A Fracture Liaison Service to Address Vitamin D Deficiency for Patients Hospitalized for Osteoporotic Fracture.

Context: Addressing vitamin D deficiency (VDD) is important for fracture secondary prevention. Objectives: To explore the function of a fracture liaison service (FLS) to address VDD. Design Setting and Patients: An observational study of patients admitted to the Massachusetts General Hospital with fractures between January 1, 2016, and October 31, 2023, cared for by the FLS. Intervention: Ergocalciferol 50 000 international units (50ku-D2) oral daily for 3 to 7 days. Main Outcomes Measures: VDD prevalence. Efficacy of inpatient daily 50ku-D2 in raising serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels. Results: Of the 2951 consecutive patients, 724 (24.53%) had VDD (defined by 25OHD ≤ 19 ng/mL). Men (252/897, or 28.09%) were more likely than women (472/2054, or 22.98%) to have VDD (P = .003). VDD was seen in 41.79% (117/280), 24.41% (332/1360), and 20.98% (275/1311) of patients of aged ≤59, 60 to 79, and ≥80 years, respectively (P < .00001). Of the 1303 patients with hip fractures, 327 (25.09%) had VDD, which was associated with a longer length of stay (8.37 ± 7.35 vs 7.23 ± 4.78 days, P = .009) and higher trend of 30-day-readmission rate (13.63% vs 18.35%, P = .037). In a cohort of 32 patients with complete data, each dose of 50ku-D2 increased serum 25OHD by 3.62 ± 2.35 ng/mL without affecting serum calcium or creatinine levels. Conclusion: VDD was seen in nearly 25% of Massachusetts General Hospital FLS patients and more prevalent in male and younger patients. VDD was associated with longer length of stay and higher 30-day-readmission risk in patients with hip fracture. Daily 50ku-D2 appeared to be a practical way to quickly replete vitamin D in the inpatient setting.

Safety of Inpatient Zoledronic Acid in the Immediate Postfracture Setting.

CONTEXT: Zoledronic acid (ZA) administered during the initial hospitalization for a fragility fracture improves the osteoporosis pharmacotherapy rate. Distinguishing the safety profile of inpatient ZA (IP-ZA) in this context is crucial if this approach is to be widely adopted. OBJECTIVE: To study the acute safety profile of IP-ZA. METHODS: An observational study of patients admitted to the Massachusetts General Hospital with fragility fractures who were eligible to receive IP-ZA. Patients were treated with or without IP-ZA. Acetaminophen, either as a single pre-ZA dose or standing multiple-doses-per-day regimen for 48 hours or longer after ZA infusion, was also administered along with protocolized vitamin D and calcium supplementation. Changes in body temperature, serum creatinine, and serum calcium were measured. RESULTS: A total of 285 consecutive patients, meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, are included in this analysis; 204 patients received IP-ZA. IP-ZA treatment was associated with a transient mean rise of body temperature of 0.31 °C on the day following its administration. Temperatures above 38 °C were seen in 15% of patients in the IP-ZA group and 4% in the nontreated group. Standing multiple-doses-per-day but not a single pre-ZA dose of acetaminophen effectively prevented this temperature increase. IP-ZA did not affect serum creatinine levels. Mean levels of serum total calcium and albumin-corrected calcium decreased by 0.54 mg/dL and 0.40 mg/dL, respectively, at their nadirs (Day 5). No patient experienced symptomatic hypocalcemia. CONCLUSION: IP-ZA along with standing multiple-doses-per-day acetaminophen, administered to patients in the immediate postfracture period, is not associated with significant acute adverse effects.

Are Foot & Ankle Surgeons Being Adequately Compensated for Ankle Fractures? - An Analysis of Relative Value Units.

The current relative value units (RVU)-based system is built to reflect the varying presentation of ankle fractures (uni-malleolar vs bi-malleolar vs tri-malleolar) by assigning individual RVUs to different fracture complexities. However, no study has evaluated whether the current RVUs reflect an appropriate compensation per unit time following open reduction internal fixation for uni-malleolar versus bi-malleolar versus tri-malleolar ankle fractures. The 2012 to 2017 American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program files were queried using current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for patients undergoing open reduction internal fixation for uni-malleolar (CPT-27766,CPT-27769,CPT-27792), bi-malleolar (CPT-27814), and tri-malleolar (CPT-27822,CPT-27823) ankle fractures. A total of 7830 (37.2%) uni-malleolar, 7826 (37.2%) bi-malleolar and 5391 (25.6%) tri-malleolar ankle fractures were retrieved. Total RVUs, Mean RVU/minute and Reimbursement rate ($/min) and Mean Reimbursement/case for each fracture type were calculated and compared using Kruskal-Wallis tests. The mean total RVU for each fracture type was as follows: (1) Uni-malleolar: 9.99, (2) Bi-malleolar = 11.71 and 3) Tri-malleolar = 12.87 (p < .001). A statistically significant difference was noted in mean operative time (uni-malleolar = 63.2 vs bi-malleolar = 78.6 vs tri-malleolar = 95.5; p < .001) between the 3 groups. Reimbursement rates ($/min) decreased significantly as fracture complexity increased (uni-malleolar = $7.21/min vs bi-malleolar = $6.75/min vs tri-malleolar = $6.10; p < .001). The average reimbursement/case was $358, $420, and $462 for uni-malleolar, bi-malleolar and tri-malleolar fractures respectively. Foot & ankle surgeons are reimbursed at a higher rate ($/min) for treating a simple uni-malleolar fracture as compared to bi-malleolar and tri-malleolar fractures, despite the higher complexity and longer operative times seen in the latter. The study highlights the need of a change in the RVUs for bi-malleolar and tri-malleolar ankle fractures to ensure that surgeons are adequately reimbursed per unit time for treating a more complex fracture case.

Interfacility Transfer Patients With Pelvic, Acetabular, and Lower Extremity Fractures Are at Higher Risk for Major Complications and Readmissions.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the adverse event profile and patient comorbidity profile of lower extremity orthopaedic trauma patients admitted via interfacility transfer (IT) to direct admission (DA) patients from home. METHODS: A total of 39,497 patients from 2012 to 2019 were identified in the American College of Surgeon National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. DA patients were compared with IT patients for differences in preoperative comorbidities, adverse events, length of stay, and readmissions in the 30-day postoperative period. Student t tests were used to assess continuous variables. Pearson χ 2 test and odds ratios (ORs) were used for categorical variables. RESULTS: The IT group comprised 7167 patients, and the DA group comprised 32,330 patients. IT patients were on average older (65.5 vs. 58.8 years, P < 0.01), more likely to be American Society of Anesthesiologists Status >2 ( P < 0.01), and had a worse comorbidity profile for numerous preoperative risk factors. IT patients had significantly higher rates of mortality [3.3% vs. 1.4%; odds ratio (OR) 2.29; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.96-2.77], major complications (10.2% vs. 6.1%; OR 1.74; 95% CI, 1.60-1.91), significantly higher readmission rates (5.8% vs. 4.8%, P < 0.01, OR 1.22 95% CI, 1.09-1.36), and more infectious complications (7% vs. 4.7%; OR 1.54; 95% CI, 1.38-1.71) than DA patients. Transfer remained a significant factor predicting major adverse events in regression analysis controlling for patient characteristics and fracture type ( P < 0.01; B 1.197; 95% CI, 1.09-1.32). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that IT patients undergoing operative management of pelvic, acetabular, and lower extremity fractures are at a significantly increased risk of major complications, readmission, and have a higher morbidity burden than DA patients. As healthcare transitions to value-based care and bundled payments, hospitals that accept a high volume of ITs will face exposure to added risk and financial penalties without adequate policy protections. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

What Do Orthopedic Trauma Surgeons Want and Expect from Anesthesiologists?

From the orthopedic trauma surgeon's perspective, successful injury management hinges on fracture fixation and restoration of patient mobility in a safe and expeditious manner. Management of critically injured polytrauma patients and shared decisions regarding regional anesthetics presents a myriad of challenges for orthopedic trauma surgeons and anesthesiologists alike. As the populations age, the typical patient sustaining traumatic orthopedic injuries are increasingly frail and elderly. This trend in demographics has mandated that care for orthogeriatric patients is coordinated by multidisciplinary teams working in concert on medically complex cases to a common end. In this article, we highlight opportunities for improved communication and care integration between orthopedic trauma surgeons and anesthesiologists.

Optimizing the implementation of a multisite feasibility trial of a mind-body program in acute orthopedic trauma.

The Toolkit for Optimal Recovery (TOR) is a mind-body program for patients with acute orthopedic injuries who are at risk for persistent pain/disability. In preparation for a multisite feasibility trial of TOR at three orthopedic trauma centers, we aim to qualitatively identify barriers and facilitators to study implementation and strategies to mitigate the implementation barriers and leverage facilitators.We conducted 18 live video focus groups among providers and three one-on-one interviews with department chiefs at Level 1 trauma centers in three geographically diverse sites (N = 79 participants). Using a content analysis approach, we detected the site-specific barriers and facilitators of implementation of TOR clinical trial. We organized the data according to 26 constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), mapped to three Proctor implementation outcomes relevant to the desired study outcomes (acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility). Across the three sites, we mapped six of the CFIR constructs to acceptability, eight to appropriateness, and three to feasibility. Prominent perceived barriers across all three sites were related to providers' lack of knowledge/comfort addressing psychosocial factors, and organizational cultures of prioritizing workflow efficiency over patients' psychosocial needs (acceptability), poor fit between TOR clinical trial and the fast-paced clinic structure as well as basic needs of some patients (appropriateness), and limited resources (feasibility). Suggestions to maximize the implementation of the TOR trial included provision of knowledge/tools to improve providers' confidence, streamlining study recruitment procedures, creating a learning collaborative, tailoring the study protocol based on local needs assessments, exercising flexibility in conducting research, dedicating research staff, and identifying/promoting champions and using novel incentive structures with regular check-ins, while keeping study procedures as nonobtrusive and language as de-stigmatizing as possible. These data could serve as a blueprint for implementation of clinical research and innovations in orthopedic and other medical settings.

Discharge to inpatient care facilities following hip fracture surgery: incidence, risk factors, and 30-day post-discharge outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Discharge to an inpatient care facility (skilled-care or rehabilitation) has been shown to be associated with adverse outcomes following elective total joint arthroplasties. Current evidence with regard to hip fracture surgeries remains limited. METHODS: The 2015-2016 ACS-NSQIP database was used to query for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty and open reduction internal fixation for hip fractures. A total of 15,655 patients undergoing hip fracture surgery were retrieved from the database. Inpatient facility discharge included discharges to skilled-care facilities and inpatient rehabilitation units. Multi-variate regression analysis was used to assess for differences in 30-day post-discharge outcomes between home-discharge versus inpatient care facility discharge, while adjusting for baseline differences between the 2 study populations. RESULTS: A total of 12,568 (80.3%) patients were discharged to an inpatient care facility. Discharge to an inpatient care facility was associated with higher odds of any complication (OR 2.03 [95% CI, 1.61-2.55]; p < 0.001), wound complications (OR 1.79 [95% CI, 1.10-2.91]; p = 0.019), cardiac complications (OR 4.49 [95% CI, 1.40-14.40]; p = 0.012), respiratory complication (OR 2.29 [95% CI, 1.39-3.77]; p = 0.001), stroke (OR 7.67 [95% CI, 1.05-56.29]; p = 0.045, urinary tract infections (OR 2.30 [95% CI, 1.52-3.48]; p < 0.001), unplanned re-operations (OR 1.37 [95% CI, 1.03-1.82]; p = 0.029) and readmissions (OR 1.38 [95% CI, 1.16-1.63]; p < 0.001) following discharge. CONCLUSION: Discharge to inpatient care facilities versus home following hip fracture surgery is associated with higher odds of post-discharge complications, re-operations and readmissions. These results stress the importance of careful patient selection prior to discharge to inpatient care facilities to minimise the risk of complications.

Pubic Symphysis Separation and Regression in Vaginal versus Cesarean Delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the association of pubic symphysis separation with mode of delivery and follow the resolution of this physiologic separation in the postpartum period. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort study that recruited two cohorts of primiparous women: those undergoing vaginal and cesarean delivery (45 and 46 patients, respectively). Chart review collected intrapartum factors. Patients were followed with serial anterior-posterior radiographs within 48 hours of delivery and at 6, 12, and 24 weeks postpartum, to evaluate the extent of pubic symphysis separation. Differences between the two cohorts in intrapartum factors were assesses as was pubic symphysis separation at each time point. RESULTS: Mean age of women was 25.8 (SD 5.1) years, and 56% were White. Mean birth weight was 3.5 (SD 0.52) kg. Mean immediate postpartum pubic symphysis separation was 7.6 (SD 2.2) mm and did not differ between groups, at 7.18 mm for vaginal delivery versus 8.04 mm for cesarean delivery (CD; P = 0.08). Pubic symphysis separation was not significantly different for CD with and without labour. Black race and obesity were associated with increased pubic symphysis separation. No intrapartum events were related to extent of separation. Normalization of pregnancy pubic symphysis separation to 4-5 mm occurred by 6 weeks postpartum. Separation of >10mm and <15mm occurred in 10 of the 91 women and occurred after vaginal and cesarean delivery. The widest pubic symphysis separation was observed in 3 patients after vaginal delivery. CONCLUSION: Physiological pubic symphysis separation occursduring pregnancy and regresses postpartum with minimal effects from labour and delivery. Cesarean deliverydoes not prevent physiological pubic symphysis separation.

Training the New Generations of Orthopaedic Surgery Residents: Understanding Generational Differences to Maximize Educational Benefit.

ABSTRACT: Most of the current orthopaedic residents are considered Millennials (born between 1981 and 1996) and are often trained by attending surgeons who are from Generation X (born between 1965 and 1980) or the Baby Boomer generation (born between 1946 and 1964). The Generation X orthopaedic surgeons were largely trained by Baby Boomers who were very demanding of their trainees and expected excellence. The Baby Boomers had been inspired, mentored, and trained by the Greatest Generation (born between 1901 and 1927). Baby Boomers took nothing for granted and nothing was given to them on a silver platter. Generation X was trained under these premises and was expected to abide by similar values. Regarding the next generation of residents, current faculty hope to instill the same qualities that had been instilled in them during their training. This value transference sometimes presents a challenge because of the differences in attitudes and perspectives that may exist between Millennial residents and their predecessors regarding work-life balance, teaching styles, the regulation of duty hours, and feedback assessments. These differences require an evolution in the methods of surgical education to optimize the educational benefit and ensure good will and rapport between the generations. Trainees and faculty alike have a responsibility to understand each other's differences and come together to ensure that knowledge, experience, values, and skill sets are effectively passed on to a new generation of orthopaedic surgeons.

Lower Extremity Splinting: A Head-to-Head Comparison of A Novel One-Step Spray-on Splint Versus Standard Splinting.

INTRODUCTION: Splinting is an essential component of treating many lower extremity musculoskeletal injuries; however, little development has been made in splinting technology. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of current immobilization equipment for lower extremity fractures by testing a novel one-step spray-on foam splint (Fast Cast) against structural aluminum malleable (SAM) lower extremity musculoskeletal injuries and 6-inch ACE (3M Corp., Minneapolis, MN, USA) bandage splints. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six orthopedic surgical residents and two medical students participated in a prospective analysis of austere splinting techniques and equipment that utilized a cadaveric model with a distal third tibia-fibula shaft fracture. Each participant was observed and scored by three fellowship trained attending orthopedic surgeons. All scoring was independent using a 5-point Likert scale based on 10 splinting criteria (50 total points possible), including quality of radiographic reduction, time to completion, safety, and sustain longitudinal traction. The Likert scale is a set of questions that reflects the respondent's degree of agreement or disagreement with a statement. Each of the 10 questions has a range of 1-5. A score of 50 means the splint performed perfectly. The lowest possible score is a 10. The participants utilized standard equipment that included SAM splints and 6-inch ACE wraps (3M Corp., Minneapolis, MN, USA) in their first attempt. A second immobilization attempt was done with a one-step spray-on foam splint (Fast Cast). After each splinting attempt, the reduction was verified with radiographic imaging. Data analysis was performed using standard descriptive statistics, Student's t-tests, and inter-rater reliability was calculated using Cronbach's alpha scores. This project is Institutional Review Board (IRB) exempt. RESULTS: The one-step spray-on foam splinting technique was superior (P < .05) in all parameters of the Likert scale, yielding a mean overall score of 45.1 points (±3.8), safety 4.7 points, longitudinal traction 4.5 points, and time 136 seconds (±23). The SAM resulted in a mean overall score of 33.8 points (±7.3), safety 2.8 points, longitudinal traction 4.1 points, and time 170 seconds (±52). Radiographic rating was 4.1 points (±0.7) for the SAM splint and 4.5 (±0.6) for Fast Cast. The differences in time to completion and radiograph rating did not reach statistical significance (P = .12 and P = .07, respectively). CONCLUSION: A one-step spray-on foam splinting technique demonstrated consistent superiority in reducing fracture motion, potential soft-tissue damage, and sustained longitudinal traction as compared to the standard technique.

Pubic root fractures are commonly misread as anterior column fractures by radiologists: Single-institution study from a level 1 trauma center.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine how frequently pubic root fracture is incorrectly identified as anterior column fracture by radiologists and describe differences in characteristics and outcomes between injury patterns. METHODS: We identified 155 patients who sustained pelvic or acetabular fractures at a single, level 1 trauma academic institution. Pelvis computed tomography (CT) scans were evaluated to determine whether patients sustained an anterior column fracture or pubic root fracture. Demographic and clinical factors such as mortality, ambulatory status, type of treatment (nonoperative/surgery), and mechanism of energy were assessed. RESULTS: There were a total of 83 patients in the anterior column group and 72 patients in the pubic root cohort. Eighty-five percent of pubic root fractures were read as anterior column fractures by radiologists. A total of 77.8% of pubic root fractures had posterior ring involvement. Patients with true anterior column acetabular fracture were more likely to need surgery (63.86% vs 41.70%, P = 0.01) and be discharged to skilled nursing or inpatient rehabilitation (59.04% vs 40.27%, P = 0.02) compared to patients with pubic root fracture. CONCLUSION: Pubic root fractures are frequently misread as anterior column fractures in radiology reports. Correctly diagnosing pubic root fractures and differentiating them from anterior column acetabular fractures can have significant impact on patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Therapeutic.

Octogenarian and Nonagenarians Are at a Higher Risk for Experiencing Adverse 30-Day Outcomes Following ORIF of Ankle Fractures.

INTRODUCTION: Despite an increasing number of elderly individuals undergoing surgical fixation for ankle fractures, few studies have investigated peri-operative outcomes and safety of surgery in an octogenarian and nonagenarian population (age >80 years). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2012-2017 American College of Surgeons database was queried for patients undergoing open reduction internal fixation for isolated uni-malleolar, bi-malleolar and tri-malleolar ankle fractures. The study cohort was divided into 3 comparison groups (age <65 years, 65-75 and >80). Multi-variate regression analyzes were used to compare the independent effect of varying age groups on 30-day post-operative outcomes while controlling for baseline clinical characteristics and co-morbidity burdens. RESULTS: A total of 19,585 patients were included: 5.3% were >80 years, 18.1% were 65-79 years, and 76.6% were <65 years. When compared to the non-geriatric population, individuals >80 years were at a significantly Abstract: higher risk of 30-day wound complications (OR 1.84; p = 0.019), pulmonary complications (OR 3.88; p < 0.001), renal complications (OR 1.96; p = 0.015), septic complications (OR 3.72; p = 0.002), urinary tract infections (OR 2.24; p < 0.001), bleeding requiring transfusion (OR 1.90; p = 0.025), mortality (or 7.44; p < 0.001), readmissions (OR 1.65; p = 0.004) and non-home discharge (OR 13.91; p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Octogenarians undergoing ankle fracture fixation are a high-risk population in need of significant pre-operative surgical and medical optimization. With the majority of patients undergoing non-elective ORIF procedures, it is critical to anticipate potential complications and incorporate experienced geriatric providers early in the surgical management of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Octogenarians and nonagenarians are fundamentally distinct and vulnerable age groups with a high risk of complications, readmissions, mortality and non-home discharges compared to other geriatric (65-79 years) and non-geriatric (<65 years) patients. Pre-operative counseling and risk-stratification are essential in this vulnerable patient population.

What Is the Quality of Surgical Care for Patients with Hip Fractures at Critical Access Hospitals?

BACKGROUND: Critical access hospitals (CAHs) play an important role in providing access to care for many patients in rural communities. Prior studies have shown that these facilities are able to provide timely and quality care for patients who undergo various elective and emergency general surgical procedures. However, little is known about the quality and reimbursement of surgical care for patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures at CAHs compared with non-CAH facilities. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Are there any differences in 90-day complications, readmissions, mortality, and Medicare payments between patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures at CAHs and those undergoing surgery at non-CAHs? METHODS: The 2005 to 2014 Medicare 100% Standard Analytical Files were queried using ICD-9 procedure codes to identify Medicare-eligible beneficiaries undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (79.15, 79.35, and 78.55), hemiarthroplasty (81.52), and THA (81.51) for isolated closed hip fractures. This database was selected because the claims capture inpatient diagnoses, procedures, charged amounts and paid claims, as well as hospital-level information of the care, of Medicare patients across the nation. Patients with concurrent fixation of an upper extremity, lower extremity, and/or polytrauma were excluded from the study to ensure an isolated cohort of hip fractures was captured. The study cohort was divided into two groups based on where the surgery took place: CAHs and non-CAHs. A 1:1 propensity score match, adjusting for baseline demographics (age, gender, Census Bureau-designated region, and Elixhauser comorbidity index), clinical characteristics (fixation type and time to surgery), and hospital characteristics (whether the hospital was located in a rural ZIP code, the average annual procedure volume of the operating facility, hospital bed size, hospital ownership and teaching status), was used to control for the presence of baseline differences in patients presenting at CAHs and those presenting at non-CAHs. A total of 1,467,482 patients with hip fractures were included, 29,058 of whom underwent surgery in a CAH. After propensity score matching, each cohort (CAH and non-CAH) contained 29,058 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess for differences in 90-day complications, readmissions, and mortality between the two matched cohorts. As funding policies of CAHs are regulated by Medicare, an evaluation of costs-of-care (by using Medicare payments as a proxy) was conducted. Generalized linear regression modeling was used to assess the 90-day Medicare payments among patients undergoing surgery in a CAH, while controlling for differences in baseline demographics and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures were less likely to experience many serious complications at a critical access hospital (CAH) than at a non-CAH. In particular, after controlling for patient demographics, hospital-level factors and procedural characteristics, patients treated at a CAH were less likely to experience: myocardial infarction (3% (916 of 29,058) versus 4% (1126 of 29,058); OR 0.80 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.88]; p < 0.001), sepsis (3% (765 of 29,058) versus 4% (1084 of 29,058); OR 0.69 [95% CI 0.63 to 0.78]; p < 0.001), acute renal failure (6% (1605 of 29,058) versus 8% (2353 of 29,058); OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.61 to 0.69]; p < 0.001), and Clostridium difficile infections (1% (367 of 29,058) versus 2% (473 of 29,058); OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.88]; p < 0.001) than undergoing surgery in a non-CAH. CAHs also had lower rates of all-cause 90-day readmissions (18% (5133 of 29,058) versus 20% (5931 of 29,058); OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.79 to 0.86]; p < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (4% (1273 of 29,058) versus 5% (1437 of 29,058); OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.82 to 0.95]; p = 0.001) than non-CAHs. Further, CAHs also had risk-adjusted lower 90-day Medicare payments than non-CAHs (USD 800, standard error 89; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients who received hip fracture surgical care at CAHs had a lower risk of major medical and surgical complications than those who had surgery at non-CAHs, even though Medicare reimbursements were lower as well. Although there may be some degree of patient selection at CAHs, these facilities appear to provide high-value care to rural communities. These findings provide evidence for policymakers evaluating the impact of the CAH program and allocating funding resources, as well as for community members seeking emergent care at local CAH facilities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Targeted Muscle Reinnervation at the Time of Major Limb Amputation in Traumatic Amputees: Early Experience of an Effective Treatment Strategy to Improve Pain.

BACKGROUND: Orthopaedic trauma etiologies are a common cause for amputation. Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) is a technique aimed at reducing or preventing pain and improving function. The purpose of this study was to examine postoperative phantom limb pain and residual limb pain following TMR in orthopaedic trauma amputees. In addition, postoperative rates of opioid and neuromodulator medication use were evaluated. METHODS: Twenty-five patients (60% male) prospectively enrolled in a single-institution study and underwent TMR at the time of major limb amputation (48% nonmilitary trauma, 32% infection secondary to previous nonmilitary trauma, and 20% other, also secondary to trauma). Phantom limb pain and residual limb pain scores, pain temporality, prosthetic use, and unemployment status were assessed at the time of follow-up. The use of opioid and neuromodulator medications both preoperatively and postoperatively was also examined. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 14.1 months, phantom limb pain and residual limb pain scores were low, with 92% of the patients reporting no pain or brief intermittent pain only. Pain scores were higher overall for male patients compared with female patients (p < 0.05) except for 1 subscore, and higher in patients who underwent amputation for infection (odds ratio, 9.75; p = 0.01). Sixteen percent of the patients reported opioid medication use at the time of the latest documented follow-up. Fifty percent of the patients who were taking opioids preoperatively discontinued use postoperatively, while 100% of the patients who were not taking opioids preoperatively discontinued postoperative use. None of the patients who were taking neuromodulator medication preoperatively discontinued use postoperatively (0 of 5). The median time to neuromodulator medication discontinuation was 14.6 months, with female patients taking longer than male patients (23 compared with 7 months; p = 0.02). At the time of the latest follow-up, the rate of reported prosthetic use was 85% for lower-extremity and 40% for upper-extremity amputees, with a rate of unemployment due to disability of 36%. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TMR in orthopaedic trauma amputees was associated with low overall pain scores at 2-year follow-up, decreased overall opioid and neuromodulator medication use, and an overall high rate of daily prosthetic use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A Review of State Guidelines for Elective Orthopaedic Procedures During the COVID-19 Outbreak.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in widespread cancellation of elective orthopaedic procedures. The guidance coming from multiple sources frequently has been difficult to assimilate as well as dynamic, with constantly changing standards. We seek to communicate the current guidelines published by each state, to discuss the impact of these guidelines on orthopaedic surgery, and to provide the general framework used to determine which procedures have been postponed at our institution. METHODS: An internet search was used to identify published state guidelines regarding the cancellation of elective procedures, with a publication cutoff of March 24, 2020, 5:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time. Data collected included the number of states providing guidance to cancel elective procedures and which states provided specific guidance in determining which procedures should continue being performed as well as to orthopaedic-specific guidance. RESULTS: Thirty states published guidance regarding the discontinuation of elective procedures, and 16 states provided a definition of "elective" procedures or specific guidance for determining which procedures should continue to be performed. Only 5 states provided guidelines specifically mentioning orthopaedic surgery; of those, 4 states explicitly allowed for trauma-related procedures and 4 states provided guidance against performing arthroplasty. Ten states provided guidelines allowing for the continuation of oncological procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Few states have published guidelines specific to orthopaedic surgery during the COVID-19 outbreak, leaving hospital systems and surgeons with the responsibility of balancing the benefits of surgery with the risks to public health.

Management of a Broken PRECICE Femoral Nail at an Ununited Distraction Osteogenesis Site: A Case Report.

CASE: A 20-year-old man with a history of right lower extremity fibular hemimelia previously treated with PRECICE femoral nail lengthening presented with a broken magnetic nail and a displaced fracture through an ununited distraction osteogenesis site. Using a combination of techniques, we removed the broken implant while maintaining the achieved limb length and preserving the native biology without bone grafting. CONCLUSION: The unique challenges associated with the removal of a broken PRECICE femoral nail are described, with a technique for implant removal that preserves the achieved length, the innate biology of the distraction osteogenesis site, and promoting union without bone grafting.

The "Hip Fracture" Bundle-Experiences, Challenges, and Opportunities.

INTRODUCTION: With growing popularity and success of alternative-payment models (APMs) in elective total joint arthroplasties, there has been recent discussion on the probability of implementing APMs for geriatric hip fractures as well. SIGNIFICANCE: Despite the growing interest, little is known about the drawbacks and challenges that will be faced in a stipulated "hip fracture" bundle. RESULTS: Given the varying intricacies and complexities of hip fractures, a "one-size-fits-all" bundled payment may not be an amenable way of ensuring equitable reimbursement for participating physicians and hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Health-policy makers need to advocate for better risk-adjustment methods to prevent the creation of financial disincentives for hospitals taking care of complex, sicker patients. Hospitals participating in bundled care also need to voice concerns regarding the grouping of hip fractures undergoing total hip arthroplasty to ensure that trauma centers are not unfairly penalized due to higher readmission rates associated with hip fractures skewing quality metrics. Physicians also need to consider the launch of better risk-stratification protocols and promote geriatric comanagement of these patients to prevent occurrences of costly adverse events.

Are Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons Being Adequately Compensated for Treating Nonunions of the Femoral Shaft?: An Analysis of Relative Value Units.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated differences in reimbursement rates between native femoral shaft fractures treated with an intramedullary nail versus those undergoing repair of nonunion of femoral shaft fractures. METHODS: The 2016 to 2017 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried using International Classification of Diseases 10th Edition diagnosis codes and Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify patients undergoing surgery for native femoral shaft fractures and/or repair of nonunion of femoral shaft fracture with/without grafts. RESULTS: The mean total relative value unit (RVU) and surgical time for each group were as follows: (1) native (RVU = 19.70, surgical time = 97.4 minutes), (2) nonunion w/out graft (RVU = 17.23, surgical time = 135.8 minutes), (3) nonunion w/graft (RVU = 18.88, surgical time = 164.5 minutes). Reimbursement rates decreased notably as complexity of case grew (native = $8.74/min versus nonunion w/graft = $6.07/min versus nonunion w/graft = $5.27/min; P < 0.001). The average reimbursement/case was $707 for native femoral shaft fracture, $618 for repair of nonunion w/out graft, and $678 for repair of nonunion with bone graft. DISCUSSION: The study highlights the need for a change in the RVUs assigned to nonunions of the femoral shaft to ensure that the value of physician intensity is retained in future RVU evaluations.

Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release Using Wide-Awake Anesthesia.

Purpose: We report on patient and surgeon experience after single-port endoscopic carpal tunnel release (CTR) using wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) technique. Methods: From July to November 2018, patients undergoing endoscopic CTR with WALANT were prospectively included. Follow-up was 3 months. Patient ratings before, during, and after the operation were collected. We recorded the surgeon's experience during surgery compared with the endoscopic CTR under local anesthesia with exsanguination and tourniquet. Complications were defined as nerve injury, infection, or the need for revision surgery. Results: The cohort consisted of 20 patients (24 wrists). All patients except one reported a complete or substantial decrease of symptoms. The 2 surgeons involved judged the procedure to be technically more demanding owing to impaired visualization (33%) caused by increased bleeding and edema in the operative field. There was one conversion from endoscopic to open surgery. Conclusions: We recommend starting single-port endoscopic CTR using WALANT with a noninflated tourniquet in place for use when necessary. Type of study/level of evidence: Therapeutic IV.