Clostridium difficile Infection Prior to Total Hip Arthroplasty Independently Increases the Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with major morbidity. There may be a link between the gut microbiome and an individual's overall immune system. A Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) infection portends poor gut microbiome health and has been previously associated with increased 90-day complication rates in total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of a previous history of C. difficile infection within 2 years of undergoing THA on PJI within 2 years postoperatively. METHODS: Patients undergoing THA from 2010 to 2021 were identified in a patient claims database (n = 770,075). Patients who had active records 2 years before and after THA as well as a history of C. difficile infection within 2 years prior to THA (n = 1,836) were included and propensity matched to a control group using age, sex, and Elixhauser comorbidity index. The primary outcome was the 2-year incidence of postoperative PJI. The exposed C. difficile infection cohort was stratified into 4 groups based on the time proximity of the C. difficile infection. Chi-square tests and logistic regressions were used to compare the groups. RESULTS: A C. difficile infection anytime within 2 years prior to total hip arthroplasty was independently associated with higher odds of PJI (OR [odds ratio]: 1.49 [95% CI (confidence interval) 1.09 to 2.02, P = .014]). Proximity of C. difficile infection to arthroplasty was associated with increased risk of PJI (infection 0 to 3 months before THA: OR 2.01 [95% CI 1.23 to 3.20], infection 3 to 6 months before THA: OR 1.84 [95% CI 1.06 to 3.04], infection 6 to 12 months before THA: OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.65 to 1.77], infection 1 to 2 years before THA: OR 1.40 [95% CI 0.94 to 2.06]). CONCLUSIONS: A C. difficile infection prior to THA is an independent risk factor for PJI. Proximity of C. difficile infection is associated with increased risk of PJI. Future investigations should evaluate how to adequately optimize patients prior to THA and pursue strategies to determine appropriate timing for proceeding with THA.

Rheumatoid Arthritis Is Not a Contraindication to Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has historically been considered a contraindication for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, the widespread use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs has substantially improved the management of RA and prevented disease progression. The objective of this study was to ascertain whether RA impacts UKA revision-free survivorship. METHODS: Patients undergoing UKA from 2010 to 2021 were identified in an administrative claims database (n = 105,937) using Current Procedural Terminology code 27446. All patients who underwent UKA who had a diagnosis of RA with a minimum of 2-year follow-up (n = 1,422) were propensity score matched based on age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index to those who did not have RA (n = 1,422). Laterality was identified using the 10th Revision of International Classification of Diseases codes. The primary outcome was ipsilateral revision to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) within 2 years, and the secondary outcome was ipsilateral revision at any time. RESULTS: Among the 1,422 patients who had a UKA and a diagnosis of RA, 37 patients (2.6%) underwent conversion to TKA within 2 years, and 48 patients (3.4%) underwent conversion to TKA at any point. In comparison, 28 patients (2.0%) in the propensity-matched control group underwent conversion to TKA within 2 years, and 40 patients (2.8%) underwent conversion to TKA at any point. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in conversion to TKA between patients who had and did not have RA, either within 2 years (P = .31) or anytime (P = .45). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who had RA and underwent UKA did not have an increased risk of revision to TKA compared to those who did not have RA. This may indicate that modern management of RA could allow for expanded UKA indications for RA patients.

Individualizing a Total Knee Arthroplasty with Three-Dimensional Planning.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is evolving from mechanical alignment to more individualized alignment options in an attempt to improve patient satisfaction. Thirteen-year survival of kinematically aligned prostheses has recently been shown to be similar to mechanically aligned TKA, allaying concerns of long-term failure of this newer individualized technique. There is a complex inter-relationship of three-dimensional knee and limb alignment for a TKA. This article will review planning parameters necessary to individualize each knee, along with a discussion of how these parameters are related in three dimensions. Future use of computer software and machine learning has the potential to identify the ideal surgical plan for each patient. In the meantime, the material presented here can assist surgeons as newer individual alignment planning becomes a reality.

Evaluating the Need for Simultaneous Carpal Tunnel Release With Forearm Fasciotomy.

PURPOSE: The need to include simultaneous carpal tunnel release (sCTR) with forearm fasciotomy for acute compartment syndrome (ACS) or after vascular repair is unclear. We hypothesized that sCTR is more common when: 1) fasciotomies are performed by orthopedic or plastic surgeons, rather than general or vascular surgeons; 2) ACS occurred because of crush, blunt trauma, or fractures rather than vascular/reperfusion injuries; 3) elevated compartment pressures were documented. We also sought to determine the incidence of delayed CTR when not performed simultaneously. METHODS: Retrospective chart review identified patients who underwent forearm fasciotomy for ACS or vascular injury over a period of 10 years. Patient demographics, mechanism of ACS or indication for fasciotomy, surgeon subspecialty, compartment pressure measurements, inclusion of sCTR, complications, reoperations, and timing and method of definitive closure were analyzed. Logistic regression modeling was used to analyze predictors associated with delayed CTR. RESULTS: Fasciotomies were performed in 166 patients by orthopedic (63%), plastic (28%), and general/vascular (9%) surgeons. Orthopedic and plastic surgeons more frequently performed sCTR (67% and 63%, respectively). A total of 107 (65%) patients had sCTR. Fasciotomies for vascular/reperfusion injury were more likely to include sCTR (44%) compared with other mechanisms. If not performed simultaneously, 11 (19%) required delayed CTR at a median of 42 days. ACS secondary to fracture had the highest rate of delayed CTR (35%), and the necessity of late CTR for fractures was not supported by the logistic regression model. Residual hand paresthesias were less frequent in the sCTR group (6.5% vs 20%). Overall complication rates were similar in both groups (63% sCTR vs 70% without sCTR). CONCLUSION: When sCTR is excluded during forearm fasciotomy, 19% of patients required delayed CTR. This rate was higher (35%) when ACS was associated with fractures. Simultaneous CTR with forearm fasciotomy may decrease the incidence of residual hand paresthesias and the need for a delayed CTR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognosis IV.

Lower-Extremity Injuries Predominate in American High School Tennis Players.

Purpose: To describe injury epidemiology in U.S. adolescent tennis players between 2014 and 2018 via the High School Reporting Information Online (HS RIO) database. Methods: The HS RIO database was queried for injury data on high school tennis players as reported by athletic trainers between 2014 and 2018. Injuries were analyzed according to athlete demographics, injury type, location, and context. Variables of interest between male and female athletes were compared using Pearson χ2 test or Fisher exact test. Results: In total, 176 injuries in high school tennis players between 2014 and 2018 were identified in the HS RIO database. Overall, 25.6% (45/176) occurred in the ankle, 12.5% (22/176) in the knee, and 9.7% (17/176) in the wrist. The most common types of injuries were ligament sprains and muscle strains at 35.2% (62/176) and 17.6% (31/176) of injuries, respectively. Although most injuries were unrelated to contact, such as overuse and heat exertion or stroke, 28.7% (47/176) of injuries were the result of rotation around a planted foot/inversion of the foot. We found no difference in injury patterns between male and female high school tennis athletes. Conclusions: We found no difference in injury patterns between male and female U.S. high school tennis athletes. The ankles, knees, and wrists were the most commonly injured areas in this population. The most common types of injuries were ligament sprains and muscle strains. Although many injuries were new, athletes rarely required surgery and returned to play. Finally, we found no difference in injury patterns between male and female high school tennis athletes. Clinical Relevance: The epidemiology of injuries among high school tennis players is poorly understood. The information from this study will help us to understand these injuries and how we may be able to better prevent them.

Large Variation in Listed Chargemaster Price for Total Joint Arthroplasty Among Top Orthopaedic Hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Chargemasters are lists of all services offered by a hospital and their associated cost. This study analyzes chargemaster data to determine price differences among different hospitals for total joint arthroplasty. METHODS: In May 2020, the chargemaster data for highly rated orthopaedic hospitals were accessed, and the diagnostic-related group (DRG) codes related to primary and revision total joint arthroplasty were analyzed (DRGs 466, 467, 468, 469, and 470). The prices listed for each hospital were averaged, and descriptive statistics were calculated. Furthermore, Medicare reimbursement was collected. A subanalysis was performed to determine relationships between geographic and demographic information. RESULTS: The median price for a major hip or knee joint arthroplasty without complications was $68,016 (range: $39,927 to $195,264). The median price of a revision of hip or knee arthroplasty without complications was $90,966 (range: $58,967 to $247,715). The cost of living in the city in which the hospitals are located was weakly correlated with procedure pricing, whereas the median income had no notable relationship to chargemaster pricing. CONCLUSION: The published cost of DRG codes in arthroplasty is widely variable among the top 20 US orthopaedic hospitals, with little correlation to the cost of living or median income of the area.

Decoding the Signals: An Analysis of Preference Signaling in the 2023 Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Match.

Background: While previously used in other specialties, the preference signaling program (PSP) was implemented in the 2022 to 2023 orthopaedic surgery residency application process for the first time. The PSP allowed for 30 signaling tokens to be sent by applicants to programs of their choice to indicate particular interest in a program. It remains unknown how the PSP affects applicants and programs in the orthopaedic surgery residency match. Thus, this study's purpose was to assess the utility of preference signaling within the orthopaedic surgery residency application process in its inaugural year of use. Methods: An anonymous electronic survey was emailed to all orthopaedic surgery residency applicants who applied to the authors' institution during the 2022 to 2023 application cycle. The survey was sent after match lists were submitted and closed before the release of match results. The survey collected information regarding applicant demographics, preference signaling habits, and attitude toward preference signaling. Results: The survey was completed by 101 applicants. Applicants applied to a mean of 90 programs (range: 10-197) and received an average of 12 interview invitations (range: 0-39). Applicants almost uniformly used all 30 signals, with nearly two-thirds signaling their home programs (65%, 49/76), and nearly all applicants sending signals to programs at which they performed away rotations (95.7%, 88/92). Applicants received a mean of 9 invitations from programs they signaled, compared with 2 invitations from programs they did not signal. Applicants were significantly more likely to receive an interview invite at a program they signaled than one they did not (p < 0.01). Overall, 57% of applicants (57/101) found the PSP to be helpful, whereas 28% (28/101) found it to be unhelpful, and 16% (16/101) had a neutral opinion. Conclusions: This study reports that the PSP in the 2022 to 2023 orthopaedic surgery match was an effective method of expressing interest in a program because applicants were significantly more likely to receive interview invites to signaled programs. More than half of respondents felt PSP to be helpful; however, the effect on application numbers is still unclear. Level of Evidence: III.

Long-term Trends in Open vs Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release Among the Medicare Population in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel release (CTR) surgery is the most common surgery billed to Medicare by hand surgeons. As such, the purpose of this study was to evaluate trends for CTR surgeries billed to Medicare from 2000 to 2020. METHODS: The publicly available Medicare Part B National Summary File from 2000 to 2020 was queried. For both open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) and endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR), the number of procedures and total Medicare reimbursement were extracted. For year 2020, the specialty of the performing surgeon was recorded. Descriptive statistics were reported. RESULTS: A total of 3 429 471 CTR surgeries were performed in the Medicare population from 2000 to 2020. For these procedures, Medicare paid surgeons over $1.23 billion. During this period, there was a 101.8% increase in annual CTR procedures (91 130 in 2000, 183 911 in 2020). Further, annual volume of ECTR increased by 456.2%, and accounted for an increasing percentage of total CTR procedures (9.1% in 2012, 25.2% in 2020). The average adjusted Medicare reimbursement per procedure decreased by 1.5% for OCTR, and decreased by 11.6% for ECTR. In 2020, orthopedic surgeons performed 85.1% of CTR procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of CTR surgeries among the Medicare population has increased from 2000 to 2020, and ECTR is accounting for a growing proportion of surgeries. When adjusted for inflation, average reimbursement has decreased, with a greater decrease among ECTR. Orthopedic surgeons perform most of such surgeries. These trends are important to assure adequate resource allocation as treating carpal tunnel becomes more common among the aging Medicare population.

Principles of mechanical and chemical debridement with implant retention.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most common causes of early revision for total hip and knee arthroplasty. Mechanical and chemical debridement typically referred to as debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) can be a successful technique to eradicate PJI in acute postoperative or acute hematogenous infections. This review will focus specifically on the indications, techniques, and outcomes of DAIR. DISCUSSION: The success of mechanical and chemical debridement, or a DAIR operation, is reliant on a combination of appropriate patient selection and meticulous technique. There are many technical considerations to take into consideration. One of the most important factors in the success of the DAIR procedure is the adequacy of mechanical debridement. Techniques are surgeon-specific and perhaps contribute to the large variability in the literature on the success of DAIR. Factors that have been shown to be associated with success include the exchange of modular components, performing the procedure within seven days or less of symptom onset, and possibly adjunctive rifampin or fluoroquinolone therapy, though this remains controversial. Factors that have been associated with failure include rheumatoid arthritis, age greater than 80 years, male sex, chronic renal failure, liver cirrhosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: DAIR is an effective treatment option for the management of an acute postoperative or hematogenous PJI in the appropriately selected patient with well-fixed implants.

Changes Over a Decade in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimal Clinically Important Difference Reporting in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

Background: When used appropriately, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) provides a powerful tool for identifying meaningful improvements brought about by a given treatment, offering more clinically relevant information than frequentist statistical analysis. However, recent studies have shown inconsistent derivation methods and use of MCIDs. The goal of this study was to report the rate of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and MCIDs use in the literature and assess how this rate has changed over time. Methods: All articles published in 2010 and 2020 reporting on total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty in The Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, and The Journal of Arthroplasty were reviewed. In each reviewed article, every reported PROM and, if present, its corresponding MCID was recorded. These data were used to calculate the rate of reporting of each PROM and MCID. Results: While the total number of articles on total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty reporting PROMs increased over time, the proportion of articles reporting PROMs decreased from 49.8% (131/263) in 2010 to 35.5% (194/546) in 2020 (P = .011). Of these articles that report PROMs, the proportion of articles reporting any MCID increased from 2.3% (3/131) in 2010 to 16.5% (32/194) in 2020 (P = .002). Conclusions: The rate of reporting of MCIDs among articles relating to total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty that report PROMs has increased significantly between 2010 and 2020 but remains low. Continued emphasis on appropriate inclusion and value of MCIDs when PROMS are reported in clinical outcomes studies is needed.

The Current Relationship Between Surgeon Reimbursement and Patient Complexity in Arthroplasty-A Risk-Payment Analysis of All Primary Joint Replacements Billed to Medicare in 2019.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess surgeon reimbursement among total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients who had differing risk profiles within the Medicare population. METHODS: The "2019 Medicare Physician and Other Provider" file was utilized. In 2019, 441,584 primary total hip and knee arthroplasty procedures were billed to Medicare Part B. All episodes were included. Patient demographics and comorbidity profiles were collected for all patients. Additionally, mean patient hierarchal condition category (HCC) risk scores and physician reimbursements were collected. All procedure episodes were split into 2 cohorts; those with an HCC risk score of 1.5 or greater, and those with patient HCC risk scores less than 1.5. Variables were averaged for each cohort and compared. RESULTS: The mean reimbursement across all procedures was $1,068.03. For the sicker patient cohort with a mean HCC risk score of 1.5 or greater, there was a significantly higher rate of all comorbidities compared to the cohort with HCC risk score under 1.5. The mean payment across the sicker cohort was $1,059.21, while the mean payment among the cohort with HCC risk score under 1.5 was 1,073.32 (P = .032). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that for Medicare patients undergoing primary TJA in 2019, the mean surgeon reimbursement was lower for primary TJA among sick patients in comparison to their healthier counterparts, although it is difficult to ascertain the impact of this discrepancy. As alternative payment models continue to undergo evaluation and development, these data will be important for the potential advancement of more equitable reimbursement models in arthroplasty care, specifically regarding surgeon reimbursement and possible risk adjustment within such models.

The Effect of Amniotic Tissue on Spinal Interventions: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Amniotic membrane tissue has been thought to potentiate healing in many soft tissue conditions. Specifically, recent studies have shown its therapeutic potential for treatment in the setting of spinal pathologies. The purpose of this study is to thoroughly review the existing scientific literature and evidence concerning the clinical use of amniotic membrane-derived biologic agents on postoperative outcomes following spinal surgery. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases up to December 2020 to identify animal and clinical studies examining the therapeutic potential for amniotic membrane tissue in the setting of spinal pathologies (including disc herniation, prevention of epidural fibrosis, and spinal fusion). Studies were broken down into 2 categories: experimental model type and the type of amnion product being analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies (4 clinical studies and 8 studies utilizing animal models) met inclusion criteria. Additionally, the major types of amnion product were divided into cryopreserved/freeze-dried amniotic membrane, human amniotic fluid, human amniotic membrane, cross-linked amniotic membrane, and amnion-derived epithelial cells. While heterogeneity of study design precludes definitive specific results reporting, most studies showed positive benefits on healing/outcomes with amniotic augmentation. Specifically, amnion products have shown promising effects in reducing epidural adhesions and scar tissue after spine surgery, improving spinal fusion rate and postoperative pain scores, and promoting better functional outcomes after spine surgery. CONCLUSIONS: A review of the limited number of reported studies revealed a wide variety of amniotic membrane preparations, treatment regimens, and indications, which limit definitive conclusions. To date, while there is no definitive clinical proof that amniotic tissues enhance tissue repair or regeneration, the aggregate results demonstrate promising basic science and outcomes potential in spinal surgery. Further study is warranted to determine whether this application is appropriate in the clinical setting. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This systematic review provides a summary of the existing literature regarding the use of amniotic membrane preparations, treatment regimens, and indications within spinal surgery. With the growing popularity and utilization of biologic agents such as amniotic membrane-derived products in orthopedic and neurologic surgery, this systematic review gives physicians a concise summary on the outcomes and indications associated with amniotic membrane products.

There are Considerable Inconsistencies Among Minimum Clinically Important Differences in TKA: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are frequently used to assess the impact of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on patients. However, mere statistical comparison of PROMs is not sufficient to assess the value of TKA to the patient, especially given the risk profile of arthroplasty. Evaluation of treatment effect sizes is important to support the use of an intervention; this is often quantified with the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). MCIDs are unique to specific PROMs, as they vary by calculation methodology and study population. Therefore, a systematic review of calculated MCID values, their respective ranges, and assessment of their applications is important to guide and encourage their use as a critical measure of effect size in TKA outcomes research. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this systematic review of MCID calculations and reporting in primary TKA, we asked: (1) What are the most frequently reported PROM MCIDs and their reported ranges in TKA? (2) What proportion of studies report distribution- versus anchor-based MCID values? (3) What are the most common methods by which these MCID values are derived for anchor-based values? (4) What are the most common derivation methods for distribution-based values? (5) How do the reported medians and corresponding interquartile ranges (IQR) compare between calculation methods for each PROM? METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases from inception through March 2022 for TKA articles reporting an MCID value for any PROMs. Two independent reviewers screened articles for eligibility, including any article that calculated new MCID values for PROMs after primary TKA, and extracted these data for analysis. Overall, 576 articles were identified, 38 of which were included in the final analysis. These studies had a total of 710,128 patients with a median age of 67.7 years and median BMI of 30.9 kg/m 2 . Women made up more than 50% of patients in most studies, and the median follow-up period was 17 months (range 0.25 to 72 months). The overall risk of bias was assessed as moderate using the Jadad criteria for one randomized controlled trial (3 of 5 ideal global score) and the modified Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies criteria for comparative studies (mean 17.2 ± 1.8) and noncomparative studies (mean 9.6 ± 1.3). There were 49 unique PROMs for which 233 MCIDs were reported. Calculated values were classified as anchor-based, distribution-based, or not reported. MCID values for each PROM, MCID calculation method, number of patients, and study demographics were extracted from each study. Anchor-based and distribution-based MCIDs were compared for each unique PROM using a Wilcoxon rank sum test given non-normal distribution of values. RESULTS: The WOMAC Function and Pain subscores were the most frequently reported MCID value, comprising 9% (22 of 233) and 9% (22 of 233), respectively. The composite Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was the next most frequently reported (9% [21 of 233]), followed by the WOMAC composite score (6% [13 of 233]). The median anchor-based values for WOMAC Function and Pain subscores were 23 (IQR 16 to 33) and 25 (IQR 14 to 31), while the median distribution-based values were 11 (IQR 10.8 to 11) and 22 (IQR 17 to 23), respectively. The median anchor-based MCID value for the OKS was 6 (IQR 4 to 7), while the distribution-based value was 7 (IQR 5 to 10). Thirty-nine percent (15 of 38) used an anchor-based method to calculate a new MCID, while 32% (12 of 38) used a distribution-based technique. Twenty-nine percent of studies (11 of 38) calculated MCID values using both methods. For studies reporting an anchor-based calculation method, a question assessing patient satisfaction, pain relief, or quality of life along a five-point Likert scale was the most commonly used anchor (40% [16 of 40]), followed by a receiver operating characteristic curve estimation (25% [10 of 40]). For studies using distribution-based calculations, all articles used a measure of study population variance in their derivation of the MCID, with the most common method reported as one-half the standard deviation of the difference between preoperative and postoperative PROM scores (45% [14 of 31]). Most reported median MCID values (15 of 19) did not differ by calculation method for each unique PROM (p > 0.05) apart from the WOMAC Function component score and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Pain and Activities of Daily Living subscores. CONCLUSION: Despite variability of MCIDs for each PROM, there is consistency in the methodology by which MCID values have been derived in published studies. Additionally, there is a consensus about MCID values regardless of calculation method across most of the PROMs we evaluated. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given their importance to treatment selection and patient safety, authors and journals should report MCID values with greater consistency. We recommend using a 7-point increase as the MCID for the OKS, consistent with the median reported anchor-based value derived from several high-quality studies with large patient groups that used anchor-based approaches for MCID calculation, which we believe are most appropriate for most applications in clinical research. Likewise, we recommend using a 10-point to 15-point increase for the MCID of composite WOMAC, as the median value was 12 (IQR 10 to 17) with no difference between calculation methods. We recommend use of median reported values for WOMAC function and pain subscores: 21 (IQR 15 to 33) and 23 (IQR 13 to 29), respectively.

Discordance Abounds in Minimum Clinically Important Differences in THA: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is intended to detect a change in a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) large enough for a patient to appreciate. Their growing use in orthopaedic research stems from the necessity to identify a metric, other than the p value, to better assess the effect size of an outcome. Yet, given that MCIDs are population-specific and that there are multiple calculation methods, there is concern about inconsistencies. Given the increasing use of MCIDs in total hip arthroplasty (THA) research, a systematic review of calculated MCID values and their respective ranges, as well as an assessment of their applications, is important to guide and encourage their use as a critical measure of effect size in THA outcomes research. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We systematically reviewed MCID calculations and reporting in current THA research to answer the following: (1) What are the most-reported PROM MCIDs in THA, and what is their range of values? (2) What proportion of studies report anchor-based versus distribution-based MCID values? (3) What are the most common methods by which anchor-based MCID values are derived? (4) What are the most common derivation methods for distribution-based MCID values? (5) How do the reported medians and corresponding ranges compare between calculation methods for each PROM? METHODS: The EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases were systematically reviewed from inception through March 2022 for THA studies reporting an MCID value for any PROMs. Two independent authors reviewed articles for inclusion. All articles calculating new PROM MCID scores after primary THA were included for data extraction and analysis. MCID values for each PROM, MCID calculation method, number of patients, and study demographics were extracted from each article. In total, 30 articles were included. There were 45 unique PROMs for which 242 MCIDs were reported. These studies had a total of 1,000,874 patients with a median age of 64 years and median BMI of 28.7 kg/m 2 . Women made up 55% of patients in the total study population, and the median follow-up period was 12 months (range 0 to 77 months). The overall risk of bias was assessed as moderate using the modified Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies criteria for comparative studies (the mean score for comparative papers in this review was 18 of 24, with higher scores representing better study quality) and noncomparative studies (for these, the mean score was 10 of a possible 16 points, with higher scores representing higher study quality). Calculated values were classified as anchor-based, distribution-based, or not reported. MCID values for each PROM, MCID calculation method, number of patients, and study demographics were extracted from each study. Anchor-based and distribution-based MCIDs were compared for each unique PROM using a Wilcoxon rank sum test, given the non-normal distribution of values. RESULTS: The Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Score (HOOS) Pain and Quality of Life subscore MCIDs were the most frequently reported, comprising 12% (29 of 242), 8% (20 of 242), and 8% (20 of 242), respectively. The EuroQol VAS (EQ-VAS) was the next-most frequently reported (7% [17 of 242]) followed by the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D) (7% [16 of 242]). The median anchor-based value for the OHS was 9 (IQR 8 to 11), while the median distribution-based value was 6 (IQR 5 to 6). The median anchor-based MCID values for HOOS Pain and Quality of Life were 33 (IQR 28 to 35) and 25 (14 to 27), respectively; the median distribution-based values were 10 (IQR 9 to 10) and 13 (IQR 10 to 14), respectively. Thirty percent (nine of 30) of studies used an anchor-based method to calculate a new MCID, while 40% (12 of 30) used a distribution-based technique. Thirty percent of studies (nine of 30) calculated MCID values using both methods. For studies reporting an anchor-based calculation method, a question assessing pain relief, satisfaction, or quality of life on a five-point Likert scale was the most commonly used anchor (30% [eight of 27]), followed by a receiver operating characteristic curve estimation (22% [six of 27]). For studies using distribution-based calculations, the most common method was one-half the standard deviation of the difference between preoperative and postoperative PROM scores (46% [12 of 26]). Most reported median MCID values (nine of 14) did not differ by calculation method for each unique PROM (p > 0.05). The OHS, HOOS JR, and HOOS Function, Symptoms, and Activities of Daily Living subscores all varied by calculation method, because each anchor-based value was larger than its respective distribution-based value. CONCLUSION: We found that MCIDs do not vary very much by calculation method across most outcome measurement tools. Additionally, there are consistencies in MCID calculation methods, because most authors used an anchor question with a Likert scale for the anchor-based approach or used one-half the standard deviation of preoperative and postoperative PROM score differences for the distribution-based approach. For some of the most frequently reported MCIDs, however, anchor-based values tend to be larger than distribution-based values for their respective PROMs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We recommend using a 9-point increase as the MCID for the OHS, consistent with the median reported anchor-based value derived from several high-quality studies with large patient groups that used anchor-based approaches for MCID calculations, which we believe are most appropriate for most applications in clinical research. Likewise, we recommend using the anchor-based 33-point and 25-point MCIDs for the HOOS Pain and Quality of Life subscores, respectively. We encourage using anchor-based MCID values of WOMAC Pain, Function, and Stiffness subscores, which were 29, 26, and 30, respectively.

Does Laterality Matter? The Effect of Unilateral v. Bilateral Sacroiliac Screw Fixation on Personal Hygiene.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative analysis of prospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether sacroiliac (SI) screw fixation ipsilateral to hand dominance compared to bilateral fixation impacts personal hygiene (wiping) after toileting. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with long arthrodesis (≥T12-pelvis) who had undergone primary unilateral or bilateral SI fixation with a minimum of 2-years-follow-up. RESULTS: 117 consecutive patients were included and separated into 2 groups: bilateral SI fixation (BL, n = 61) and unilateral SI fixation (UNI, n = 56), with no difference in age. Of UNI patients, 10.7% (6) performed personal hygiene with a different hand after surgery, compared to 6.6% (4) of patients who received BL fixation (P = 0.422). All UNI patients who switched hands were right-hand dominant, and 5/6 received right-sided fixation. There was no statistical difference found between number of levels fused (<8, 9-11, or >11 levels) and changes in personal hygiene habits. Over a third of patients from both groups had difficulty performing personal hygiene after fusion (UNI = 39.3% BL = 36.1%, P = 0.719). CONCLUSION: SI screws increase the difficulty of performing personal hygiene; yet, the side of unilateral screws does not significantly change personal hygiene habits when compared to bilateral screw placement. Moreover, the length of the construct does not have a significant impact on ability to perform personal hygiene, cause changes in habits, or require the assistance of another individual. However, among our sample of individuals, bilateral fixation did result in a higher rate of revision instrumentation.

Patients are Most Interested in Which Hip Arthroplasty Approach? A 15-year Google Trends Analysis.

Background: The purpose of this analysis was to assess the public interest in total hip arthroplasty (THA) based on approach by analyzing Google Trends online search volume trends between 2007 and 2021. Methods: Data were obtained by querying the Google Trends online search tool for key terms and phrases relating to anterior, posterior, lateral, and minimally invasive approaches to THA. Data from January 2007 to December 2021 were utilized. Relative search volume (RSV) was generated for each THA approach group based on historical search volume trends in the United States. Results: Over the 15-year period, Google Trends Search Data demonstrated a statistically significant increase (P < .001) in the RSV for all 4 major hip arthroplasty approaches. The growth in public interest for anterior hip arthroplasty was significantly greater than the growth for posterior (P = .02) and minimally invasive hip arthroplasty (P = .02). The difference in RSV growth between lateral and anterior approaches was not significant (P = .88). The average RSV for anterior hip arthroplasty was 59.0, which was significantly greater than the average RSV of all other groups. Conclusions: The anterior approach to hip arthroplasty has demonstrated a consistent and statistically significant increase in RSV over the past 15 years that has outpaced the increases observed in the posterior and minimally invasive approaches. Despite the increase in public awareness and interest for anterior approach hip arthroplasty, it is yet to demonstrate any long-term clinical benefits over other approaches.

Abnormal Spinopelvic Motion and Spine Deformity are Associated With Native Femoral Retroversion in the Setting of Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: The effect of spinopelvic pathology on femoral version is unclear. This study investigated variability in native femoral anteversion in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and its relationship to the patient's underlying spinopelvic pattern. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed to include in the study all patients undergoing robot-assisted THA over a 3-year period. Native femoral version was measured for each patient using a preoperative computed tomography scan and categorized as excessive, normal, or retroverted. Additionally, a subset analysis was performed for all patients with sit-to-stand dynamic pelvic radiographs available, and cases were classified by spinopelvic pattern. Results: A total of 119 patients were included in the study with a mean age of 68.6 years; 61 (51%) were female. The median femoral anteversion for the entire study group was 6.0° (-32° to 40°, interquartile range 13.5°). Eleven patients (9.2%) had excessive femoral anteversion, 54 of the 119 (45.4%) had normal femoral version, and 54 of the 119 (45.4%) had native retroversion. Forty-two patients (35.3%) had sit-to-stand radiographs available and were subclassified by femoral version type and spinopelvic parameters. Welch's analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference in femoral version among spinopelvic patterns (F = 7.826, P = .003), with Games-Howell post hoc analysis showing increased retroversion in deformity-stiff patients compared to deformity-normal mobility patients (P = .003). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that native femoral retroversion is present in a significant number of patients undergoing THA and is more common in patients with stiff spine deformities. Based on this observation, currently available spinopelvic classification systems should be modified to account for native femoral version.

Orthopaedic Surgery Away Rotations: Current Issues and Lessons Learned.

Away rotations have become a critical factor for a successful orthopaedic surgery residency match. Away rotations significantly improve an applicant's chance of matching into an orthopaedic residency. Away rotations were limited during the 2020 to 2021 academic year because of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the 2021 to 2022 academic year, the American Association of Medical Colleges coalition recommended students only complete 1 rotation outside their home institution, whereas the American Orthopaedic Association Council of Residency Directors argued that multiple rotations should be allowed. We sought to quantify the impact of these restrictions on orthopaedic surgery applicants during the 2020 to 2021 residency application cycle. Methods: An online survey was sent to all applicants applying to the authors' home orthopaedic surgery program. The survey asked respondents to indicate how many away rotations they completed and how many they planned to complete but were unable to complete in the 2020 to 2021 application cycle. Historical match data were obtained from the National Resident Matching Program's publicly accessible Main Residency Match Data and Reports. Results: Survey responses were collected from 650 of 812 applicants (80%) to our program. Over a third of respondents (38.1%) reported completing 3 subinternship rotations during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle. Nearly a quarter of respondents (24.0%) reported completing 4 rotations. Most applicants (50.9%) were unable to complete 5 previously planned rotations because of pandemic-related restrictions, and 25.2% reported an inability to complete 4 rotations. Fewer applicants reported canceling 3 rotations (9.2%), 2 rotations (6.8%), or 1 (7.8%) rotation. Conclusions: Away rotations have been a traditional component of the orthopaedic surgery application process. Restrictions on away rotations in the 2020 to 2021 residency application cycle had affected the number of rotations that applicants were able to complete. However, despite those restrictions, over a third of applicants were able to complete at least 3 rotations. This suggests that the away rotation experience is variable for students and may be multifactorial; however, our study did not investigate the reasons for this. Accordingly, limiting away rotations may support an inequitable environment for medical students applying to orthopaedic surgery, and creating a consensus definition among medical schools, program directors, and orthopaedic chairs of away rotations, their duration, and the maximum number allowed would enhance fairness and reduce inconsistencies.