Economic and Professional Impact of The Covid-19 Pandemic and Prevalence of Depression and Anxiety on Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons in Brazil / Impacto econômico e profissional da pandemia de COVID-19 e prevalência de depressão e ansiedade nos cirurgiões de ombro e cotovelo do Brasil

Abstract Objective To assess the economic and professional impact (including teaching and training) during the covid-19 pandemic, as well as the prevalence of major depressive episode and generalized anxiety disorder, on shoulder and elbow surgeons in Brazil. Methods Cross-sectional study carried out with surgeons who are members of the Brazilian Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (SBCOC). Sampling was non-probabilistic for convenience. The information was obtained through a self-administered online questionnaire, through the SBCOC members' registered e-mails, using structured questions and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) instruments to screening for major depressive episode and generalized anxiety disorder, respectively. Results 119 participants were evaluated. The commitment in teaching was affirmed by 87.7% of the surgeons, there was a reduction above 50% of the surgical volume for about 4 out of 10 surgeons and reduction of the income above 50% for about 17.3%, due to the fact that 55.5% of professionals did not have professional stability. The major depressive episode had a prevalence of 26.7% in the sample, and generalized anxiety disorder was presented by 20% of the surgeons. Conclusion The combination of the negative impact on professional and financial factorsmay have affected shoulder and elbow surgeons in Brazil, generating high rates of anxiety and depression.

Resumo Objetivo Avaliar o impacto econômico e profissional (incluindo ensino e treinamento) durante a pandemia de covid-19, bem como a prevalência de episódio depressivo maior e de transtorno de ansiedade generalizada, nos cirurgiões de ombro e cotovelo do Brasil. Métodos Estudo transversal realizado com os cirurgiões membros titulares da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia de Ombro e Cotovelo (SBCOC). A amostragem foi não probabilística por conveniência. As informações foram obtidas por meio de questionário online autoaplicado, através de divulgação pelo e-mail cadastrado dos membros da SBCOC, utilizando questões estruturadas e os instrumentos Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) e Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) para rastreio de episódio depressivo maior e transtorno de ansiedade generalizada, respectivamente. Resultados Foram avaliados 119 participantes. O comprometimento no ensino foi afirmado por 87,7% dos cirurgiões, houve redução acima de 50% do volume cirúrgico para cerca de 4 em cada 10 cirurgiões e redução da renda acima de 50% para cerca de 17,3%, sendo que 55,5% dos profissionais não apresentavam estabilidade profissional. O episódio depressivo maior apresentou uma prevalência de 26,7% na amostra, e o transtorno de ansiedade generalizada foi apresentado por 20% dos cirurgiões. Conclusão A combinação do impacto negativo sobre fatores profissionais e financeiros pode ter afetado os cirurgiões de ombro e cotovelo do Brasil, gerando elevados índices de ansiedade e depressão.

The Association Between Orthopaedic Surgeon Academic Productivity Metrics and Compensation from Medical Industry.

INTRODUCTION: Academic research has value well beyond personal financial gain. However, these endeavors do require a notable amount of time and opportunity cost. Academic productivity may raise a researcher's profile within the field, increasing the likelihood for interactions with the medical industry and possibly cultivating relationships with future monetary significance. METHODS: Queries of the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services publicly available Open Payments System allowed for extraction of industry compensation data for orthopaedic surgeons. Aggregate data produce three compensation groups (mean annual income) for individual physicians: none; 1 to $100,000; and >$100,000. Physicians in the highest income category were matched 1:1 with physicians in each of the other two compensation groups. Selected physicians then underwent an academic productivity assessment. Queries of Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar User Profile databases provided the h-index and m-index for each surgeon. Bivariate and multivariate analyses produced statistical results. In addition to the analysis of the tiered income groups, analysis of compensation as a continuous variable also occurred. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2020, 636, 7,617, and 22,091 US orthopaedic surgeons earned mean annual industry compensation >$100,000; between $1 and $100,000; and $0, respectively. Royalties (80.8%) predominated in the top earning group, compared with Consulting Fees (46.5%) in the second-tier group. The highest income group had higher h-index ($0 versus $1 to 100,000 versus >$100,000 = 3.6 versus 7.5 versus 20.0, P < 0.001) and m-index ($0 versus $1 to 100,000 versus >$100,000 = 0.26 versus 0.44 versus 0.80, P < 0.001) scores than either the intermediate or no compensation groups. In addition, h-index and m-index correlated positively with total compensation (h-index: r = 0.32, P < 0.001; m-index: r = 0.20, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis of factors associated with increased industry compensation identified h-index (B = 0.034, P < 0.001) and years active (B = 0.042, P < 0.001) as having significant associations with physician compensation. Physician subspecialty also correlated with industry compensation. DISCUSSION: Academic research can provide invaluable contributions to the improvement of patient care. These efforts often require notable personal sacrifice with minimal direct remuneration. However, academic productivity metrics correlate positively with industry compensation, highlighting a possible supplementary benefit to scholarly efforts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Industry Payments Among Appropriate Use Criteria Voting Panels: An Open Payments Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although multiple studies have consistently demonstrated that orthopaedic surgeons receive greater transfers of value than other specialties, the industry payments of providers who are involved in the formation of practice guidelines have not been thoroughly explored. Therefore, the purpose of our analysis was to evaluate the industry payments of the authors of the Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). METHODS: The publicly available AAOS web portal (OrthoGuidelines.org) was queried for all AUCs that had been released between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019, regarding the management of musculoskeletal pathologies. A cross-sectional analysis of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments database was conducted to determine the number and total value of industry payments to AUC voting committee members during the year of voting for the AUC. Industry payments for each orthopaedic surgeon voting member were compared with payments received by orthopaedic surgeons nationwide who received any payment within the same year. The proportion of orthopaedic surgeon voting members who received any industry payment was compared with the proportion of orthopaedic surgeons nationwide who received payments. RESULTS: Our analysis included a total of 18 different AUCs with 216 voting members, 157 of whom were orthopaedic surgeons. Of the orthopaedic surgeon voting members, 105 (67%) received industry payments, a rate roughly comparable with the national average among orthopaedic surgeons (74%). For 7 of 18 AUCs (39%), the median payment per orthopaedic surgeon voting member was above the median among orthopaedic surgeons receiving payments nationwide that year. Qualitatively, orthopaedic surgeon voting members were more likely to receive payments in the form of royalties, licenses, or speaking fees than orthopaedic surgeons nationwide. CONCLUSIONS: AUC voting members receive payments at frequencies and magnitudes that are roughly comparable with orthopaedic surgeons nationwide. Whether voting panel members receiving payments at these rates is ideal or is in the best interest of patients is a policy decision for the AAOS and society at large. Our study confirms that payments are common and, thus, continued vigilance is justified.

Three months in a high-volume tertiary orthopaedic trauma unit: What is a registrar worth?

BACKGROUND: South Africa has a high burden of traumatic injuries that is predominantly managed in the public healthcare system, despite the relative disparity in human resources between the public and private sectors. Because of budget and theatre time constraints, the trauma waiting list often exceeds 50 - 60 patients who need urgent and emergent surgery in high-volume orthopaedic trauma centres. This situation is exacerbated by other surgical disciplines using orthopaedic theatre time for life-threatening injuries because of lack of own theatre availability. One of the proposed solutions to this problem is outsourcing of some of the cases to private medical facilities. OBJECTIVES: To establish the volume of work done by an orthopaedic registrar during a 3-month trauma rotation, and to calculate the implant and theatre costs, as well as compare the salary of a registrar with the theoretical private surgeon fees for procedures performed by the registrar in the 3-month period. METHODS: In a retrospective study, the surgical logbook of a single registrar during a 3-month rotation, from 14 January to 14 April 2019, was reviewed. Surgeon fees were calculated for these procedures, according to current medical aid rates, without additional modifier codes being added. RESULTS: During the 3-month study period, a total of 157 surgical procedures was performed, ranging from total hip arthroplasty to debridement of septic hands. Surgeon fees amounted to ZAR186 565.10 per month ‒ double the gross salary of a registrar. Total implant costs amounted to ZAR1 272 667. Theatre costs were ZAR1 301 976 for the 3-month period. CONCLUSIONS: Although this analysis was conducted over a short period, it highlights the significant amount of trauma work done by a single individual at a high-volume tertiary orthopaedic trauma unit. With increasing budget constraints, pressure on theatre time and a growing population, cost-effective expansion of resources is needed. From this study, it appears that increasing capacity in the state sector could be cheaper than private outsourcing, although a more in-depth analysis needs to be conducted.

The Estimated Cost of Maintenance of Certification.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance of Certification (MOC) is a controversial topic in medicine for many different reasons. Studies have suggested that there may be associations between fewer negative outcomes and participation in MOC. However, MOC still remains controversial because of its cost. We sought to determine the estimated cost of MOC to the average orthopaedic surgeon, including fees and time cost, defined as the market value of the physician's time. METHODS: We calculated the total cost of MOC to be the sum of the fees required for applications, examinations, and other miscellaneous fees as well as the time cost to the physician and staff. Costs were calculated for the oral, written, and American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Web-based Longitudinal Assessment (ABOS WLA) MOC pathways based on the responses of 33 orthopaedic surgeons to a survey sent to a state orthopaedic society. RESULTS: We calculated the average orthopaedic surgeon's total cost in time and fees over the decade-long period to be $71,440.61 ($7,144.06 per year) for the oral examination MOC pathway and $80,391.55 ($8,039.16 per year) for the written examination pathway. We calculated the cost of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery web-based examination pathway to be $69,721.04 ($6,972.10 per year). CONCLUSIONS: The actual cost of MOC is much higher than just the fees paid to organizations providing services. The majority of the cost comes in the form of time cost to the physician. The ABOS WLA was implemented to alleviate the anxiety of a high-stakes examination and to encourage efficient longitudinal learning. We found that the ABOS WLA pathway does save time and money when compared with the written examination pathway when review courses and study periods are taken. We believe that future policy changes should focus on decreasing physician time spent completing MOC requirements, and decreasing the cost of these requirements, while preserving the model of continued evidence-based medical education.

COVID-19 Impact on Orthopedic Surgeons: Elective Procedures, Telehealth, and Income.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the response in orthopedic surgery to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic across the United States by surveying surgeons about their care setting, timing of restrictions on elective surgery, use of telehealth, and estimated economic impact. METHODS: A survey was distributed via REDCap through state orthopedic organizations between April and July 2020. The 22-question digital survey collected information regarding restrictions on elective procedures, location of care, utilization of telehealth, and estimated reductions in annual income. RESULTS: In this study, 192 participants responded to the survey (average age 49.9 ± 11.0 years, 92.7% male). Responses primarily originated from Alabama (30.2%), Georgia (30.2%), and Missouri (16.1%). The remainder of the responses were grouped into the category "other." Respondents did not vary significantly by state in operative setting or income type (salary, work relative value units, or collections). Most of the participants documented elective procedure restrictions in hospital and ambulatory settings. The highest frequency of closures occurred between March 18 and 20 (47% in hospital, 51% in ambulatory). Of the participants, financial loss estimates varied across states (P = 0.005), with 50% of physicians claiming >50% losses of income in Alabama (24% Georgia, 10% Missouri, 31% other). Regarding telehealth, practices set up for these services before 2020 varied across states. None of the orthopedic practices in Alabama had telehealth before the COVID-19 pandemic (Missouri 25%, Georgia 9%, other 8%, P = 0.06); however, respondents generally were split when considering the anticipation of implementing telehealth into routine practice. CONCLUSIONS: Most practices did implement restrictions for elective clinic visits and procedures early during the pandemic. COVID-19 ultimately will result in a large revenue loss for elective orthopedic practices. Services such as telehealth may help offset these losses and help deliver orthopedic care to patients remotely.

Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgeon Industry Compensation Reported by the Open Payments Database.

Background. The current study aims to characterize and explore trends in Open Payments Database (OPD) payments reported to orthopaedic foot and ankle (F&A) surgeons. OPD payments are classified as General, Ownership, or Research. Methods. General, Ownership, and Research payments to orthopaedic F&A surgeons were characterized by total payment sum and number of transactions. The total payment was compared by category. Payments per surgeon were also assessed. Median payments for all orthopaedic F&A surgeons and the top 5% compensated were calculated and compared across the years. Medians were compared through Mann-Whitney U tests. Results. Over the period, industry paid over $39 million through 29,442 transactions to 802 orthopaedic F&A surgeons. The majority of this payment was General (64%), followed by Ownership (34%) and Research (2%). The median annual payments per orthopaedic F&A surgeon were compared to the 2014 median ($616): 2015 ($505; P = .191), 2016 ($868; P = .088), and 2017 ($336; P = .084). Over these years, the annual number of compensated orthopaedic F&A surgeons increased from 490 to 556. Averaged over 4 years, 91% of the total orthopaedic F&A payment was made to the top 5% of orthopaedic F&A surgeons. The median payment for this group increased from $177 000 (2014) to $192 000 (2017; P = .012). Conclusion. Though median payments to the top 5% of orthopaedic F&A surgeons increased, there was no overall change in median payment over four years for all compensated orthopaedic F&A surgeons. These findings shed insight into the orthopaedic F&A surgeon-industry relationship.Levels of Evidence: III, Retrospective Study.

Identifying surgeon and institutional drivers of cost in total shoulder arthroplasty: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Despite rapid increases in the demand for total shoulder arthroplasty, data describing cost trends are scarce. We aim to (1) describe variation in the cost of shoulder arthroplasty performed by different surgeons at multiple hospitals and (2) determine the driving factors of such variation. METHODS: A standardized, highly accurate cost accounting method, time-driven activity-based costing, was used to determine the cost of 1571 shoulder arthroplasties performed by 12 surgeons at 4 high-volume institutions between 2016 and 2018. Costs were broken down into supply costs (including implant price and consumables) and personnel costs, including physician fees. Cost parameters were compared with total cost for surgical episodes and case volume. RESULTS: Across 4 institutions and 12 surgeons, surgeon volume and hospital volume did not correlate with episode-of-care cost. Average cost per case of each institution varied by factors of 1.6 (P = .47) and 1.7 (P = .06) for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), respectively. Implant (56% and 62%, respectively) and personnel costs from check-in through the operating room (21% and 17%, respectively) represented the highest percentages of cost and highly correlated with the cost of the episode of care for TSA and RSA. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in episode-of-care total costs for both TSA and RSA had no association with hospital or surgeon case volume at 4 high-volume institutions but was driven primarily by variation in implant and personnel costs through the operating room. This analysis does not address medium- or long-term costs.

The Effect of COVID-19 on Orthopedic Practices and Surgeons in Louisiana.

This study was performed to analyze the effect that coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has had on orthopedic surgeons' practices, their patients, and orthopedic surgeons themselves through a survey distributed to members of the Louisiana Orthopaedic Association (LOA). An anonymous 22-question online survey was created and distributed to 323 LOA members. Of the 323 recipients of the survey, 99 (30.7%) responded. As a part of a multiple response set, in which respondents could choose more than one answer, the majority reported delayed care for routine orthopedic injuries (81 of 97, 83.5%). Almost every surgeon (n=95, 96.0%) reported stopping or delaying elective surgery because of COVID-19 and an increase in pain/disability/deformity in patients due to delay in elective procedures (73 of 97, 75.3%) and delay in seeking care (66 of 97, 68.0%). The majority reported an increased use of telehealth visits (68 of 97, 70.1%), a decrease in patient volume (88 of 97, 90.7%), and a reduction in income (79 of 98, 80.6%) during the past 6 months. A majority of surgeons (58 of 98, 59.2%) reported that they had applied for government assistance or took out loans. Via a multiple response set, respondents indicated that as a result of the pandemic, telehealth will become more widespread (64 of 98, 65.3%) and hospitals will exert a stronger influence over health care (64 of 98, 65.3%). The COVID-19 pandemic has had lasting effects on orthopedic surgeons in Louisiana and their practices, with a substantial decrease in the number of patients treated (90.5%), surgical volume, and revenue (80.6%). Orthopedic surgeons affected by the pandemic could use these data to further understand future challenges with patient care and changing orthopedic practice dynamics during this unique time. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):351-355.].

The short-term impact of COVID-19 pandemic on spine surgeons: a cross-sectional global study.

PURPOSE: The outbreak of COVID-19 erupted in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. In a few weeks, it progressed rapidly into a global pandemic which resulted in an overwhelming burden on health care systems, medical resources and staff. Spine surgeons as health care providers are no exception. In this study, we try to highlight the impact of the crisis on spine surgeons in terms of knowledge, attitude, practice and socioeconomic burden. METHODS: This was global, multicentric cross-sectional study on 781 spine surgeons that utilized an Internet-based validated questionnaire to evaluate knowledge about COVID-19, availability of personal protective equipment, future perceptions, effect of this crisis on practice and psychological distress. Univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the predictors for the degree of COVID-19 effect on practice. RESULTS: Overall, 20.2%, 52% and 27.8% of the participants were affected minimally, intermediately and hugely by COVID-19, respectively. Older ages (ß = 0.33, 95% CI 0.11-0.56), orthopedic spine surgeons (ß = 0.30, 95% CI 0.01-0.61) and those who work in the private sector (ß = 0.05, 95% CI 0.19-0.61) were the most affected by COVID-19. Those who work in university hospitals (ß = - 0.36, 95% CI 0.00 to - 0.71) were affected the least. The availability of N95 masks (47%) and disposable eye protectors or face shields (39.4%) was significantly associated with lower psychological stress (p = 0.01). Only 6.9%, 3.7% and 5% had mild, moderate and severe mental distress, respectively. CONCLUSION: While it is important to recognize the short-term impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the practice of spine surgery, predicting where we will be standing in 6-12 months remains difficult and unknown. The COVID-19 crisis will probably have an unexpected long-term impact on lives and economies.

Patient Perception of Orthopedic Surgeon Reimbursement.

Significant attention has been directed at evaluating reimbursement rates to orthopedic surgeons for various surgical procedures. To evaluate patients' understanding of the surgeon reimbursement process, studies using patient surveys have been conducted to determine patients' perceptions of orthopedic surgeon compensation. To date, there has been no systematic review to consolidate the data of these studies. This study aimed to synthesize the findings of these individual studies across multiple subspecialties of orthopedic surgery to evaluate the potential discrepancy between how much patients believe orthopedic surgeons are reimbursed and the actual reimbursement rate. We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify studies that report findings of patient perceptions of orthopedic surgeon reimbursement for various procedures. Searches were conducted using MEDLINE through PubMed, Embase, and Scopus. Summary estimates of reimbursement discrepancies across subspecialties and overall were reported as unweighted averages of the individual study results within each group. Twelve studies were identified that met inclusion criteria, constituting 4309 surveys. These survey studies measured patients' perceptions of how much orthopedic surgeons are reimbursed for common procedures, including anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, arthroscopic meniscectomy, carpal tunnel release, rotator cuff repair, multiple spine procedures and total shoulder, hip, and knee arthroplasty. It was found that patients reported reasonable surgeon's fees to be 11.2 times more than actual Medicare reimbursement. Among individual studies, the largest discrepancies were seen in total hip arthroplasty (26 times), whereas the smallest difference was in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (1.6 times). On average, patients estimated Medicare reimbursement rates to be 5.9 times higher than the actual surgeon reimbursement. Patients consistently overestimate how much orthopedic surgeons are reimbursed for common orthopedic procedures. The results of this systematic review suggest that patients may value these procedures more than what Medicare reimburses. Such information may help educate the public, direct policy, and increase transparency between orthopedic surgeons and patients.

The Cost of Maternity Leave for the Orthopaedic Surgeon.

INTRODUCTION: Maternity leave among orthopaedic surgeons is not well understood. This study seeks to quantify past and current maternal leave characteristics of female orthopaedic surgeons. METHODS: A survey was distributed to the members of the Ruth Jackson Orthopaedic Society and Women in Orthopaedics, an online group exclusive to female orthopaedic surgeons in practice or in training. The survey was open from April 2018 to October 2018 with access gained by way of a web-based link. Respondents were queried regarding demographics and maternity leave characteristics including age at conception, length of leave given/taken, and cost. RESULTS: A total of 801 surveys were completed with 452 surveys returning with information regarding past pregnancies. Of the 452 surgeons with children, the average leave offered was 4.6 ± 4.2 weeks for the first child, with 8.2 ± 7.4 weeks taken. A difference was observed (P < 0.001) between the amount of leave taken between residents (6.3 ± 5.0 weeks), fellows (8.3 ± 7.2 weeks), and practicing surgeons (9.6 ± 8.5 weeks). The average cost of the first leave was $40,932 ± 61,258. The average cost during training was different than during practice ($154 versus $45,350, P < 0.001). The length of leave offered (P = 0.05) and taken (P < 0.001) affects the cost, whereas delivery type, timing of stopping clinic, taking calls, and operating did not. Each additional week of leave offered saved a surgeon $2,583, and each additional week taken cost $3,252. DISCUSSION: Residents take shorter leaves than fellows and attendings. The cost of taking leave is substantial, and the cost during practice is higher than during training. The amount of leave taken is greater than the amount of paid leave offered.

Significant Improvement in the Value of Surgical Treatment of Tibial Plateau Fractures Through Surgeon Practice Standardization.

INTRODUCTION: It is unclear whether cost-based decisions to improve the value of surgical care (quality:cost ratio) affect patient outcomes. Our hypothesis was that surgeon-directed reductions in surgical costs for tibial plateau fracture fixation would result in similar patient outcomes, thus improving treatment value. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study with retrospective control data. Surgically treated tibial plateau fractures from 2013 to October 2014 served as a control (group 1). Material costs for each case were calculated. Practices were modified to remove allegedly unnecessary costs. Next, cost data were collected on similar patients from November 2014 through 2015 (group 2). Costs were compared between groups, analyzing partial articular and complete articular fractures separately. Minimum follow-up (f/u) was 1-year. Outcomes data collected include Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) and pain interference domains, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, visual analog pain scale, infection, nonunion, unplanned return to surgery, demographics, injury characteristics, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Group 1 included 57 partial articular fractures and 57 complete articular fractures. Group 2 included 37 partial articular fractures and 32 complete articular fractures. Median cost of partial articular fractures decreased from $1,706 to $1,447 (P = 0.025), and median cost of complete articular fractures decreased from $2,681 to $2,220 (P = 0.003). Group 1 had 55 patients who consented to clinical f/u, and group 2 had 39. Median PROMIS PF score was 40 for group 1 and was 43 for group 2 (P = 0.23). There were no significant differences between the groups for any clinical outcomes, demographics, injury characteristics, or comorbidities. Median f/u in group 1 was 31 months compared with 15 months in group 2 (P < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: We have demonstrated that surgeons can improve value of surgical care by reducing surgical costs while maintaining clinical outcomes.

Men Receive Three Times More Industry Payments than Women Academic Orthopaedic Surgeons, Even After Controlling for Confounding Variables.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, orthopaedic surgeons received nearly USD 300 million from industry, with the top 10% of recipients making more than 95% of the total amount. The degree to which gender may be associated with industry compensation has not been well explored; however, this may be confounded by a number of variables, including academic productivity, experience, and other factors. We wished to explore the variability in payment distribution by gender after controlling for these factors. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do men or women academic orthopaedic surgeons receive more payments from industry? (2) To what degree do any observed differences between the genders persist, even after accounting for identifiable factors, including academic rank, scholarly productivity, regional location of university, subspecialty selection as identified by fellowships completed, and years since completion of residency? METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional retrospective analysis of surgeons practicing in orthopaedic surgery academic departments in the United States. Academic orthopaedic surgery departments were identified using the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database. Publicly available data on gender, academic rank, scholarly productivity, regional location of university, fellowships completed, and years since residency graduation were collected from institutional websites. Industry funding data for 2016 were obtained from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments Database, and scholarly productivity data through 2017 were collected from Scopus. A total of 2939 academic orthopaedic surgeons, 2620 (89%) men and 319 (11%) women from 126 programs were identified. Men and women surgeons were different in most of the variables collected, and all except region of university were associated with differences in industry payments. RESULTS: The median payment for men surgeons was greater than that for women (USD 1027 [interquartile range USD 125-USD 9616] versus USD 177 [IQR USD 47-USD 1486]; difference of medians, USD 850; p < 0.001]. After accounting for potentially confounding variables like faculty rank, years since residency, H-index and subspecialty choice, women faculty members still received only 29% of payments received by otherwise comparable men orthopaedists (beta coefficient for gender = 0.29 [95% CI 0.20 to 0.44; p < 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: Women academic orthopaedic surgeons received only 29% of the industry payments received by men, even after controlling for faculty rank, years since residency, H-index, and subspecialty selection. This gender-related disparity may hinder the career advancement of women orthopaedic surgeons. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Increased transparency by companies can help guide orthopaedic surgeons who wish to receive industry funding.

The Role of Gender, Academic Affiliation, and Subspecialty in Relation to Industry Payments to Orthopaedic Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The Physician-Payments-Sunshine-Act (PPSA) was introduced in 2010 to provide transparency regarding physician-industry payments by making these payments publicly available. Given potential ethical implications, it is important to understand how these payments are being distributed, particularly as the women orthopaedic workforce increases. The purpose of this study was thus to determine the role of gender and academic affiliation in relation to industry payments within the orthopaedic subspecialties. METHODS: The PPSA website was used to abstract industry payments to Orthopaedic surgeons. The internet was then queried to identify each surgeon's professional listing and gender. Mann-Whitney U, Chi-square tests, and multivariable regression were used to explore the relationships. Significance was set at a value of P < 0.05. RESULTS: In total, 22,352 orthopaedic surgeons were included in the study. Payments were compared between 21,053 men and 1299 women, 2756 academic and 19,596 community surgeons, and across orthopaedic subspecialties. Women surgeons received smaller research and non-research payments than men (both, P < 0.001). There was a larger percentage of women in academics than men (15.9% vs 12.1%, P < 0.001). Subspecialties with a higher percentage of women (Foot & Ankle, Hand, and Pediatrics) were also the subspecialties with the lowest mean industry payments (all P < 0.001). Academic surgeons on average, received larger research and non-research industry payments, than community surgeons (both, P < 0.001). Multivariable linear regression demonstrated that male gender (P = 0.006, P = 0.029), adult reconstruction (both, P < 0.001) and spine (P = 0.008, P < 0.001) subspecialties, and academic rank (both, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of larger industry research and non-research payments. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of the US orthopaedic surgeon workforce received industry payments in 2014. Academic surgeons received larger payments than community surgeons. Despite having a larger percentage of surgeons in academia, women surgeons received lower payments than their male counterparts. Women also had a larger representation in the subspecialties with the lowest payments.

What Proportion of Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs Have Accessible Parental Leave Policies, and How Generous are They?

BACKGROUND: Parental leave during graduate medical education is a component of wellness in the workplace. Although every graduate medical education program is required by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) to have a leave policy, individual programs can create their own policies. The ACGME stipulates that "the sponsoring institution must provide a written policy on resident vacation and other leaves of absence (with or without pay) to include parental and sick leave to all applicants." To our knowledge, a review of parental leave policies of all orthopaedic surgery residency programs has not been performed. QUESTION/PURPOSES: (1) What proportion of orthopaedic surgery residency programs have accessible parental (maternity, paternity, and adoption) leave policies? (2) If a policy exists, what financial support is provided and what allotment of time is allowed? METHODS: All ACGME-accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs in 2017 and 2018 were identified. One hundred sixty-six ACGME-accredited allopathic orthopaedic surgery residency programs were identified and reviewed by two observers. Reviewers determined if a program had written parental leave policy, including maternity, paternity, or adoption leave. Ten percent of programs were contacted to verify reviewer findings. The search was sequentially conducted starting with the orthopaedic surgery residency program's website. If the information was not found, the graduate medical education (GME) website was searched. If the information was not found on either website, the program was contacted directly via email and phone. Parental leave policies were classified as to whether they provided dedicated parental leave pay, provided sick leave pay, or deferred to unpaid Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) policies. The number of weeks of maternity, paternity, and adoption leave allowed was collected. RESULTS: Our results showed that 3% (5 of 166) of orthopaedic surgery residency programs had a clearly stated policy on their program website. Overall, 81% (134 of 166) had policy information on the institution's GME website; 7% (12 of 166) of programs required direct communication with program coordinators to obtain policy information. Further, 9% (15 of 166) of programs were deemed to not have an available written policy as mandated by the ACGME. A total of 21% of programs (35 of 166) offered designated parental leave pay, 29% (48 of 166) compensated through sick leave pay, and 50% (83 of166) deferred to federal law (FMLA) requiring up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave. CONCLUSIONS: Although 91% of programs meet the ACGME requirement of written parental leave policies, current parental leave policies in orthopaedic surgery are not easily accessible for prospective residents, and they do not provide clear compensation and length of leave information. Only 3% (5 of 166) of orthopaedic surgery residency programs had a clearly stated leave policy accessible on the program's website. Substantial improvements would be gained if every orthopaedic residency program clearly outlined the parental leave policy on their residency program website, including compensation and length of leave, particularly in light of the 2019 American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery changes allowing time away to be averaged over the 5 years of training. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Parental leave policies are increasingly relevant to today's trainees []. Applicants to orthopaedic surgery today value work/life balance including protected parental leave [].

The Effect of Sex on Orthopaedic Surgeon Income.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have identified discrepancies in salary between male and female surgeons. Our aim was to investigate the impact of sex on an orthopaedic surgeon's yearly earnings by evaluating stratified income and specialty data from a large sample survey of orthopaedic surgeons. METHODS: Self-reported data were obtained from the 2014 and 2008 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) biennial censuses. Responses were received from 6,805 (24.26%) of those who were surveyed. The census form is a 19-question survey that includes information regarding work status (full time versus part time), sex, years in practice, practice type (private versus academic), specialty, hours worked, case volume, and income. The main outcome evaluated was self-reported income, and a multivariate regression model was used to control for confounding variables. RESULTS: Male surgeons reported higher incomes than female colleagues working equivalent hours ($802,474 versus $560,618; p = 0.016); however, male surgeons reported a greater case volume for the same number of hours. Among surgeons who performed ≥26 procedures per month, male and female surgeons reported comparable incomes ($949,508 versus $872,903; p = 0.649). Incomes of those in practice for >20 years also were comparable. Regression analysis controlling for subspecialty choice, hours worked, work status, case volume, years in practice, and practice setting revealed that income was $62,032.51 less for women than men (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Income disparity between male and female orthopaedic surgeons remains significant, and the gap increased from 2008 to 2014. Although subspecialty choice, practice setting, years in practice, and amount and distribution of procedures performed can partially explain salary differences, our regression analysis suggests persistence of an income gap based on sex in orthopaedic surgery.