Inter-physician Communication in Pediatric Orthopaedics: What do Pediatricians Want to Hear From us?

BACKGROUND: Pediatric orthopaedic surgeons often communicate with general pediatric providers to facilitate patient care, but little data exist on communication preferences. This study investigates pediatric provider preferences regarding when they would like to receive patient updates from pediatric orthopedists, which communication modalities they prefer, and what information they like to receive. METHODS: We developed a 19-question e-mail survey to evaluate provider preferences on communication modality, timing, frequency, and what data they deem important as it relates to musculoskeletal patient care. RESULTS: A total of 111 general pediatric providers in our geographical region completed the survey. Among the providers, 55.9% preferred fax, 40.5% electronic health record inbox message, 19.8% e-mail, 12.6% mail, and 7.2% call/voicemail. The majority (67.9%) preferred information in a traditional note format, whereas 24.8% preferred a summary in paragraph format. Patient diagnosis and treatment plan for shared patients were the most important pieces of information for general pediatric providers to receive from pediatric orthopedists. Of various patient-specific scenarios included in the survey, referrals for osteomyelitis concern, fractures requiring surgery, scoliosis concern, and developmental dysplasia of the hip requiring treatment were considered most important for pediatric orthopedists to send updates. In terms of frequency of communication, over half of the pediatric providers (59.5%) desired updates after the first visit and after care plan changes (50.5%). CONCLUSION: Only 43.5% of pediatric providers feel like current communication with pediatric orthopaedic surgeons is "always" or "often" adequate. Most of our surveyed providers preferred occasional SOAP notes through fax as communication from pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. The communication deemed most important to providers related to referrals where the provider makes the initial diagnosis and then refers the patient to orthopaedics for a condition with potential long-term patient impacts. Finally, providers felt communication was most important after the first pediatric orthopaedic office visit. EVIDENCE: Level III, survey based.

Three-dimensional analysis of the sagittal profile in surgically treated Lenke 5 curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. OBJECTIVES: To determine how the pre- and postoperative three-dimensional (3D) sagittal profiles of Lenke 5 curves in idiopathic scoliosis patients compare to unaffected controls. Prior research evaluating the sagittal plane of Lenke 5 (thoracolumbar/lumbar) curves in 2D suggests that the major curve is hypolordotic. METHODS: Patients with Lenke 5 curves treated with thoracolumbar/lumbar posterior fusion who had biplanar radiography (with 3D reconstruction) preoperatively (Pre) and 2+ years postoperatively (PO2Y) were included. A cohort of similarly aged controls (C) without spinal pathology was identified. The following 3D sagittal measurements were compared both pre- and postoperatively to controls: T1-T10, T10-L3, L3-S1, and pelvic incidence (PI). Kyphosis is designated by positive values, and lordosis by negative values. RESULTS: Nineteen Lenke 5 patients and 125 controls were included. Preoperatively, Lenke 5 patients were hypokyphotic relative to controls from T1 to T10 (30° ± 13° vs. 42° ± 9°, p < 0.001) and hyperlordotic from T10 to L3 (- 26° ± 15° vs. - 13° ± 12°, p < 0.001). Lenke 5 spines were less lordotic from L3 to S1 (- 41° ± 9° vs. - 47° ± 7°, p = 0.004). PI was similar between groups (Lenke 5 Pre: 48° ± 13°, C: 46° ± 10°, p = 0.49). Postoperatively, the area of principal deformity (T10-L3) remained hyperlordotic (PO2Y: - 23° ± 10° vs. C: - 13° ± 12°, p < 0.001). The proximal and distal uninstrumented segments demonstrated spontaneous sagittal correction, becoming similar to controls: T1-T10 (PO2Y: 41° ± 12° vs. C: 42° ± 9°, p = 0.421) and L3-S1 (PO2Y: - 48° ± 9° vs. C: - 47° ± 7°, p = 0.56). CONCLUSION: When measured in 3D, Lenke 5 curves were more lordotic than controls in the periapical region of the major coronal curve. Posterior correction improved sagittal alignment, including spontaneous sagittal correction of the unfused segments. However, ~ 10° of hyperlordosis persisted in the instrumented/fused T12-L3 segment. Intraoperative correction strategies should take this preoperative increase in 3D sagittal deformity into account during rod contouring as well as compression/distraction to restore more normal sagittal alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Growth-preserving instrumentation in early-onset scoliosis patients with multi-level congenital anomalies.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. OBJECTIVES: To assess final outcomes in patients with early-onset scoliosis (EOS) who underwent growth-preserving instrumentation (GPI). Various types of growth-preserving instrumentation (GPI) are frequently employed, but until recently had not been utilized long enough to assess final outcomes. METHODS: GPI "graduates" with multi-level congenital curves were identified. Graduation was defined as a final fusion or 5 years of follow-up without planned future surgeries. Outcomes included radiographic parameters and complications. RESULTS: 26 patients were included. 11 had associated diagnoses; eight had fused ribs. 17 were treated with traditional growing rods, seven with vertically expandable prosthetic ribs, and two with Shilla procedures. The mean GPI spanned 12.3 levels including 10.7 motion segments, age at index surgery was 5.5 years, treatment spanned 7.5 years, and follow-up was 9.2 years. 24 patients underwent final fusion. Mean major curve decreased from 73° to 49° with index surgery (p < 0.01) and remained unchanged through a final follow-up. Final major curve was < 40° in 9 patients (35%), 40°-60° in 11 patients (42%), and > 60° in 6 patients (23%). None worsened throughout treatment. Mean T1-T12 height increased 2.4 cm with index surgery (p = 0.02) and 5.4 cm total (p < 0.01). T1-T12 height increased in all patients and was ultimately < 18 cm in 10 patients (38%), 18-22 cm in 10 patients (38%), and > 22 cm in 6 patients (23%). On average, there were 2.6 complications per patient, including 1.7 implant failures. 12 patients (46%) experienced ≥ 3 complications; four patients (15%) experienced none. CONCLUSION: We observed successful prevention of deformity progression but substantial residual deformity among GPI graduates with multi-level congenital EOS. Most coronal curve correction was attained during GPI implantation; thoracic height improved throughout treatment. While some favorable results were found, treatment strategies allowing improved deformity correction would be valuable for this challenging population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic-III.

What are normal radiographic spine and shoulder balance parameters among adolescent patients?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. OBJECTIVES: To define normal values and distributions for sagittal, coronal, and shoulder balance among healthy adolescents, both for traditional radiographs and biplanar radiography. Our understanding of spine balance, especially in the sagittal plane, has expanded rapidly in recent years. Additionally, there has been growing use of simultaneous biplanar radiography which requires slightly different patient positioning. However, the normal ranges of several commonly used parameters have not yet been defined, either in traditional or biplanar radiography. METHODS: Radiographs were retrospectively reviewed of 273 patients aged 10-18 years seen in spine clinics at two high-volume centers and not diagnosed with any spine pathology. One center utilized traditional radiography and the other biplanar radiography. Coronal, sagittal, and shoulder balance were measured for each patient. Intra-observer reliability and normal values with distributions were reported for each parameter. RESULTS: Intra-observer reliability was excellent (intra-class correlation coefficients ≥ 0.98). Each parameter was normally distributed at each institution based on Kolmogorov-Smirnov testing. Sagittal balance was more negative at the institution using traditional radiographs (- 3.4 ± 4.2 vs. 0.3 ± 2.2, p < 0.001). Coronal balance was statistically, but not clinically, significantly more negative at this institution (- 0.6 ± 1.4 vs. - 0.2 ± 1.0, p = 0.007). Shoulder balance was not different between institutions. The "normal" ranges (mean ± 2 standard deviations, i.e., expected to include 95% of patients) were - 2.8 to 2.0 cm for coronal balance, - 9.0 to 6.1 cm for sagittal balance, and - 1.5-2.4 cm for shoulder balance. CONCLUSIONS: In adolescents without known spine pathology, the mean coronal, sagittal, and shoulder balance is near neutral, but each parameter varies over a large range; so the average patient deviates from neutral by 1.0 ± 0.7 cm, 3.1 ± 2.6 cm, and 0.9 ± 0.7 cm, respectively. The most important difference between biplanar and traditional radiographs was a significantly more negative sagittal balance in the biplanar group which may be attributable to arm positioning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Does Very High Surgeon or Hospital Volume Improve Outcomes for Hemiarthroplasty Following Femoral Neck Fractures?

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates whether very high-volume hip arthroplasty providers have lower complication rates than other relatively high-volume providers. METHODS: Hemiarthroplasty patients ≥60 years old were identified in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System 2001-2015 dataset. Low-volume hospitals (<50 hip arthroplasty cases/y) and surgeons (<10 cases/y) were excluded. The upper and lower quintiles were compared for the remaining "high-volume" hospitals (50-70 vs >245) and surgeons (10-15 vs ≥60) using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed treating volume as a continuous variable. RESULTS: In total, 48,809 patients were included. Very high-volume hospitals demonstrated slightly less pneumonia (6% vs 7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.88, P < .0001). Very high-volume surgeons experienced slightly higher rates of inpatient morality (3% vs 2%, HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06-1.60, P = .01), revision surgery (3% vs 3%, HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.02-1.52, P = .03), and implant failure (1% vs <1%, HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.10-2.96, P = .02). Sensitivity analyses did not significantly alter these findings but suggested that inpatient mortality may decline as surgeon volume approaches 30 cases/y before gradually increasing at higher volumes. CONCLUSION: A clinically meaningful volume-outcome relationship was not identified among very high-volume hemiarthroplasty surgeons or hospitals. Although prior evidence indicates that outcomes can be improved by avoiding very low-volume providers, these results suggest that complications would not be further reduced by directing all hemiarthroplasty patients to very high-volume surgeons or facilities. Future research investigating whether inpatient mortality changes with surgeon volume (particularly around 30 cases/y) in a different dataset would be valuable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III.

Do Hospital or Surgeon Volume Affect Outcomes After Surgical Management of Tibial Shaft Fractures?

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether hospital and surgeon volume are associated with outcomes after operative fixation of tibial shaft fractures. METHODS: Adults (≥18 year old) who underwent operative fixation of diaphyseal tibial fractures were identified in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System data set from 2001 to 2015. Reoperation, nonunion, and other adverse event rates were compared across surgeon and hospital volume using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for clinical and demographic factors. Low-volume providers (lowest 20%) were compared with high-volume providers (highest 20%). Low volume constituted <5 cases/year for hospitals and 1 case/year for surgeons. High volume constituted ≥40 cases/year for hospitals and ≥8 cases/year for surgeons. RESULTS: Nine thousand one hundred forty-seven patients were included. Relative to high-volume surgeons, low-volume surgeons experienced slightly higher rates of pneumonia [2% vs. 1%, hazard ratio (HR) 2.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38-4.53, P = 0.003], and respiratory failure (5% vs. 3%, HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.30-2.71, P = 0.001). Compared with high-volume hospitals, low-volume hospitals experienced slightly lower rates of compartment syndrome (1% vs. 3%, HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24-0.85, P = 0.01) and fasciotomies (3% vs. 7%, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85, P = 0.005). The rates of all other reoperations and adverse events compared among hospitals and surgeons were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: We did not detect a clinically meaningful volume-outcome relationship for either surgeons or hospitals despite the use of a robust database with rigorous statistical methodology. Of note, these findings should not be applied to rare complex injuries such as those with extensive bone loss or articular extension, which are not well represented by this study population. Therefore, we conclude that typical tibial shaft fracture, including open or closed injuries, can be safely managed in the vast majority of orthopaedic settings and that this care does not necessarily require transfer to a specialty centers. Future research into orthopaedic volume-outcome relationships could be strengthened by the use of functional outcomes (which would likely require well-organized multicenter prospective registries). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Spontaneous Healing of a Bucket-Handle Posterior Labral Detachment After Hip Dislocation in a Five-Year-Old Child: A Case Report.

CASE: We report the case of a 5-year-old girl who sustained a traumatic hip dislocation and a spontaneous reduction that was complicated by nonconcentric reduction and a large bucket-handle labral detachment. This injury was managed, via an anterior approach, with capsulotomy and reduction of the large interposed labral tear with an attached osteochondral fragment from the posterior aspect of the acetabulum. No additional surgical treatment was employed for the labral tear. CONCLUSION: The patient ultimately demonstrated radiographic healing and an asymptomatic, clinically stable hip. This case illustrates the spontaneous healing of a large posterior labral detachment in a young pediatric patient with a good outcome at 2.5 years after injury.

Are Medicare's "Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement" Bundled Payments Stratifying Risk Adequately?

BACKGROUND: Bundled payments are meant to reduce costs and improve quality of care. Without adequate risk adjustment, bundling may be inequitable to providers and restrict access for certain patients. This study examines patient factors that could improve risk stratification for the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) bundled-payment program. METHODS: Ninety-five thousand twenty-four patients meeting the CJR criteria were retrospectively reviewed using administrative Medicare data. Multivariable regression was used to identify associations between patient factors and traditional (fee-for-service) Medicare reimbursement over the bundle period. RESULTS: Average reimbursement was $18,786 ± $12,386. Older age, male gender, cases performed for hip fractures, and most comorbidities were associated with higher reimbursement (P < .05), except dementia (lower reimbursement; P < .01). Stratification incorporating these factors displayed greater accuracy than the current CJR risk adjustment methods (R2 = 0.23 vs 0.17). CONCLUSION: More robust risk stratification could provide more equitable reimbursement in the CJR program. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Large database analysis; Level III.

Should All Orthopaedists Perform Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fractures? A Volume-Outcome Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether very low surgeon and hospital hip arthroplasty volumes are associated with unfavorable outcomes after hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures. METHODS: Patients ≥60 years of age and who underwent hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture were identified in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System data from 2001 to 2015. Incidence of inpatient mortality and postoperative complications were compared across both surgeon and hospital volume using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for clinical and demographic factors. RESULTS: Fifty eight thousand eight hundred fourteen patients were included. Low surgeon volume (1 case/year) was associated with increased complications [hazard ratio (HR) 1.35, 95% CI, 1.26-1.44, P < 0.0001), including dislocations (HR 1.31 95% CI, 1.04-1.65, P = 0.02) and several medical complications (P = 0.003) compared with surgeons performing at least 2 hip arthroplasties/year. Low hospital volume (<20 cases/year) was associated with increased complications (HR 1.11, 95% CI, 1.02-1.20, P = 0.02), including deep infections (HR 1.39, 95% CI, 1.02-1.89, P = 0.04) and certain medical complications (P = 0.02) compared with centers performing at least 50 hip arthroplasties/year. Hospital and surgeon volume were not associated with inpatient mortality (P = 0.98) or reoperations (P = 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: Providers who rarely perform hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures should defer these cases to surgeons and hospitals who regularly perform hip arthroplasty. Additional research is needed to further characterize the thresholds for "low volume" and to determine whether there is additional benefit afforded by high-volume surgeons and hospitals (or if it is adequate that providers performing hemiarthroplasty maintain volumes above relatively low thresholds as identified here). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Refining Risk Adjustment for the Proposed CMS Surgical Hip and Femur Fracture Treatment Bundled Payment Program.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has been considering the implementation of a mandatory bundled payment program, the Surgical Hip and Femur Fracture Treatment (SHFFT) model. However, bundled payments without appropriate risk adjustment may be inequitable to providers and may restrict access to care for certain patients. The SHFFT proposal includes adjustment using the Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) and geographic location. The goal of the current study was to identify and quantify patient factors that could improve risk adjustment for SHFFT bundled payments. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a 5% random sample of Medicare data from 2008 to 2012. A total of 27,898 patients were identified who met SHFFT inclusion criteria (DRG 480, 481, and 482). Reimbursement was determined for each patient over the bundle period (the surgical hospitalization and 90 days of post-discharge care). Multivariable regression was performed to test demographic factors, comorbidities, geographic location, and specific surgical procedures for associations with reimbursement. RESULTS: The average reimbursement was $23,632 ± $17,587. On average, reimbursements for male patients were $1,213 higher than for female patients (p < 0.01). Younger age was also associated with higher payments; e.g., reimbursement for those ≥85 years of age averaged $2,282 ± $389 less than for those aged 65 to 69 (p < 0.01). Most comorbidities were associated with higher reimbursement, but dementia was associated with lower payments, by an average of $2,354 ± $243 (p < 0.01). Twenty-two procedure codes are included in the bundle, and patients with the 3 most common codes accounted for 98% of the cases, with average reimbursement ranging from $22,527 to $24,033. Less common procedures varied by >$20,000 in average reimbursement (p < 0.01). DRGs also showed significant differences in reimbursement (p < 0.01); e.g., DRG 480 was reimbursed by an average of $10,421 ± $543 more than DRG 482. Payments varied significantly by state (p ≤ 0.01). Risk adjustment incorporating specific comorbidities demonstrated better performance than with use of DRG alone (r = 0.22 versus 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the proposed SHFFT bundled payment model should use more robust risk-adjustment methods to ensure that providers are reimbursed fairly and that patients retain access to care. At a minimum, payments should be adjusted for age, comorbidities, demographic factors, geographic location, and surgical procedure.

Complications Following Operatively Treated Ankle Fractures in Insulin- and Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetic Patients.

BACKGROUND: Diabetics with ankle fractures experience more complications than the general population, but it is unclear whether complications differ between type 1 and 2 diabetics and between insulin- and non-insulin-dependent diabetics. This study aims to determine if there is a difference in postoperative complication rates between these groups. METHODS: An administrative health care database from a large commercial insurer was queried to identify operatively treated ankle fractures in patients with type 1 (T1D), type 2 (T2D), type 2 insulin-dependent (T2ID), and type 2 non-insulin-dependent (T2NID) diabetes. Postoperative complications were identified to include postoperative stiffness, posttraumatic arthritis, amputation, implant removal, and infection. Subgroup analysis was performed to control for comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 20 703 closed and 2873 open operatively treated ankle fractures were identified. Patients with T1D experienced higher rates of amputation, postoperative infection, and total complications than patients with T2D (P < .05). Patients with T2ID experienced higher rates of amputation, infection, and total complications than those with T2NID (P < .0001). Subgroup analysis controlling for comorbidities showed a higher total complication rate for T1D compared with T2D in closed ankle fractures (P < .02) and for T2ID compared with T2NID in both open and closed ankle fractures (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T1D and T2ID have higher complication rates than patients with T2D and T2NID, respectively. Foot and ankle surgeons should be cautioned not to classify diabetics as one cohort and should use these findings to stratify risk among this patient population. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level III: Diagnostic.

Sanders II/III Calcaneus Fractures in Laborers: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis and Call for Effectiveness Research.

OBJECTIVE: This study compares the cost and cost-effectiveness of treatments options for Sanders II/III displaced intra-articular calcaneus fractures (DIACFs) in laborers. METHODS: Literature on Sanders type II and III fractures was reviewed to determine complication rates and utility values for each treatment option. Costs were calculated using Medicare reimbursement and implant prices from our institution. Monte Carlo simulations were used to analyze a decision tree to determine the cost and cost-effectiveness of each treatment from a societal perspective. Sensitivity analysis was performed on all variables. RESULTS: Minimally invasive open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) (sinus tarsi approach with 4 screws alone) was least expensive ($23,329), followed by nonoperative care ($24,530) and traditional ORIF using extensile lateral approach ($27,963) (P < 0.001); this result was most sensitive to time out of work. Available cost-effectiveness data were limited, but our analysis suggests that minimally invasive ORIF is a dominant strategy, and traditional ORIF is superior to nonoperative care (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $57,217/quality-adjusted life year). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that minimally invasive ORIF (sinus tarsi approach) is the least expensive option for managing Sanders II/III displaced intra-articular calcaneus fractures, followed by nonoperative care. Our cost-effectiveness results favor operative management but are highly sensitive to utility values and are weakened by scarce utility data. We therefore cannot currently recommend a treatment course based on value, and our primary conclusion must be that more extensive effectiveness research (ie, health-related quality of life data, not just functional outcomes) is desperately needed to elucidate the value of treatment options in this field. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patient Satisfaction Is Associated With Time With Provider But Not Clinic Wait Time Among Orthopedic Patients.

Clinic wait time is considered an important predictor of patient satisfaction. The goal of this study was to determine whether patient satisfaction among orthopedic patients is associated with clinic wait time and time with the provider. The authors prospectively enrolled 182 patients at their outpatient orthopedic clinic. Clinic wait time was defined as the time between patient check-in and being seen by the surgeon. Time spent with the provider was defined as the total time the patient spent in the examination room with the surgeon. The Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey was used to measure patient satisfaction. Factors associated with increased patient satisfaction included patient age and increased time with the surgeon (P=.024 and P=.037, respectively), but not clinic wait time (P=.625). Perceived wait time was subject to a high level of error, and most patients did not accurately report whether they had been waiting longer than 15 minutes to see a provider until they had waited at least 60 minutes (P=.007). If the results of the current study are generalizable, time with the surgeon is associated with patient satisfaction in orthopedic clinics, but wait time is not. Further, the study findings showed that patients in this setting did not have an accurate perception of actual wait time, with many patients underestimating the time they waited to see a provider. Thus, a potential strategy for improving patient satisfaction is to spend more time with each patient, even at the expense of increased wait time. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(1):43-48.].