Bibliometric Analysis of the English Musculoskeletal Literature over the Last 30 Years.

Publication and authorship are important in academia for career advancement, obtaining grants, and improved patient care. There has been a recent interest in bibliometric changes over time, especially regarding the gender gap. The purpose of this study was to explore bibliometric changes in the musculoskeletal literature. Bibliometric variables (number of authors, institutions, countries, pages, references, corresponding author position, author gender, geographic region of origin, and editorial board makeup) were analyzed for 5 basic science and 12 clinically oriented musculoskeletal journals from 1985 through 2016. Statistical analyses comprised bivariate analyses, multifactorial ANOVAs, and logistic regression analyses. A p < 0.005 was considered significant. Nearly, all variables increased over time. Asia had the highest number of authors and corresponding author positions, Australia/New Zealand the highest number of institutions and references, North America the highest number of pages, and Europe the highest number of countries. Those with a female first author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Likewise, those with a female corresponding author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Single-authored manuscripts decreased over time. The percentage of female first authors rose from 10.8% in 1985-1987 to 23.7% in 2015-2016. There were more female 1st authors in the basic science journals compared to the clinical journals (33.2% vs. 12.7%). Single-authored manuscripts were more likely to be written by males (5.1 vs. 2.4%) and decreased over time. The many differences by geographic region of origin likely reflect different socio/cultural attitudes regarding academia and research, as well as the gender composition of the disciplines by geographic region. Overall, there has been an increase in the number of female 1st and corresponding authors, editorial board members, and chief editors, indicating a slow but progressive narrowing of the gender gap.

Utility and Prognostic Ability of a Diagnostic Injection Before Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic injections are commonly utilized in the workup of painful total knee arthroplasties (TKA), particularly when the diagnosis remains unclear. However, current literature provides limited evidence regarding the utility and prognostic capability of anesthetic injections in this scenario. This study sought to establish the role of diagnostic injections in predicting successful revision TKA. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on 144 consecutive aseptic revision TKAs receiving diagnostic anesthetic injections. Instability (57.6%) and aseptic loosening (33.3%) comprised most revision etiologies. Patient-reported percentage pain relief after the injection was statistically correlated with KOOS JR, Knee Society Score, UCLA Activity Level, and satisfaction scores. RESULTS: About 74.3% (107/144) of revision TKAs reported >50% pain relief after injection. There were no differences in pain relief based on revision indication (P = .841). Improvement from preoperative activity level was greater in the >50% pain relief group (P = .024). Four-month patient satisfaction did not differ between patients who reported >50% and ≤50% pain relief (67% vs. 66%, P = .130). About 64% of patients who reported >50% pain relief were satisfied at minimum 1-year follow-up, compared with only 47% of those who reported ≤50% pain relief after diagnostic injection (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Study results show that patients reporting >50% pain relief after diagnostic injection have improvements in activity level and maintain greater satisfaction at minimum 1-year than those reporting ≤50% pain relief. Expectations for improvement after revision TKA should be tempered if diagnostic anesthetic injection yields minimal subjective pain relief.

Peroneal nerve decompression: institutional review and meta-analysis to identify prognostic associations with favorable and unfavorable surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVEA common cause of peroneal neuropathy is compression near the fibular head. Studies demonstrate excellent outcomes after decompression but include few cases (range 15-60 patients). Consequently, attempts to define predictors of good outcomes are limited. Here, the authors combine their institutional outcomes with those in the literature to identify predictors of good outcomes after peroneal nerve decompression.METHODSThe authors searched their institutional electronic medical records to identify all peroneal nerve decompressions performed in the period between December 1, 2012, and September 30, 2016, and created an IRB-approved database. They also conducted a MEDLINE and literature search to identify articles discussing surgical decompression. All data were combined by meta-analysis to identify the factors associated with a favorable outcome, which was defined as improvement in preoperative symptoms. Patients were analyzed in the aggregate and by presentation (pain, paresthesias, weakness, foot drop). The factors evaluated included age, sex, body mass index, diabetes, smoking status, previous knee or lumbar spine surgery, preoperative symptom duration, and etiology. A meta-analysis was completed for any factor evaluated in at least three data sets.RESULTSTwenty-one institutional cases had sufficient data for review. The follow-up among this group was long: median 29 months, range 12-52 months. On aggregate analysis of the data, only diabetes was significantly associated with unfavorable outcomes after decompression (p = 0.05). A trend toward worse outcomes was seen in smokers presenting with pain (p = 0.06). Outcomes were not affected by presentation.An additional 115 cases in the literature had extractable data for meta-analysis, and other associations were seen. Preoperative symptom duration longer than 12 months was associated with unfavorable outcomes (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08-0.65). Patients presenting with paresthesias or hypesthesia demonstrated a trend toward more unfavorable outcomes when operated on more than 6 months after symptom onset (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13-1.06). Even after the meta-analysis, outcomes did not vary with an advanced age (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.24-1.98) or with patient sex (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.42-3.06).CONCLUSIONSThe authors provide their institutional data in combination with published data regarding outcomes after peroneal nerve decompression. Outcomes are typically favorable and generally unaffected by the type of symptoms preoperatively, especially if the patient is nondiabetic and preoperative symptom duration is less than 12 months. Patients with paresthesias may benefit from surgery within 6 months after onset. Smoking may adversely affect surgical outcomes. Finally, an advanced age does not adversely affect outcomes, and older patients should be considered for surgery.