were not negatively influenced by the reorganisation. Continued efforts are required to optimise the treatment of these frail patients in the period of the pandemic, minimising the risk of contamination, and to limit the incidence of PPFs in the future. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Cast-Related Complications.

Despite advances in surgical techniques and technology, casting remains an important treatment modality in the armamentarium of orthopedic surgery. Opportunities for skill development and complication management are a decreasing commodity for the surgeon in training. Appropriate indications for casting and technical expertise of cast application are key to complication avoidance. Prompt recognition and evaluation of potential complications are key to optimizing patient outcomes. Following the lead of the American Board of Orthopedic Surgery Resident Skills Modules, we implore teaching institutions to develop and maintain robust teaching programs, skills acquisitions laboratories, and assessments for confirmation of competency for all residency programs.