The impact of prior authorization review on orthopaedic subspecialty care: a prospective multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prior authorization review (PAR), in the United States, is a process that was initially intended to focus on hospital admissions and costly high-acuity care. Over time, payors have broadened the scope of PAR to include imaging studies, prescriptions, and routine treatment. The potential detrimental effect of PAR on health care has recently been brought into the limelight, but its impact on orthopedic subspecialty care remains unclear. This study investigated the denial rate, the duration of care delay, and the administrative burden of PAR on orthopedic subspecialty care. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter study was performed analyzing the PAR process. Orthopedic shoulder and/or sports subspecialty practices from 6 states monitored payor-mandated PAR during the course of providing routine patient care. The insurance carrier (traditional Medicare, managed Medicare, Medicaid, commercial, worker's compensation, or government payor [ie, Tricare, Veterans Affairs]), location of service, rate of approval or denial, time to approval or denial, and administrative time required to complete process were all recorded and evaluated. RESULTS: Of 1065 total PAR requests, we found a 1.5% (16/1065) overall denial rate for advanced imaging or surgery when recommended by an orthopedic subspecialist. Commercial and Medicaid insurance resulted in a small but statistically significantly higher rate of denial compared to traditional Medicare, managed Medicare, worker's compensation, or governmental insurance (P < .001). The average administrative time spent on a single PAR was 19.5 minutes, and patients waited an average of 2.2 days to receive initial approval. Managed Medicare, commercial insurance, worker's compensation, and Medicaid required approximately 3-4 times more administrative time to process a PAR than to traditional Medicare or other governmental insurance (P < .001). After controlling for the payor, we identified a significant difference in approval or denial based on geographic location (P < .001). An appeal resulted in a relatively low rate of subsequent denial (20%). However, approximately a third of all appeals remained in limbo for 30 days or more after the initial request. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest prospective analysis to date of the impact of PAR on orthopedic subspecialty care in the United States. Nearly all PAR requests are eventually approved when recommended by orthopedic subspecialists, despite requiring significant resource use and delaying care. Current PAR practices constitute an unnecessary process that increases administrative burden and negatively impacts access to orthopedic subspecialty care. As health care shifts to value-based care, PAR should be called into question, as it does not seem to add value but potentially negatively impacts cost and timeliness of care.

Cubital Tunnel Syndrome.

Cubital tunnel syndrome is the most common cause of symptomatic ulnar neuropathy. The unique anatomic course of the ulnar nerve around the elbow makes it particularly vulnerable at a location far from its terminal destination. The natural progression of cubital tunnel syndrome allows patients who have mild symptoms to be adequately treated nonsurgically. Minor changes in activity combined with appropriate splinting may acceptably alleviate symptoms. Surgical intervention is recommended for patients who have more severe symptoms. Current data confirm that in situ ulnar nerve decompression, partial medial epicondylectomy, and anterior transposition result in equal success rates; however, more invasive techniques may increase the risk for complications. If primary surgical intervention fails, revision surgery can provide good results. Modern techniques for revision surgery incorporate the placement of a protective circumferential barrier around the pathologic nerve to mitigate cicatrix formation. Although several attractive options are currently available for the management of cubital tunnel syndrome, further research is necessary to guide treatment.

Biomechanical effects of rotator interval closure in shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Subscapularis dysfunction remains a significant problem after shoulder arthroplasty. Published techniques have variable recommendations for placing a rotator interval closing suture in attempts to off-load the subscapularis repair site, the implications of which have yet to be examined in the literature. The goals of this study were to investigate the biomechanical benefit of the rotator interval closing suture on the subscapularis repair strength and to analyze the effect on shoulder range of motion. METHODS: Sixteen matched cadaveric shoulders underwent a subscapularis tenotomy and shoulder arthroplasty. The subscapularis tenotomy was repaired, and motion at physiologic torsional force was recorded. One of each matched pair was randomly assigned to receive an additional rotator interval closure suture. Each specimen then underwent a standardized cyclic loading with measurement of gap formation and load to failure. RESULTS: The rotator interval closing suture significantly increased the ultimate load to failure of the subscapularis repair (452 N vs. 219 N; P = .002) and decreased gap formation at the subscapularis repair site. Measurement of the shoulder motion showed no significant difference between shoulders with and without the rotator interval closing suture. DISCUSSION: We report the additional biomechanical benefit that the rotator interval closing suture provides to the subscapularis repair site after shoulder arthroplasty. This suture acts to improve the load to failure of the subscapularis repair and to decrease gap formation under cyclic load. Furthermore, it does not detrimentally affect shoulder external rotation or overall arc of rotation. Our findings support the application of this off-loading technique after subscapularis repair during shoulder arthroplasty.

Management of rotator cuff tears.

Every year approximately 18 million Americans report shoulder pain, a large percentage of which are a result of rotator cuff disease. Rotator cuff tear progression can be difficult to predict. Factors associated with tear enlargement include increasing symptoms, advanced age, involvement of 2 or more tendons, and rotator cable lesion. Nonsurgical treatment can be effective for patients with full-thickness tears. When conservative treatment fails, surgical repair provides a reliable treatment alternative. Recurrent tears after surgery can compromise outcomes, particularly for younger patients with physically demanding occupations. Revision surgery provides satisfactory results for those with symptomatic re-tears. If the tear is deemed irreparable, addressing concomitant biceps pathology or performing partial repairs can reliably improve pain and potentially reverse pseudoparalysis. The reverse shoulder arthroplasty has limited indications in the setting of rotator cuff tears and should be reserved for patients with painful pseudoparalysis and associated arthropathy.

Comparison of screw trajectory on stability of oblique scaphoid fractures: a mechanical study.

PURPOSE: To determine whether a screw placed perpendicular to the fracture line in an oblique scaphoid fracture will provide fixation strength that is comparable with that of a centrally placed screw. METHODS: Oblique osteotomies were made along the dorsal sulcus of 8 matched pairs of cadaveric scaphoids. One scaphoid from each pair was randomized to receive a screw placed centrally down the long axis. In the other scaphoid, a screw was placed perpendicular to the osteotomy. Each scaphoid underwent cyclic loading from 80 N to 120 N at 1 Hz. Cyclic loading was carried out until 2 mm of fracture displacement occurred or 4,000 cycles was reached. The specimens that reached the 4,000-cycle limit were then loaded to failure. Screw length, number of cycles, and load to failure were compared between the groups. RESULTS: We found no difference in number of cycles or load to failure between the 2 groups. Screws placed perpendicular to the fracture line were significantly shorter than screws placed down the central axis. CONCLUSIONS: A perpendicularly placed screw provides equivalent strength to one placed along the central axis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Compared with a screw placed centrally in an oblique scaphoid fracture, a screw placed perpendicular to the fracture line allows the use of a shorter screw without sacrificing strength of fixation.

Arthroscopic repair of triangular fibrocartilage tears: a biomechanical comparison of a knotless suture anchor and the traditional outside-in repairs.

PURPOSE: To compare the biomechanical strength of a knotless suture anchor repair and the traditional outside-in repair of peripheral triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) tears in a cadaveric model. METHODS: We dissected the distal ulna and TFCC from 6 matched cadaveric wrist pairs and made iatrogenic complete peripheral TFCC tears in each wrist. In 6 wrists, the TFCC tears were repaired using the standard outside-in technique using 2 2-0 polydioxane sutures placed in a vertical mattress fashion. In the other 6 wrists, we repaired the TFCC tears using mini-pushlock suture anchors to the fovea. The strength of the repairs was then determined using a materials testing machine with the load placed across the repair site. We loaded the repairs until a gap of 2 mm formed across the repair site, and then subsequently loaded them to failure. Thus, for each repair we obtained the load at 2-mm gap formation, load to failure, and mode of failure. RESULTS: At the 2-mm gap formation, the suture anchor repairs were statistically stronger than the outside-in repairs. For load to failure, the suture anchor repairs were also statistically stronger than the outside-in repairs. Failure in both techniques occurred most commonly as suture pull-out from the soft tissues. CONCLUSIONS: The all-arthroscopic suture anchor TFCC repair was biomechanically stronger than an outside-in repair. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The suture anchor technique allows for repair of both the superficial and deep layers of the articular disk directly to bone, restoring the native TFCC anatomy. By being knotless, the suture anchor repair avoids irritation to the surrounding soft tissues by suture knots.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

The reverse shoulder arthroplasty is considered to be one of the most significant technological advancements in shoulder reconstructive surgery over the past 30 years. It is able to successfully decrease pain and improve function for patients with rotator cuff-deficient shoulders. The glenoid is transformed into a sphere that articulates with a humeral socket. The current reverse prosthesis shifts the center of rotation more medial and distal, improving the deltoid's mechanical advantage. This design has resulted in successful improvement in both active shoulder elevation and in quality of life.

The distal biceps tendon.

Distal biceps tendon ruptures continue to be an important injury seen and treated by upper extremity surgeons. Since the mid-1980s, the emphasis has been placed on techniques that limit complications or improve initial tendon-to-bone fixation strength. Recently, basic science research has expanded the knowledge base regarding the biceps tendon structure, footprint anatomy, and biomechanics. Clinical data have further delineated the results of conservative and surgical management of both partial and complete tears in acute or chronic states. The current literature on the distal biceps tendon is described in detail.

The management of ulnocarpal abutment and degenerative triangular fibrocartilage complex tears in the competitive athlete.

Ulnar-sided wrist pain is a frequent cause for loss of practice time and competitive play for athletes. Ulnocarpal abutment, a common source of ulnar-sided pain, typically burdens athletes who participate in gymnastics, racket sports, and baseball. Although many athletes respond to nonoperative management, surgical intervention should be considered when symptoms persist. Surgical options include arthroscopic debridement, arthroscopic wafer, open wafer, or ulnar-shortening osteotomy. Treatment should be tailored to the athletes' level of function, expectations, and goals. The timing of interventions also influences the treatment algorithm. A successful outcome can be anticipated when appropriate treatment is rendered.

The contracted elbow: is ulnar nerve release necessary?

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic release of the ulnar nerve in patients undergoing capsular release for severe elbow contractures has been recommended, although there are limited data to support this recommendation. Our hypothesis was that more severely limited preoperative flexion and extension would be associated with a higher incidence of postoperative ulnar nerve symptoms in patients undergoing capsular release. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 164 consecutive patients who underwent open or arthroscopic elbow capsular release for stiffness between 2003 and 2010. The ulnar nerve was decompressed if the patient had preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms or a positive Tinel test. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion and incidence of ulnar nerve symptoms were recorded. RESULTS: The mean improvement in the arc of motion of was 36.7°. New-onset postoperative ulnar nerve symptoms developed in 7 of 87 patients (8.1%) who did not undergo ulnar nerve decompression; eventually, 5 of these patients with persistent symptoms underwent ulnar nerve decompression. The rate of developing postoperative symptoms was higher if patients had preoperative flexion ≤ 100° (15.2%) compared with those with preoperative flexion >100° (3.7%). There was no association between preoperative extension or gain in motion arc and postoperative symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The overall rate of ulnar nerve symptoms after elbow contracture release was low if ulnar nerve decompression was performed in patients with preoperative symptoms or a positive Tinel test. There was a higher rate of ulnar nerve symptoms in patients with more severe contractures (≤ 100° of preoperative flexion), which did not reach statistical significance.

Anatomic and biomechanical analysis of the short and long head components of the distal biceps tendon.

HYPOTHESIS: The short head bundle of the distal biceps tendon is more efficient at elbow flexion, and the long head is more efficient at forearm supination. METHODS: The short and long head bundles of the distal biceps tendon were separated to the bicipital tuberosity in 6 cadavers. The area and centroid of each bundle insertion were computed from surface points measured within each footprint. Each bundle was individually loaded. The supination torque and flexion load generated were recorded at 90° of elbow flexion. The slope of the torque generated versus biceps load was used to define the supination moment arm. The ratio of the flexion load generated to biceps load applied was used to define the relative flexion efficiency. RESULTS: The short head insertion was positioned distal and anterior relative to the long head and typically included the apex of the tuberosity. The areas of the long and short heads were 59 ± 15 and 94 ± 44 mm(2) (P = .07), respectively. The long head moment arm was significantly higher in supination. The short head had a significantly higher moment arm in neutral and pronation. The ratio of the flexion load to biceps load was 15% higher for the short head. CONCLUSION: The short and long heads of the biceps have distinct insertions. The short head's insertion allows it to be relatively more efficient at elbow flexion at 90°. In the neutral and pronated forearm, the short head is the relatively more efficient supinator. In the supinated forearm, the long head becomes relatively more efficient at supination.

Arthroscopic treatment of rotator cuff disease.

The goal of this article is to summarize the current concepts on rotator cuff disease with an emphasis on arthroscopic treatment. Most rotator cuff tears are the result of an ongoing attritional process. Once present, a tear is likely to gradually increase in size. Partial-thickness and subscapularis tears can both be successfully treated arthroscopically if conservative management fails. Partial tears involving greater than 50% of tendon thickness should be repaired. Articular-sided partial tears involving less than 50% of the rotator cuff can reliably be treated with debridement. A more aggressive approach should be considered for low-grade tears (<50%) if they occur on the bursal side. Biomechanical and anatomic studies have shown clear superiority with dual-row fixation compared with single-row techniques. However, current studies have yet to show clear clinical advantage with dual-row over single-row repairs. Biceps tenotomy or tenodesis can reliably provide symptomatic improvement in patients with irreparable massive tears. True pseudoparalysis of the shoulder is a contraindication to this procedure alone and other alternatives should be considered.

Minimally invasive proximal biceps tenodesis: an anatomical study for optimal placement and safe surgical technique.

BACKGROUND: An anatomic study specifically investigating the optimal location for proximal biceps tenodesis and detailing the topographic relationship to neurovascular structures has not been conducted. METHODS: Twelve cadaveric upper extremities were dissected to identify the proximal biceps musculotendinous junction and topographic relationships to neighboring neurovascular structures. RESULTS: The musculotendinous junction of the long head of the biceps tendon was on average 2.2 cm distal to the superior border and 3.1 cm proximal from the inferior border of the pectoralis major tendon. The musculocutaneous nerve was on average 2.6 cm medial to the long head of the biceps at the musculotendinous junction. The distance from the lesser tuberosity to the musculotendinous junction of the long head of the biceps averaged 5.4 cm. The distance from the anterior humeral circumflex vessels to the musculotendinous junction of the long head of the biceps was 4.6 cm on average. The distance from the musculotendinous junction of the long head of the biceps to the musculocutaneous nerve as it pierces the coracobrachialis was 4.6 cm. CONCLUSION: In order to restore the appropriate length-tension relationship of the biceps muscle, proximal biceps tenodesis should possibly be placed closer to the superior border of the pectoralis major tendon than previously thought. The lesser tuberosity can be used as a tactile landmark for appropriate intraoperative placement. Although there is a relatively safe "buffer zone" between the location of the tenodesis and adjacent neurovascular structures, extreme caution must be used.

Anterior exposure of the lumbar spine with and without an "access surgeon": morbidity analysis of 265 consecutive cases.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence and type of exposure-related complications for anterior lumbar surgery performed with and without an "access" surgeon. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: No data exist comparing the incidence and type of exposure-related complications for anterior lumbar surgery performed with and without a vascular surgeon's assistance. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for 265 consecutive patients who underwent anterior lumbar spine surgery at our institution from 2003 to 2005. Each patient's records were reviewed for diagnosis, procedure, whether the surgical exposure was conducted by the spine surgeon (Spine) or with a vascular surgeon's assistance (Team), levels exposed, complications, and any lasting sequelae. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with at least 1 intraoperative complication was 8% and 12% for the Spine and Team cases, respectively. Two percent of the Spine patients experienced an intraoperative vascular complication compared with 7% of the Team cases. No intraoperative vascular complication occurred in the single-level Spine exposures. Four percent of the patients with single-level exposures with Team approaches sustained an intraoperative vascular complication. Eight percent of the multilevel Spine cases sustained an intraoperative vascular complication compared with 9% of the multilevel Team exposures. There were 14 vascular injuries appreciated intraoperatively in a total of 13 patients. These injuries were directly repaired in 10 patients without any residual sequelae. The rate of vascular complications was statistically higher for multiple-level exposures (9%) versus single-level exposure (3%; P = 0.0357). The rate of retrograde ejaculation was 6% in the Spine cases whereas it was 7% in the Team approach. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support the notion that the presence of an "access" surgeon will change the type and rate of complications. With adequate training and judgment, spine surgeons may safely perform such exposures, provided vascular surgical assistance is readily available.