Evaluation of Patient Expectations and Outcomes after Distal Radius Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Patient expectations influence patient-reported outcomes after musculoskeletal injuries. The goal of this study is to determine how pretreatment expectations correlate with outcomes in patients with distal radius fractures. METHODS: Seventy-five patients with an isolated distal radius fracture were prospectively enrolled into nonoperative and operative cohorts. The Trauma Expectation Factor-Trauma Outcome Measure (TEF-TOM) score was the primary outcome measure. Trauma Expectation Factor scores were recorded at the time of enrollment, and TOM scores were recorded at 3, 6, and 12 months. Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (qDASH) and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) scores were also recorded. RESULTS: Trauma Outcome Measure scores at all time points were worse than expected (P < .01). Expectations were higher for patients younger than 65 years than for the 65+ group (P = .02). In patients aged 65+ years, mean TOM at 3 months was not significantly different than expected (P = .11) but decreased by 6 (P = .04) and 12 months (P < .01). Baseline TEF and TEF-TOM scores were not significantly different between operative and nonoperative groups (P = .37). Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and PRWE scores were not significantly different between age or treatment groups at the final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The overall treatment of distal radial injuries in our study did not meet patient expectations. Patients aged 65 years or older had lower expectations but were not able to predict their outcomes better than patients aged <65 years. There were no differences in TEF or TOM by treatment method. Patients demonstrated improved functional outcomes (qDASH/PRWE) at all time points regardless of age and treatment method.

Patient Comprehension of Operative Instructions With a Paper Handout Versus a Video: A Prospective Randomized Control Trial.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a video versus that of a paper handout for explaining operative instructions for hand and upper extremity surgeries to patients. We aimed to compare patient performance using a knowledge-based questionnaire. In addition, we aimed to compare how helpful patients found their assigned operative instructions. METHODS: This was a randomized trial of 60 patients undergoing same-day hand and upper extremity surgeries. The patients were randomized to receive educational material outlining operative instructions, either in the form of a video link or a paper handout. At the first postoperative visit, the patients' comprehension of the content was evaluated using a questionnaire. The primary outcomes included the number of questions answered correctly and patient-reported evaluation of the provided instructions on a scale of 1-5. RESULTS: Patients who received video instructions scored higher in the questionnaire than those in the paper instructions group (paper: 58% correct; video: 76% correct). Moreover, patients in the video group were significantly more likely to answer questions pertaining to opioid use correctly. A higher proportion of patients in the video group than in the paper group found the information "extremely" or "very" helpful. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that the patients demonstrated greater comprehension of the operative instructions when these were administered in a video format than when these were administered as a printed handout. In particular, the results suggest that video-based education specifically improves patients' comprehension of proper opioid use. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There appears to be utility in implementing videos for patient education purposes, particularly in the setting of operative instructions for same-day surgical procedures.

The Effect of Thumb Carpometacarpal Joint Corticosteroid Injections on Outcomes Following Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies suggest steroid injections may affect infection rates following thumb carpometacarpal joint (CMCJ) arthroplasty. However, it is unclear whether injections prior to CMCJ arthroplasty affect functional outcomes, primarily Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (qDASH). METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients who underwent thumb CMCJ arthroplasty from 2015 to 2019. Patients who had qDASH scores reported preoperatively, and at 5 and 11 months postoperatively were included. Charts were reviewed for the presence or absence of prior corticosteroid injection to the CMCJ and complications. Delta qDASH was calculated by subtracting the patients' postoperative qDASH scores from the preoperative qDASH scores. RESULTS: In all, 350 CMCJ arthroplasty patients were identified, 177 who had received at least 1 steroid injection and 173 who were steroid-naïve. No significant differences existed in delta qDASH scores postoperatively between the injection and naïve groups at 5 months (28.5 vs 28.6) or 11 months (31.2 vs 31.9). Whereas there were no significant differences in rates of major complications between the 2 groups, minor complications were higher in the injection group (16.4% vs 9.2%). Patients who received more than 3 injections did not have worse 5-month or 11-month delta qDASH scores or complication rates than those with fewer than 3. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative CMCJ steroid injection status does not affect major complication rates or functional outcomes following CMCJ arthroplasty. However, injections increase the rate of minor complications. The qDASH and complication rates following CMCJ arthroplasty are not affected by receiving greater than 3 injections preoperatively.

The Efficacy of Intra-Articular Versus Extra-Articular Corticosteroid Injections in the Thumb Carpometacarpal Joint.

Purpose: This study evaluated whether the location of steroid deposition (intra-articular vs extra-articular) for thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) joint arthritis affects clinical outcomes. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 102 hands (82 patients) with thumb CMC joint arthritis. Patients received a CMC joint injection with Triamcinolone and radiopaque contrast. Wrist radiographs were used to visualize the injection location. Patients completed Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) questionnaires and visual analog scale (VAS; scale, 1-100) pain scores before injection and then at 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months after injection. Generalized linear regression models were constructed to identify variables associated with clinical outcomes. Results: The rate of intra-articular injection was 80%. No differences were found between the 2 groups in preinjection DASH or VAS scores. After 1 week, both the intra-articular and extra-articular groups showed improvements of DASH (14.2 and 11.2, respectively) and VAS (15.5 and 15.0, respectively) scores. Although both groups were worse at 3 months, the intra-articular group had significantly lower DASH (26.7 vs 37.5, respectively) and VAS (26.5 vs 39.0, respectively) scores than the extra-articular group. There were no differences between the intra-articular and extra-articular groups for DASH (33.8 vs 42.5, respectively) or VAS scores at 6 months. The intra-articular group maintained significant improvements in outcomes for up to 6 months, while the extra-articular group only maintained them for up to 1 month. The Eaton-Littler classification was found to be a predictor of DASH and VAS scores at 3 and 6 months. Conclusions: Intra-articular injection in the thumb CMC joint provides significantly greater pain relief and functional improvement compared to extra-articular injection at 3 months. Inadvertent extra-articular injection is common and appears to provide short-term pain relief and functional improvement. Some patients receiving intra-articular injections continue experiencing relief for up to 6 months. Type of study/level of evidence: Therapeutic II.

Social Media and the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process.

INTRODUCTION: Social media use in the residency application process has been on the rise, yet applicant and program director (PD) perspectives in orthopaedic residency have not been explored in depth. Our objective is to evaluate perspectives of orthopaedic residency applicants and PDs on social media usage and its impact on the residency application process. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey study conducted in 2021 with two related, anonymous surveys sent to residency applicants and PDs. One hundred thirteen of 562 (20.1%) applicants to our institution and 29 of 148 (19.6%) PDs listed on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website responded to our survey and were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Applicants reported learning about residency programs through Instagram (69.2%), the program website (58.9%), and Doximity (29.9%). Thirty-four percent of applicants reported social media influencing their rank list, with non-training-related posts being the most impactful. PDs reported that 97% of their programs have an official web page, 41% have an active Instagram site, 27% have a Twitter account but none regularly update Doximity. Just over 48% of PDs reported institutional support for online content creation. Financial investment varied, with 35% reporting no spending, and 24% spending over $2501. In response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) restrictions, 79% of PDs reported generating increased social media content. DISCUSSION: Social media provides a low-cost but far-reaching opportunity for PDs to recruit residents and highlight their respective programs. Social media content should display the culture and lifestyle of the program, with consistency in content creation. PDs should also ensure accuracy on external sites such as Doximity.

Perspectives on the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the cancellation of away rotations and other experiences fundamental to orthopaedic surgery residency application. Limited information is available on the experiences of applicants and program directors (PDs) during the COVID-19 pandemic residency application cycle. This study aimed to evaluate the current perspectives of applicants and PDs regarding the orthopaedic surgery residency application process. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study using 2 independent but similar surveys that addressed multiple aspects of the application process during the COVID-19 pandemic, including perceived effect of virtual experiences. Between February and March 2021, the surveys were distributed to orthopaedic surgery applicants and orthopaedic residency PDs. RESULTS: In total, 113 applicants (20.1%) and 29 PDs (19.6%) completed the survey. Applicants applied to 97.6 programs and received 13.3 interviews. They participated in 2.4 virtual away rotations. In total, 79.3% of programs reported offering some form of virtual opportunity, including virtual away rotations (24.0%), virtual happy hours (64.0%), and virtual conferences (64.0%). Programs offering virtual away rotations hosted 46.8 rotators and only invited back 54.5% for an interview. Applicants were most concerned about the lack of away rotations, the interview, and networking during this cycle, and 51% reported less confidence in matching. The most important factors for influencing applicant rank lists were perceived happiness of residents, resident camaraderie, and geographic location. However, residency program social events were not well replicated in a virtual setting. DISCUSSION: The COVID-19 pandemic presented new challenges for applicants and PDs. Applicants had less clinical exposure and received less interview invites after virtual away rotations. Despite applying to more programs, applicants received fewer interviews than in previous years. The virtual experiences adopted in this cycle did not adequately replicate the social factors that applicants found most important when ranking a program. Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, PDs most highly valued away rotation performance, clinical rotation performance, and board examination scores when offering interviews.

Wire Extrusion After Flexor Tendon Repair with a Multifilament Stainless Steel Cable-Crimp Suture System: A Case Report.

CASE: We report the case of a 22-year-old man with a ruptured flexor tendon repair associated with wound drainage. The patient subsequently underwent flexor tendon revision with a multifilament stainless steel cable-crimp suture system. Two years after the revision repair, a blister ruptured over the patient's operative site, exposing the stainless steel wire from the revision repair. The wire was removed, and the patient regained full flexion. CONCLUSIONS: As extrusion of metallic suture material from the skin represents a complication, surgeons should be prepared to recognize this rare complication and to preoperatively counsel patients as to this risk.

Patient Perceptions of COVID-19 Precautions and Their Effects on Experiences With Hand Surgery.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate patient perceptions of COVID-19 precautions and how these precautions have affected their hand and upper extremity surgery experience. METHODS: We sent an 18-item survey to 1,213 patients who underwent elective hand and upper extremity surgery at 1 academic institution from October 2020 to January 2021. The survey consisted of questions related to patient demographics, treatment delays due to COVID-19, and patient perceptions of COVID-19 precautions. Descriptive statistics were performed to analyze the survey responses. Responses for patients aged 18-50 and 51+ were compared using a chi-square analysis for categorical variables and a Student t-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: Out of 1,213 invitations, 384 survey respondents completed the survey (31.6%). Of the respondents, 16.8% reported delaying medical treatment for an average of 123.2 days because of COVID-19. The preventative measures were found to be adequate by 95% of patients. Only 2.6% of patients reported experiencing surgical delays due to preoperative COVID-19 testing or other COVID-19-related precautions. COVID-19 testing was seen as necessary by 88% of patients, and 74% did not find COVID-19 testing to be a barrier to their surgery. Patients aged 51+ were more likely to delay seeking medical treatment than younger patients (19.3% vs 9.1%, respectively). Furthermore, those that did delay seeking treatment waited longer on average than their younger counterparts (136.1 vs 72.9 days, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, patients undergoing hand and upper extremity surgery typically do not find COVID-19 precautions to be a significant barrier to care and understand their importance. Despite this, many patients, particularly older ones, are delaying medical care for extended periods of time. It is important for hand surgeons to acknowledge their patients' perspectives and work to educate patients on evolving surgical safety guidelines. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patient perspectives of current COVID-19 precautions can help inform hand surgeons on areas for continued patient education.

Coding Practices in Hand Surgery and Their Relationship to Surgeon Compensation Structure.

Purpose: To evaluate the coding practices of hand surgeons in the American Society for Surgery of the Hand with respect to practice compensation structure using common, representative hand surgery cases. Methods: We developed a survey of demographic factors and 4 commonly encountered hypothetical hand surgery cases. This survey was emailed to the members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Respondents were asked to code these cases using prepopulated applicable Current Procedural Terminology codes or any other codes of their choosing. The membership responses were then compared with those of 3 independent orthopedic coders. Results: Of the 4,477 invitations sent, a total of 421 (9.4%) respondents completed the survey. There was notable heterogeneity in the Current Procedural Terminology code choices for the trapeziectomy and distal radius fracture cases. Physicians with a collections-based model coded for significantly higher work-related value units on average compared with the fixed salary- and relative value unit-based physicians for the trapeziectomy case (14.41 vs 13.65 and 13.67, respectively; P < .05). The 3 independent coders all chose a single Current Procedural Terminology code for the carpal tunnel release, distal radius fracture, and scaphoid nonunion cases. The percentages of physician responses that selected only these codes were 84.6% (carpal tunnel release), 61.0% (distal radius fracture), and 73.6% (scaphoid nonunion). Physicians were less likely to code in line with the independent coders for the distal radius fracture case compared with other cases, particularly those physicians with a collections-based model. Conclusions: The compensation model may be associated with coding practices for more complicated hand cases. The additional work-related value units potentially billed can quickly accumulate for frequently performed procedures. This wide variation supports a need for more frequent and accessible communication and education on coding practices in hand surgery. Clinical relevance: Improved communication and education regarding appropriate coding practices as well as easily accessible reference material may assist in minimizing coding discrepancies for surgical hand procedures.