What is the long-term survivorship, complication profile, and patient reported outcomes after Birmingham hip resurfacing?

Introduction: When indicated, Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) presents a viable alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA), but there remain questions about the long-term outcomes of BHR. Therefore, we asked: 1) what are the long-term patient-reported outcomes and 2) survivorship rates following BHR; 3) what are the causes for revision surgery after BHR? and 4) how have these outcomes compared to THA at long-term follow-up. Methods: A query of PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane in September 2023 was performed. Articles were included if they reported BHR survivorship rates at ≥10 years. Survivorship was defined as an all-cause revision of any BHR component. This review encompasses 26 articles, totaling 13,103 hips. Mean follow-up ranged from 6.0 to 20.9 years, but each study had at least a subgroup analysis for ≥10-year follow-up. Results: Five studies compared preoperative and postoperative PROs for BHR, with four reporting improvement in at least one PRO after 10-year follow-up. Overall, survivorship rates ranged from 83% to 100% across diverse long-term timeframes, with 25 of 26 studies reporting 10-year survivorship rates greater than 87%. The primary reasons for revisions were implant loosening (22%), adverse reactions to metal debris (21.2%), and fractures of any kind (17.2%). In the six studies that compared BHR to THA, long-term survivorship was similar while BHR exhibited slightly superior activity levels. Conclusion: The findings from this study suggested favorable long-term survivorship and postoperative outcomes of BHR. In studies comparing long-term BHR and THA, survivorship was comparable, with BHR potentially providing enhanced postoperative activity levels.

An In-Depth Analysis of Public and Private Research Funding in Orthopaedic Surgery from 2015 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the trends and patterns of research funding can aid in enhancing growth and innovation in orthopaedic research. We sought to analyze financial trends in public orthopaedic surgery funding and characterize trends in private funding distribution among orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals to explore potential disparities across orthopaedic subspecialties. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of private and public orthopaedic research funding from 2015 to 2021 using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORTER through the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, respectively. Institutions receiving funds from both the NIH and the private sector were classified separately as publicly funded and privately funded. Research payment characteristics were categorized according to their respective orthopaedic fellowship subspecialties. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and Mann-Kendall tests were employed. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Over the study period, $348,428,969 in private and $701,078,031 in public research payments were reported. There were 2,229 unique surgeons receiving funding at 906 different institutions. The data showed that a total of 2,154 male orthopaedic surgeons received $342,939,782 and 75 female orthopaedic surgeons received $5,489,187 from 198 different private entities. The difference in the median payment size between male and female orthopaedic surgeons was not significant. The top 1% of all practicing orthopaedic surgeons received 99% of all private funding in 2021. The top 20 publicly and top 20 privately funded institutions received 77% of the public and 37% of the private funding, respectively. Private funding was greatest (31.5%) for projects exploring adult reconstruction. CONCLUSION: While the amount of public research funding was more than double the amount of private research funding, the distribution of public research funding was concentrated in fewer institutions when compared with private research funding. This suggests the formation of orthopaedic centers of excellence (CoEs), which are programs that have high concentrations of talent and resources. Furthermore, the similar median payment by gender is indicative of equitable payment size. In the future, orthopaedic funding should follow a distribution model that aligns with the existing approach, giving priority to a nondiscriminatory stance regarding gender, and allocate funds toward CoEs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Securing research funding is vital for driving innovation in orthopaedic surgery, which is crucial for enhancing clinical interventions. Thus, understanding the patterns and distribution of research funding can help orthopaedic surgeons tailor their future projects to better align with current funding trends, thereby increasing the likelihood of securing support for their work.

Women's Representation as Principal Investigators Among Pediatric Orthopaedic Clinical Trials: An Analysis of ClinicalTrials.Gov.

INTRODUCTION: Despite recent efforts to increase the participation of women in orthopaedic surgery, there remains a gender gap, particularly when compared with other medical specialties. Acting as a principal investigator (PI) in a clinical trial can give physicians notable exposure and national recognition, which can improve their chances of promotion and tenure. This study aims to assess the proportion of women serving as PIs in pediatric orthopaedic clinical trials, examine associated trial characteristics, and explore geographic distribution. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of clinical trials was conducted using data from the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. Specific search terms were used to identify pediatric orthopaedic trials. Data on trial characteristics, including phase, status, funding source, and intervention type, were collected. PI sex was determined using Genderize.io, an application program interface that predicts the sex of individuals based on their name, and the geographic distribution of women PIs was examined. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2022, women PIs increased from zero to 26.86%. The United States saw no significant increase (ß = 1.553; P = 0.125), but international trials did (ß = 2.845; P = 0.008). Women PIs led more active/completed trials and trials with behavioral/other interventions. Geographic analysis showed higher representation in North America (38.47%), especially the Northeast (28.17%) and West (25.35%). The United States had 28.74% women PIs, with California (15.49%) leading. CONCLUSION: Progress toward gender parity in pediatric orthopaedic research is evident; however, disparities still exist. Efforts to provide additional research opportunities for women in orthopaedics may be crucial in attracting and retaining diverse talent in the field. Targeted initiatives may have potential in achieving equal representation in orthopaedics.

Incidence of Complications After Tibial Tubercle Osteotomy and Tibial Tubercle Osteotomy With Distalization.

BACKGROUND: Tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO) is a well-established surgical treatment option for patellofemoral instability and pain. TTO with distalization (TTO-D) is indicated for patients with patellofemoral instability, patellar malalignment, and patella alta. The current literature demonstrates several complications that may be associated with TTO, with reportedly higher rates of complications associated with TTO-D. PURPOSE: To analyze and compare complication rates after TTO without distalization (TTO-ND) and TTO-D and assess risk factors associated with complications. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All skeletally mature patients who underwent TTO with or without distalization by a single surgeon between September 2014 and May 2023 with a minimum of 6 months of clinical follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patient factors, surgical indications, perioperative data, and complications were collected via a retrospective review of electronic medical records. Concomitant procedures were categorized as intra-articular, extra-articular, and osteotomies. RESULTS: A total of 251 TTOs (117 TTO-D, 134 TTO-ND) were included in the study group. Postoperative complications were observed in 15 operations (6%), with arthrofibrosis as the most common complication (10 operations [4%]). TTO-D and TTO-ND had similar rates of complication (5% vs 7%; P = .793). Clinical nonunion was observed in 3 operations (3%) in the TTO-D cohort and 1 operation (1%) in the TTO-ND cohort. In the TTO-D cohort, concomitant intra-articular procedures were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of complications in a univariate model. In the TTO-ND cohort, an increased tourniquet time was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of complications in a univariate model. For all TTOs as well as the TTO-D and TTO-ND cohorts, there were no significant associations between patient or surgical variables in a multivariate model. CONCLUSION: TTO with and without distalization is a safe procedure with low rates of complication. TTO-D was not associated with a higher rate of complications compared with TTO-ND. There was no association between complications and surgical variables for TTO procedures.

High Prevalence of Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders and Limited Evidence-based Ergonomics in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control defines work-related musculoskeletal disorders as disorders of the nerves, muscles, tendons, joints, spinal discs, and cartilage that are caused or exacerbated by the environment or nature of work. Previous meta-analyses have characterized work-related musculoskeletal disorders among interventionists, general surgeons, and other surgical subspecialties, but prevalence estimates, prognosis, and ergonomic considerations vary by study and surgical specialty. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the career prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in orthopaedic surgeons? (2) What is the treatment prevalence associated with work-related musculoskeletal disorders in orthopaedic surgeons? (3) What is the disability burden of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in orthopaedic surgeons? (4) What is the scope of orthopaedic surgical ergonomic assessments and interventions? METHODS: A systematic review of English-language studies from PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was performed in December 2022 and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies that presented prevalence estimates of work-related musculoskeletal disorders or assessed surgical ergonomics in orthopaedic surgery were included. Reviews, case reports, gray literature (conference abstracts and preprints), and studies with mixed-surgeon (nonorthopaedic) populations were excluded. The search yielded 5603 abstracts; 24 survey-based studies with 4876 orthopaedic surgeons (mean age 48 years; 79% of surgeons were men) were included for an analysis of work-related musculoskeletal disorders, and 18 articles were included for a descriptive synthesis of ergonomic assessment. Quality assessment using the Joanna Briggs Institute Tool revealed that studies had a low to moderate risk of bias, largely because of self-reporting survey-based methodology. Because of considerable heterogeneity and risk of bias, prevalence outcomes were not pooled and instead are presented as ranges (mean I 2 = 91.3%). RESULTS: The career prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in orthopaedic surgeons ranged from 37% to 97%. By anatomic location, the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the head and neck ranged from 4% to 74%; back ranged from 9% to 77%; forearm, wrist, and hand ranged from 12% to 54%; elbow ranged from 3% to 28%; shoulder ranged from 3% to 34%; hip and thigh ranged from 1% to 10%; knee and lower leg ranged from 1% to 31%; and foot and ankle ranged from 4% to 25%. Of orthopaedic surgeons reporting work-related musculoskeletal disorders, 9% to 33% had a leave of absence, practice restriction or modification, or early retirement, and 27% to 83% received some form of treatment. Orthopaedic surgeons experienced biomechanical, cardiovascular, neuromuscular, and metabolic stress during procedures. Interventions to improve orthopaedic surgical ergonomics have been limited, but have included robotic assistance, proper visualization aids, appropriate use of power tools, and safely minimizing lead apron use. In hip and knee arthroplasty, robotic assistance was the most effective in improving posture and reducing caloric expenditure. In spine surgery, proper use of surgical loupes was the most effective in improving posture. CONCLUSION: Although the reported ranges of our main findings were wide, even on the low end of the reported ranges, work-related musculoskeletal disability among orthopaedic surgeons appears to be a substantial concern. We recommend that orthopaedic residency training programs incorporate surgical ergonomics or work injury lectures, workshops, and film review (alongside existing film review of surgical skills) into their curricula. We suggest hospitals engage in shared decision-making with surgeons through anonymous needs assessment surveys to implement wellness programs specific to surgeons' musculoskeletal needs. We urge institutions to assess surgeon ergonomics during routine quality assessment of novel surgical instruments and workflows. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Understanding the use of artificial intelligence for implant analysis in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms aimed at reviewing radiographs after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). This disruptive technology is particularly promising in the context of preoperative planning for revision TJA. Yet, the efficacy of AI algorithms regarding TJA implant analysis has not been examined comprehensively. METHODS: PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar electronic databases were utilized to identify all studies evaluating AI algorithms related to TJA implant analysis between 1 January 2000, and 27 February 2023 (PROSPERO study protocol registration: CRD42023403497). The mean methodological index for non-randomized studies score was 20.4 ± 0.6. We reported the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and area under the curve (AUC) for the performance of each outcome measure. RESULTS: Our initial search yielded 374 articles, and a total of 20 studies with three main use cases were included. Sixteen studies analyzed implant identification, two addressed implant failure, and two addressed implant measurements. Each use case had a median AUC and accuracy above 0.90 and 90%, respectively, indicative of a well-performing AI algorithm. Most studies failed to include explainability methods and conduct external validity testing. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the promising role of AI in recognizing implants in TJA. Preliminary studies have shown strong performance in implant identification, implant failure, and accurately measuring implant dimensions. Future research should follow a standardized guideline to develop and train models and place a strong emphasis on transparency and clarity in reporting results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Enteric glial hub cells coordinate intestinal motility.

Enteric glia are the predominant cell type in the enteric nervous system yet their identities and roles in gastrointestinal function are not well classified. Using our optimized single nucleus RNA-sequencing method, we identified distinct molecular classes of enteric glia and defined their morphological and spatial diversity. Our findings revealed a functionally specialized biosensor subtype of enteric glia that we call "hub cells." Deletion of the mechanosensory ion channel PIEZO2 from adult enteric glial hub cells, but not other subtypes of enteric glia, led to defects in intestinal motility and gastric emptying in mice. These results provide insight into the multifaceted functions of different enteric glial cell subtypes in gut health and emphasize that therapies targeting enteric glia could advance the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases.

Access to Hepatitis C Treatment during and after Incarceration in New Jersey, United States: A Qualitative Study.

Despite effective antiviral therapy for hepatitis C virus (HCV), people who are incarcerated and those returning to the community face challenges in obtaining HCV treatment. We aimed to explore facilitators and barriers to HCV treatment during and after incarceration. From July-November 2020 and June-July 2021, we conducted 27 semi-structured interviews with residents who were formerly incarcerated in jail or prison. The interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the study sample and analyzed qualitative data thematically using an iterative process. Participants included five women and 22 men who self-identified as White (n = 14), Latinx (n = 8), and Black (n = 5). During incarceration, a key facilitator was having sufficient time to complete HCV treatment, and the corresponding barrier was delaying treatment initiation. After incarceration, a key facilitator was connecting with reentry programs (e.g., halfway house or rehabilitation program) that coordinated the treatment logistics and provided support with culturally sensitive staff. Barriers included a lack of insurance coverage and higher-ranking priorities (e.g., managing more immediate reentry challenges such as other comorbidities, employment, housing, and legal issues), low perceived risk of harm related to HCV, and active substance use. Incarceration and reentry pose distinct facilitators and challenges to accessing HCV treatment. These findings signal the need for interventions to improve engagement in HCV care both during and after incarceration to assist in closing the gap of untreated people living with HCV.

Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: As the demand for total joint arthroplasty continues to grow, patients increasingly turn to internet sources for accessible orthopaedic health information. We sought to evaluate the readability of online hip and knee arthroplasty patient education materials (PEMs). METHODS: Our systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-P guidelines (PROSPERO registration of the study protocol: CRD42022358872, September 19th, 2022). PubMed, EBSCOhost, Medline, and Google Scholar electronic databases were utilized to identify all studies evaluating online PEMs related to total joint arthroplasty between January 1, 2000, and August 1, 2022. The quality of studies was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute scale. RESULTS: Our initial search yielded 360 publications which were then screened for appropriate studies aligned with our review's purpose. A total of eleven cross-sectional studies were included. The total sample size across the studies consisted of 662 PEMs. Five studies evaluated professional or academic orthopaedic websites, six evaluated PEMs through web engines, and three evaluated apps or commercial websites. Most included studies found PEMs to be well above the recommended 6th-grade reading level. CONCLUSION: Arthroplasty PEMs produced by orthopaaedic websites, web searches, and apps have readability scores well above the recommended levels. Given the importance of health literacy on patient outcomes and satisfaction, work needs to be done to improve the readability of these materials.

Family-Provided Health Care for Children With Special Health Care Needs.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Many children with special health care needs (CSHCN) receive health care at home from family members, but the extent of this care is poorly quantified. This study's goals were to create a profile of CSHCN who receive family-provided health care and to quantify the extent of such care. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2009-2010 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs, a nationally representative sample of 40 242 parents/guardians of CSHCN. Outcomes included sociodemographic characteristics of CSHCN and their households, time spent by family members providing health care at home to CSHCN, and the total economic cost of such care. Caregiving hours were assessed at (1) the cost of hiring an alternative caregiver (the "replacement cost" approach), and (2) caregiver wages (the "foregone earnings" approach). RESULTS: Approximately 5.6 million US CSHCN received 1.5 billion hours annually of family-provided health care. Replacement with a home health aide would have cost an estimated $35.7 billion or $6400 per child per year in 2015 dollars ($11.6 billion or $2100 per child per year at minimum wage). The associated foregone earnings were $17.6 billion or $3200 per child per year. CSHCN most likely to receive the greatest amount of family-provided health care at home were ages 0 to 5 years, were Hispanic, lived below the federal poverty level, had no parents/guardians who had finished high school, had both public and private insurance, and had severe conditions/problems. CONCLUSIONS: US families provide a significant quantity of health care at home to CSHCN, representing a substantial economic cost.