A Comparison of Early Complication Rates of Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release With and Without Resident Involvement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the complication rates of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) relative to orthopedic resident trainee involvement in the procedure. METHODS: All patients undergoing isolated, elective ECTR by two attending surgeons within a 59-month period were analyzed. Cases were categorized as the following according to the degree of resident involvement: ECTR performed by attending with either no resident or a resident as an assistant (group 1), resident performing a portion of the procedure (group 2), and resident performing the entire procedure (group 3). Early postoperative complications and/or intraoperative conversion to an open procedure were the outcomes of interest. We used a noninferiority design, hypothesizing that resident involvement would not be associated with inferior outcomes compared with cases without resident involvement. Multiple logistic regression models, adjusted for patient demographic and surgical characteristics, were fit to assess the relationship between resident involvement groups and complication/conversion outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1,167 ECTR cases (895 patients) were performed and returned for postoperative follow-up for at least 2 weeks after surgery. Operative time was significantly shorter for group 1 cases versus group 2 and 3 cases. The early postoperative complication and conversion rates were 1.7% and 1.0%, respectively. Superficial infection (1.2%), deep infection (0.3%), and transient neuropraxia (0.3%) occurred infrequently and did not differ relative to resident involvement. No differences in the odds of complication and/or conversion relative to resident involvement were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of ECTR performed entirely or in part by attending-supervised resident trainees were not inferior to ECTR performed by an attending surgeon regarding the odds of experiencing complications or conversion to an open procedure. With appropriate supervision, ECTR can be performed safely by orthopedic and plastic surgery residents. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.

Intraoperative Conversion From Endoscopic to Open Carpal Tunnel Release: A Systematic Review and Case Series.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence, outcomes, and complications associated with conversion from endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) to open carpal tunnel release (OCTR). METHODS: A retrospective case review of all patients who underwent ECTR over 4 years by 2 fellowship-trained hand surgeons at a single academic center was performed. We recorded outcomes and the reason for conversion in patients who underwent conversion to an OCTR. Baseline demographics and surgical complications were compared between the 2 groups. A systematic review was performed to define the incidence and reasons for conversion from ECTR to OCTR. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we included clinical studies of ECTR from 2000 to 2021. RESULTS: In the retrospective series, 9 of 892 (1.02%) ECTR cases underwent conversion to an OCTR at the time of the index procedure. One of 9 converted cases had transient neurapraxia involving the recurrent motor branch after surgery compared with 0 cases in the group that underwent ECTR without conversion. Improvements in the visual analog scale for pain and QuickDASH were noted at a mean of 46 weeks after surgery in the group that underwent conversion to OCTR. The systematic review identified an incidence of conversion of 0.62%. The most common reasons for conversion to OCTR in the case series and systematic review were poor visualization due to hypertrophic tenosynovium and aberrant nerve anatomy. CONCLUSIONS: The overall incidence of intraoperative conversion from ECTR to OCTR during the index procedure was 1.02%, with the most common reasons for conversion being poor visualization due to hypertrophic tenosynovium and aberrant nerve anatomy. Patients who undergo conversion from ECTR to OCTR demonstrate improvements in pain and disability, similar to patients who undergo ECTR without conversion. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Technology, Social Media, and Telemedicine Utilization for Rural Hand and Upper-Extremity Patients.

PURPOSE: To define technology and social media use among rural upper-extremity patients. In addition, we aimed to assess how patients use social media in relation to health care and their willingness to participate in telemedicine programs. METHODS: An anonymous multiple-choice written survey was administered to 550 upper-extremity patients at 4 rural outreach clinics. Demographic information was obtained, as was social media use, habits and interests. We compared both users and nonusers of social media to define demographic differences between these groups. RESULTS: A total of 412 patients completed surveys and were included in our analysis (75%); 225 reported using social media (55%). Of the respondents, 67% had a high school education or less and 60% reported an income of less than $50,000/y with an unemployment rate of 58%. In addition, 28% reported not owning a smartphone and 20% lacked home Internet access. Multivariable regression demonstrated that age, female sex, and home Internet access were all independently associated with increased social media use. Facebook was the most frequently used social media platform. Moreover, 42% were interested in telemedicine and social media users were significantly more likely to be interested in telemedicine programs compared with non-social media users. CONCLUSIONS: Within a population of rural and economically disadvantaged upper-extremity patients, 55% currently use social media; 32% used these platforms to research health conditions. Whereas younger female patients with home Internet access were more likely to use social media, older patients were more likely to use these platforms to research health conditions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As more health information moves on-line and as telemedicine programs continue to evolve, some rural upper-extremity patients may still have technological barriers in the form of smartphone and computer ownership as well as a lack of home Internet access.

Telemedicine After Upper Extremity Surgery: A Prospective Study of Program Implementation.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to evaluate the implementation of a postoperative hand and upper extremity telemedicine program. We aimed to compare travel burden, visit time, and patient satisfaction between an initial postoperative telemedicine visit and a second conventional in-clinic visit. METHODS: Telemedicine guidelines established by our hospital system were used as inclusion criteria for this prospective study, which included patients indicated for surgery in the outpatient clinic during a 3-month period. Patients were excluded if they had wounds closed with nonabsorbable suture, remained admitted to the hospital, or required a custom orthosis at their first postoperative visit. Baseline demographics and patient-reported outcome measures were collected prior to surgery. Information pertaining to technology usage was collected for the telemedicine visit and travel information was obtained for the in-clinic visit. Patient satisfaction was recorded for both visits. RESULTS: Fifty-seven of 87 patients (66%) who met the inclusion criteria elected to participate in the study. A cell phone was utilized by 89% of patients and 88% of visits were performed from the patient's home. There were 4 technological complications during the study period (7%). Mean round-trip travel distance for the in-clinic visit was 60 miles with an average drive time of 85 minutes. Visit times were significantly shorter with telemedicine (7 minutes vs 38 minutes). Telemedicine was preferred by 90% of patients for subsequent encounters. All 4 clinical complications were recognized during the telemedicine visit. CONCLUSIONS: A telemedicine program for postoperative care after hand and upper extremity surgery decreases travel burdens associated with conventional in-clinic appointments. Telemedicine significantly decreases visit times without decreasing patient satisfaction for patients who elect to participate in remote video visits. The ability to recognize early postsurgical complications was not compromised by utilizing this technology, even during our early experience. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Telemedicine after hand and upper extremity surgery results in high levels of patient satisfaction and decreases visit times and the travel burdens associated with conventional in-clinic appointments.