Search

Purpose: To determine whether leading, commercially-available LLMs provide treatment recommendations concordant with evidenced-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) developed by the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS)., Methods: All CPGs concerning the management of rotator cuff tears(n=33) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries(n=15) were extracted from the AAOS. Treatment recommendations from Chat-generative pretrained transformer version-4 [ChatGPT-4; OpenAI], Gemini (Google), Mistral-7B (Mistral AI), and Claude-3 (Anthropic) were graded by two blinded physicians as being "concordant," "discordant," or "indeterminate" (i.e., neutral response without definitive recommendation) with respect to AAOS CPGs. The overall concordance between LLM and AAOS recommendations were quantified, while the comparative overall concordance of recommendations amongst the four LLMs was evaluated through the Fischer's-exact test., Results: Overall 135(70.3%) responses were concordant, 43(22.4%) indeterminate, and 14(7.3%) discordant. Inter-rater reliability for concordance classification was excellent (Kappa=0.92). Concordance with AAOS CPGs was most frequently observed with ChatGPT-4 (n=38, 79.2%), and least frequently with Mistral-7B (n=28,58.3%). Indeterminate recommendations were most frequently observed with Mistral-7B (n=17,35.4%) and least frequently with Claude-3 (n=8, 6.7%). Discordant recommendations were most frequently observed with Gemini (n=6,12.5%) and least frequently with ChatGPT-4 (n=1,2.1%). Overall, no statistically significant differences in concordant recommendations was observed across LLMs (p=0.12). Only 20 (10.4%) of all recommendations were transparent and provided references with full bibliographic details or links to specific peer-reviewed content to support recommendations., Conclusion: Among leading commercially-available LLMs, more than one-in-four recommendations concerning the evaluation and management of rotator cuff and ACL injuries do not reflect current evidenced-based CPGs. Although ChatGPT-4 demonstrated the highest performance, clinically significant rates of recommendations without concordance or supporting evidence were observed. Only 10% of responses by LLMs were transparent, precluding users from fully interpreting the sources from which recommendations were provided., Clinical Relevance: While leading LLMs generally provide recommendations concordant with CPGs, a substantial error-rate exists, and the proportion of recommendations that do not align with these CPGs suggest that LLMs are not trustworthy clinical support tools at this time. Each off-the-shelf, closed-source LLM has strengths and weaknesses. Future research should evaluate and compare multiple LLMs to avoid bias associated with narrow evaluation of few models as observed in current literature., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To define the clinical effect of intra-articular injection of iliac crest-derived bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) at the time of hip arthroscopy in patients with symptomatic labral tears and early radiographic degenerative changes., Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected hip registry database was performed. Patients with symptomatic labral tears and Tönnis grade 1 or 2 degenerative changes who underwent labrum-preserving hip arthroscopy with BMAC injection were included and were matched with patients who underwent hip arthroscopy without BMAC injection. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected preoperatively and up to 2 years postoperatively included the modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sport, and International Hip Outcome Tool 33 score. Clinical relevance was measured with the minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptom state, and substantial clinical benefit for each outcome score., Results: A total of 35 patients underwent labrum-preserving hip arthroscopy with BMAC injection and were matched with 35 control patients. There were no differences in demographic characteristics between the groups (P > .05). The BMAC group consisted of 22 patients (62.9%) with Tönnis grade 1 changes and 13 (37.1%) with Tönnis grade 2 changes, whereas all 35 control patients had Tönnis grade 0 hips. All PROs were significantly improved in both groups at 2 years, with no difference in improvement. The rate of failure requiring conversion to total hip arthroplasty was 14.3% (mean, 1.6 years postoperatively) in the BMAC group and 5.7% (mean, 7 years postoperatively) in the control group (P = .09). The difference in the frequency of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptom state, and substantial clinical benefit was not statistically significant between cohorts., Conclusions: In a challenging group of patients with symptomatic labral tears and early radiographic degenerative changes, hip arthroscopy with BMAC injection results in statistically and clinically significant improvement in PROs comparable to a group of patients with nonarthritic hips undergoing hip arthroscopy at short-term follow-up., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial., (Copyright © 2023 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the clinical utility of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and quantify the delay in surgical care for patients aged ≤40 years undergoing primary hip arthroscopy with history, physical examination, and radiographs concordant with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS)., Methods: From August 2015 to December 2020, 1,786 consecutive patients were reviewed from the practice of 1 fellowship-trained hip arthroscopist. Inclusion criteria were FAIS, primary surgery, and age ≤40 years. Exclusion criteria were MRI contraindication, reattempt of conservative management, or concomitant periacetabular osteotomy. After nonoperative treatment options were exhausted and a surgical plan was established, patients were stratified by those who presented with versus without MRI. Those without existing MRI received one, and any deviations from the surgical plan were noted. All preoperative MRIs were compared with office evaluation and intraoperative findings to assess agreement. Demographic data, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)-Pain, and time from office to MRI or arthroscopy were recorded., Results: Of the patients indicated by history, physical examination, and radiographs alone (70% female, body mass index 24.8 kg/m 2 , age 25.9 years), 198 patients presented without MRI and 934 with MRI. None of the 198 had surgical plans altered after MRI. Patients in both groups had MRI findings demonstrating anterosuperior labral tears that were visualized and repaired intraoperatively. Mean time from office to arthroscopy for patients without MRI versus those with was 107.0 ± 67 and 85.0 ± 53 days, respectively (P < .001). Time to MRI was 22.8 days. No difference between groups was observed among the 85% of patients who surpassed the HOOS-Pain minimal clinically important difference (MCID)., Conclusion: Once indicated for surgery based on history, physical examination, and radiographs, preoperative MRI did not alter the surgical plan for patients aged ≤40 years with FAIS undergoing primary hip arthroscopy. Moreover, preoperative MRI delayed time to arthroscopy. The necessity of routine preoperative MRI in the young primary FAIS population should be challenged., (Copyright © 2022 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine what subspecialties have applied machine learning (ML) to predict clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) within orthopaedic surgery and to determine whether the performance of these models was acceptable through assessing discrimination and other ML metrics where reported., Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were queried for articles that used ML to predict achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), or substantial clinical benefit (SCB) after orthopaedic surgical procedures. Data pertaining to demographic characteristics, subspecialty, specific ML algorithms, and algorithm performance were analyzed., Results: Eighteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies developed novel algorithms, whereas one study externally validated an established algorithm. All studies used ML to predict MCID achievement, whereas 3 (16.7%) predicted SCB achievement and none predicted PASS achievement. Of the studies, 7 (38.9%) concerned outcomes after spine surgery; 6 (33.3%), after sports medicine surgery; 3 (16.7%), after total joint arthroplasty (TJA); and 2 (11.1%), after shoulder arthroplasty. No studies were found regarding trauma, hand, elbow, pediatric, or foot and ankle surgery. In spine surgery, concordance statistics (C-statistics) ranged from 0.65 to 0.92; in hip arthroscopy, 0.51 to 0.94; in TJA, 0.63 to 0.89; and in shoulder arthroplasty, 0.70 to 0.95. Most studies reported C-statistics at the upper end of these ranges, although populations were heterogeneous., Conclusions: Currently available ML algorithms can discriminate the propensity to achieve CSOs using the MCID after spine, TJA, sports medicine, and shoulder surgery with a fair to good performance as evidenced by C-statistics ranging from 0.6 to 0.95 in most analyses. Less evidence is available on the ability of ML to predict achievement of SCB, and no evidence is available for achievement of the PASS. Such algorithms may augment shared decision-making practices and allow clinicians to provide more appropriate patient expectations using individualized risk assessments. However, these studies remain limited by variable reporting of performance metrics, CSO quantification methods, and adherence to predictive modeling guidelines, as well as limited external validation., Level of Evidence: Level III, systematic review of Level III studies., (Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare the cost-effectiveness of nonoperative management, particulated juvenile allograft cartilage (PJAC), and matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) in the management of patellar chondral lesions., Methods: A Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three strategies for symptomatic patellar chondral lesions: 1) nonoperative management, 2) PJAC, and 3) MACI. Model inputs (transition probabilities, utilities, and costs) were derived from literature review and an institutional cohort of 67 patients treated with PJAC for patellar chondral defects (mean age 26 years, mean lesion size 2.7 cm 2 ). Societal and payer perspectives over a 15-year time horizon were evaluated. The principal outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) using a $100,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) willingness-to-pay threshold. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model and the relative effects of variable estimates on base case conclusions., Results: From a societal perspective, nonoperative management, PJAC, and MACI cost $4,140, $52,683, and $83,073 and were associated with 5.28, 7.22, and 6.92 QALYs gained, respectively. PJAC and MACI were cost-effective relative to nonoperative management (ICERs $25,010/QALY and $48,344/QALY, respectively). PJAC dominated MACI in the base case analysis by being cheaper and more effective, but this was sensitive to the estimated effectiveness of both strategies. PJAC remained cost-effective if PJAC and MACI were considered equally effective., Conclusions: In the management of symptomatic patellar cartilage defects, PJAC and MACI were both cost-effective compared to nonoperative management. Because of the need for one surgery instead of two, and less costly graft material, PJAC was cheaper than MACI. Consequently, when PJAC and MACI were considered equally effective, PJAC was more cost-effective than MACI. Sensitivity analyses accounting for the lack of robust long-term data for PJAC or MACI demonstrated that the cost-effectiveness of PJAC versus MACI depended heavily on the relative probabilities of yielding similar clinical results., Level of Evidence: III, economic and decision analysis., (Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of our study was to compare lower extremity rotational kinematics and kinetics (angles, torques, and powers) and hip muscle electromyography (EMG) activity between cam-type femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and age- and sex-matched controls during walking, fast walking, stair ascent, stair descent, and sit-to-stand., Methods: This study included 10 males with unilateral FAIS and 10 control males with no FAIS. We measured kinematics, kinetics, and electromyographic signals during stair ascent/descent, sit-to-stand, self-selected walk, and fast walk. Peak signal differences between groups were compared with independent t-tests with statistical significance when P < .05., Results: FAIS hips showed significant differences compared to controls, including increased hip flexion during walking (+4.9°, P = .048) and stair ascent (+7.8°, P =.003); diminished trunk rotation during stair ascent (-3.4°; P = .015), increased knee flexion during self-selected walking (+5.1°, P = .009), stair ascent (+7.4°, P = .001), and descent (+5.3°, P = .038); and increased knee valgus during fast walking (+4.7°, P = .038). gMed and MedHam showed significantly decreased activation in FAIS during walking (gMed: -12.9%, P = .002; MedHam: -7.4%, P = .028) and stair ascent (gMed: -16.7%, P = .036; MedHam: -13.0%, P = .041); decreased gMed activation during sit-to-stand (-8.8%, P = .004) and decreased MedHam activation during stair descent (-8.0%, P = .039)., Conclusions: Three-dimensional motion analysis and EMG evaluation of functional kinematics and kinetics in subjects with symptomatic unilateral cam-type FAIS across a spectrum of provocative tasks demonstrated significant differences compared to controls in hip flexion, trunk rotation, knee flexion, and valgus. FAIS hips had significantly decreased gMed and MedHam activity. These findings may explain altered torso-pelvic, hip, and knee mechanics in FAIS patients and suggest that evaluation of FAIS should include the patient's hip, knee, and torso-pelvic relationships and muscle function., Clinical Relevance: The clinical and functional manifestation of FAIS hip pathomechanics is not entirely understood, and previous literature to date has not clearly described the alterations in gait and functional movements seen in patients with cam-type FAIS. The current study used 3D motion analysis and EMG evaluation of functional kinematics and kinetics to identify a number of differences between FAIS and control hips, which help us better understand the lower extremity kinematics and kinetics and muscle activation in FAIS., (Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To (1) report on pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores for patients undergoing repeat revision surgery in short-term follow-up and (2) compare minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state achievement between primary, revision, and repeat revision hip arthroscopy cohorts., Methods: Data from consecutive patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy from January 2012 to February 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Hips that underwent 2 revision hip arthroscopic surgeries were identified and matched 1:3 to patients undergoing revision surgery and 1:3 to patients undergoing primary surgery by age, sex, and body mass index. Baseline demographic data, surgical indications, and hip-specific PROs were collected were obtained preoperatively and at minimum 1-year follow-up. MCID was calculated individually for each cohort., Results: Twenty patients who underwent repeat revision were matched to 60 patients who underwent revision and 60 primary patients. Patients who underwent repeat revision achieved MCID on all investigated PROs at a similar rate to patients undergoing primary surgery (90.0% vs 91.7%, P = .588) and at a greater rate than patients undergoing first-time revision surgery (90.0% vs 71.7%, P = .045). Patients who underwent repeat revision achieved patient acceptable symptomatic state on all investigated PROs at a similar rate to patients who underwent first-time revision (30.0% vs 55.0%, P = .053) but at a significantly lower rate than primary patients (30.0% vs 76.7%, P < .001). However, patients undergoing repeat revision surgery had significantly lower preoperative PROs (P < .001 for all) and no significant difference in PROs at minimum 1-year follow-up compared with patients undergoing revision (P > .05). Compared with the primary cohort, patients who underwent repeat revision had significantly lower Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (77.3 ± 16.7 vs 86.1 ± 14.4; P = .034), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (60.6 ± 27.2 vs 76.1 ± 23.8; P < .001), and modified Harris Hip Score (69.2 ± 19.3 vs 81.7 ± 16.1; P = .048) at a minimum of 1-year follow-up., Conclusions: Second-time revision hip arthroscopy, which often requires advanced procedures, results in clinically significant improvement in PROs; however, outcomes for repeat revision cases are similar to first-time revision cases but inferior to those obtained following primary surgeries., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective case-control study., (Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare the impact of age and gender on achieving meaningful outcomes among minimum patients 5 years after undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS)., Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS by a single fellowship-trained surgeon between January 2012 and October 2014 were analyzed. Study inclusion criteria included any patient undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS, with 5 years follow-up. Preoperative and 5-year postoperative functional scores were collected, including the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living Subscale (HOS-ADL), HOS-Sport Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris hip score (mHHS), and Visual Analog Scale for satisfaction. Patients were matched 1:1 by gender and age to compare outcomes between these 2 demographics. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) were calculated for each functional measure and compared by gender and age., Results: Of the 340 patients (70.5%) with 5 years' follow up, 150 were matched by gender and age into one of the following groups: female patients <30 years, female patients 30 to 45 years, female patients >45 years, male patients <30 years, male patients 30 to 45 years, and male patients >45 years of age. At minimum 5-year follow-up, all 6 groups demonstrated statistically significant improvement in the functional outcome score averages and pain (P < .001 for all). Both within gender and within age category analysis of postoperative functional scores did not demonstrate any statistical differences (P > .05). Analysis of achieving MCID and PASS demonstrated that females had higher rates of reaching the HOS-SS and mHHS threshold for achieving MCID as compared to their male counterparts (P < .05). Furthermore, patients <30 years old had higher rates of reaching the HOS-ADL and mHHS for achieving PASS when compared to patients >45 years old (P < .05)., Conclusion: The majority of patients achieve clinically significant outcome improvement at 5-year follow-up after arthroscopic FAIS surgery. Females reach the mHHS threshold for achieving MCID at significantly higher rates than males. Patients <30 years of age achieved PASS on the HOS-ADL and mHHS threshold scores at higher rates than those >45 years old., Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study., (Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine which interventions optimize clinical outcomes in adhesive capsulitis by performing a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials., Methods: A systematic review was conducted of all clinical trials on adhesive capsulitis published since 2008. Patient cohorts were grouped into treatment categories; data collected included range of motion (ROM) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Interventions were compared across groups by means of arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis in a random-effects model., Results: Sixty-six studies comprising 4042 shoulders (57.6% female patients, age 54.8 ± 3.2 years [mean ± standard deviation]) were included. The most commonly studied interventions were physical therapy (PT) or shoulder injections. Network meta-analysis demonstrated that arthroscopic surgical capsular release was the most effective treatment in increasing ROM. This effect was apparent in forward flexion (effect difference [ED] versus placebo, 44°, 95% confidence interval [CI] 31° to 58°), abduction (ED 58°, 45° to 71°), internal rotation (ED 34°, 24° to 44°), and external rotation (ED 59°, 37° to 80°). Interventions most effective for pain relief included PT supplemented with either medical therapy (ED -4.50, -9.80 to 2.80) or ultrasound therapy (ED -5.10, -5.10 to -1.40). Interventions most effective for improvement of functional status included PT, manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), intra-articular or subacromial steroid injection, surgical capsular release, and supplementation of PT with alternative therapy., Conclusions: No one treatment emerged superior in regard to ROM, pain symptoms, and functional status. Surgery (after failure of conservative treatment) ranked highest across all ROM domains. Treatments that ranked highest for treatment of pain included PT supplemented with either medical therapy or ultrasound. Finally, treatments that ranked highest for improvements in functional status included MUA, PT with medical therapy, surgical intervention, PT with ultrasound, PT with injection, and injection alone., Level of Evidence: II, systematic review and network meta-analysis of level I and II studies., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the quality of orthopaedic cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) in accordance with the 2016 recommendations by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine., Methods: A systematic review of all CEAs from September 2017 to September 2019 in the 10 highest impact orthopaedic surgery journals was performed. Quality scoring used the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument and the Second Panel checklist. QHES scores ≥80 were considered high quality and <50 poor quality. Mann-Whitney U and independent samples Kruskal-Wallis tests compared individual and multiple groups, respectively. Linear regression analysis was performed to correlate QHES score, checklist item fulfillment, and impact factor., Results: The 10 highest impact orthopaedic journals published 6,323 articles with 35 (0.55%) meeting inclusion criteria. Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and sports medicine articles comprised 65.7% of included studies. Overall mean QHES score was 89.0 ± 7.6, with 82.8% considered high quality. Mean proportion of Second Panel checklist items fulfilled was 82.1% ± 13.3%, but no studies performed an impact inventory accounting for consequences within and outside the health care sector or discussed ethical implications. Mean QHES score and satisfied checklist items were significantly different by journal (P = .025 and P = .01, respectively). In addition, there was a moderate positive correlation between QHES score and impact factor (r = 0.446, P = .007). TJA CEAs satisfied a higher number of checklist items compared with spine surgery CEAs., Conclusions: Recent orthopaedic CEAs have generally been high quality according to updated Second Panel guidelines but consistently miss checklist items relating to societal impact and ethics. TJA and sports medicine continue to be the most frequently studied orthopaedic subspecialties in health economics, and the breadth of orthopaedic procedures analyzed by CEAs has improved., Study Design: Level IV, systematic review., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To (1) compare the rates of reaching threshold hip-specific outcome scores for achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) in patients who underwent partial versus complete T-capsulotomy repair and (2) identify the failure rates in each group 5 years after undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS)., Methods: Data from consecutive patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS performed by a single fellowship-trained surgeon from January 2011 to March 2013 were collected and analyzed. Baseline data, hip-specific outcomes, and clinical failure rates were recorded at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. Patients with partial T-capsulotomy repair were matched 1:3 by age, body mass index, and sex to patients with complete T-capsulotomy repair. Threshold scores for achieving the MCID and PASS were calculated and compared between the 2 groups. Additionally, rates of revision and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) were compared between the groups., Results: A total of 379 patients were available for analysis (39 partial and 340 complete repairs), with 100 patients included in the matching process (25 in the partial-repair group and 75 in the complete-repair group). Comparison of radiographic parameters, including the Tönnis grade, alpha angle, and lateral center-edge angle, between the 2 groups showed no statistically significant difference (P > .05 for all). Comparison of postoperative score averages between the partial- and complete-closure groups showed a significant difference in the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living Subscale (85.4 ± 17.7 vs 94.6 ± 7.8, P < .001), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (76.6 ± 26.2 vs 89.3 ± 16.8, P = .034), modified Harris Hip Score (83.2 ± 19.7 vs 90.5 ± 11.2, P = .035), and visual analog scale pain score (24.5 ± 30.8 vs 13.4 ± 15.8, P = .035). A total of 65 complete-repair patients (95.6%) achieved the MCID for at least 1 outcome measure versus 18 patients with partial repair (78.3%) (P = .04). A total of 69 complete-repair patients (92%) achieved the PASS for at least 1 outcome measure versus 18 partial-repair patients (72%) (P = .017). Of the 39 partial-repair patients, 35.9% (n = 14) underwent revision or conversion to THA, as compared with 2.9% (n = 10) in the overall cohort., Conclusions: At a minimum 5-year follow-up, patients with complete capsular closure after hip arthroscopy for FAIS show superior long-term outcomes and achieve higher rates of meaningful clinical success when compared with patients with partial capsular closure. Furthermore, patients with partial capsular repair undergo revision or conversion to THA at high rates., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study., (Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To (1) develop and validate a machine learning algorithm to predict clinically significant functional improvements after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and to (2) develop a digital application capable of providing patients with individual risk profiles to determine their propensity to gain clinically significant improvements in function., Methods: A retrospective review of consecutive hip arthroscopy patients who underwent cam/pincer correction, labral preservation, and capsular closure between January 2012 and 2017 from 1 large academic and 3 community hospitals operated on by a single high-volume hip arthroscopist was performed. The primary outcome was the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living (ADL) at 2 years postoperatively, which was calculated using a distribution-based method. A total of 21 demographic, radiographic, and patient-reported outcome measures were considered as potential covariates. An 80:20 random split was used to create training and testing sets from the patient cohort. Five supervised machine learning algorithms were developed using 3 iterations of 10-fold cross-validation on the training set and assessed by discrimination, calibration, Brier score, and decision curve analysis on an independent testing set of patients., Results: A total of 818 patients with a median (interquartile range) age of 32.0 (22.0-42.0) and 69.2% female were included, of whom 74.3% achieved the MCID for the HOS-ADL. The best-performing algorithm was the stochastic gradient boosting model (c-statistic = 0.84, calibration intercept = 0.20, calibration slope = 0.83, and Brier score = 0.13). Of the initial 21 candidate variables, the 8 most important features for predicting the MCID for the HOS-ADL included in model training were body mass index, age, preoperative HOS-ADL score, preoperative pain level, sex, Tönnis grade, symptom duration, and drug allergies. The algorithm was subsequently transformed into a digital application using local explanations to provide customized risk assessment: https://orthoapps.shinyapps.io/HPRG&#95;ADL/., Conclusions: The stochastic boosting gradient model conferred excellent predictive ability for propensity to gain clinically significant improvements in function after hip arthroscopy. An open-access digital application was created, which may augment shared decision-making and allow for preoperative risk stratification. External validation of this model is warranted to confirm the performance of these algorithms, as the generalizability is currently unknown., Level of Evidence: IV, Case series., (Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML), has transformed numerous industries through newfound efficiencies and supportive decision-making. With the exponential growth of computing power and large datasets, AI has transitioned from theory to reality in teaching machines to automate tasks without human supervision. AI-based computational algorithms analyze "training sets" using pattern recognition and learning from inputted data to classify and predict outputs that otherwise could not be effectively analyzed with human processing or standard statistical methods. Though widespread understanding of the fundamental principles and adoption of applications have yet to be achieved, recent applications and research efforts implementing AI have demonstrated great promise in predicting future injury risk, interpreting advanced imaging, evaluating patient-reported outcomes, reporting value-based metrics, and augmenting telehealth. With appreciation, caution, and experience applying AI, the potential to automate tasks and improve data-driven insights may be realized to fundamentally improve patient care. The purpose of this review is to discuss the pearls, pitfalls, and applications associated with AI., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To (1) compare the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and citation rates between orthopaedic and nonorthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 5 high-impact medical journals and (2) identify general characteristics of these articles associated with greater exposure on social media platforms., Methods: Articles published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Annals of Internal Medicine, and Archives of Internal Medicine between January 2011 and December 2016 were analyzed. These journals were selected based on retaining high impact factors with rigorous publication standards and availability of the AAS for their publications. The queried time frame was chosen to balance the inception of the AAS with an optimal period for citation accrual. A total of 14 article characteristics, in addition to number of Tweets, Facebook shares, news mentions, and the AAS, were extracted. Inclusion criteria were orthopaedic RCTs reporting on outcomes after surgical intervention. Linear regression was used to assess the relationship between publication characteristics and the AAS and social media attention., Results: A total of 9 orthopaedic and 59 nonorthopaedic RCTs were included. The mean AASs were significantly different (574 ± 565.7 versus 256.9 ± 222.3, P = .003), whereas citation rate was not (192.2 ± 117.1 versus 382.3 ± 560.3, P = .317). Orthopaedic RCTs had a significantly greater number of mentions on Twitter and Facebook (P < .001). A higher AAS significantly associated with a greater number of citations (β = 0.75, P = .019) for orthopaedic RCTs. The mean AAS of orthopaedic RCTs favoring nonoperative management (809.6 ± 676.3) was greater than those favoring operative treatment (292.0 ± 248.9) but was not statistically significant (P = .361)., Conclusion: Orthopaedic RCTs published in 5 high-impact general medical journals had a significantly greater mean AAS relative to nonorthopaedic RCTs, with no differences in citation rates. Additionally, there was a strong association between the AAS and citation rate of orthopaedic RCTs. Orthopaedic RCTs had greater social media exposure on both Twitter and Facebook., Clinical Relevance: Orthopaedic surgeons, researchers, and providers who publish RCTs in high-impact medical journals can anticipate extensive social media attention for their articles relative to other nonorthopaedic RCTs in the same journals. Social media attention may be related to operative versus nonoperative management topics. This study provides further evidence for the increasing use of the AAS and its association with citation accrual., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To identify thresholds for patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) achievement in a cohort of primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) recipients, and to identify factors predictive of PASS achievement., Methods: A prospective clinical registry was queried for primary ACLR patients from January 2014 to April 2017 with serial patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) completion at 6, 12, and 24 months. Exclusion criteria included significant concomitant procedures. Knee-based PROMs included the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscores. PASS threshold values were calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with area under the curve (AUC) analysis. A stepwise multivariate regression identified preoperative and operative predictors of PASS achievement., Results: A total of 144 primary ACLR patients (30.86 ± 12.78 years, body mass index 25.51 ± 4.64, 41.0% male) were included in the analysis. PASS threshold values were established using ROC curve analysis, all of which exceeded 0.7 on AUC analysis (0.742 to 0.911). Factors impacting odds of PASS achievement in the ACLR cohort included preoperative exercises (odds ratio [OR] 2.95 to 4.74, P = .003 to .038), worker's compensation status (OR 0.25 to 0.28, P = .014 to .033), preoperative scores (OR 1.03 to 1.07, P = .005 to <.001), iliotibial band tenodesis (OR 11.08, P = .010), and anteromedial approach (OR 18.03 to 37.05, P < .001)., Conclusion: Factors predictive of PASS achievement in recipients of primary ACLR include functional status (e.g., preoperative exercise, preoperative KOOS Sport/Recreation score), worker's compensation status, technique (e.g., anteromedial) and preoperative PROMs. The results of our study are important in better informing shared decision-making models and improving evidence-based guidelines to optimize patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To compare the use and responsiveness of Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) at 6-month follow-up., Methods: Data from patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with routine capsular closure between August 2018 and January 2019 for the treatment of FAIS were analyzed. Preoperative outcomes, 6-month postoperative outcomes, and demographics were recorded. Primary outcome measures included PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), and PROMIS Depression. The legacy PROMs included Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score Sport Subscale (HOS-SS), and the international hip outcome tool 12 questions (iHOT-12). Floor and ceiling effects along with the responsiveness and Cohen's d effect size of each PROM tool were calculated., Results: Ninety-six patients with an average age and body mass index of 32.4 ± 11.9 years and 25.9 ± 6.1 kg/m 2 , respectively, were included in the final analysis. All outcomes were significantly higher at 6 months compared with the preoperative level (P < .001) except for PROMIS Depression (P = .873). PROMIS-PF demonstrated excellent correlation with HOS-SS (r = 0.81; P < .001), very good correlation with HOS-ADL (r = 0.73; P < .001), and good correlation with iHOT-12 (r = 0.68; P < .001). No floor was observed for any measure. The effect size was large for all outcomes, except PROMIS Depression (d = 0.04), but largest for iHOT12 (d = 1.87) followed by HOS-ADL (d = 1.29). The iHOT-12 was more responsive than PROMIS-PI (relative efficiency [RE] = 3.95), PROMIS-PF (RE = 4.13), HOS-ADL (RE = 2.26), and HOS-SS (RE = 3.84). HOS-SS was similarly responsive to PROMIS-PI (RE=1.03) and PROMIS-PF (RE=1.08). However, PROMIS-PF was overall the least responsive., Conclusions: In patients at 6 months postoperatively from hip arthroscopy for FAIS, iHOT-12 was the most responsive and had the largest effect size. In contrast, PROMIS-PF had a lower effect size compared with legacy hip-specific PROMs. Additionally, PROMIS-PF did not correlate as well with iHOT-12 compared with HOS-SS., Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine the limitations of randomized sham surgery-controlled trials in orthopaedic sports medicine and fidelity of the trials' conclusions., Methods: Randomized placebo surgery-controlled trials in orthopaedic sports medicine were included in this Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-guided systematic review. Several aspects of investigation design and conduct were analyzed: genetic analysis for propensity to placebo response, equipoise of informed consent process, geography of trial subjects, percentage of eligible subjects willing to be randomized, changes from protocol publication to results publication, and perioperative complications., Results: Seven sham surgery-controlled trials (845 subjects [370 knees, 449 shoulders, 26 elbows]; 5 from Europe, 1 from North America, and 1 from Australia; all superiority model, efficacy design) were analyzed. There were consistent methodologic deficiencies across studies. No studies reported genetic analysis of susceptibility to placebo response. Three studies (43%) were underpowered. Crossover rates ranged from 8% to 36%, which led to un-blinding in up to 100% of subjects. There were low enrollment rates of eligible subjects (up to 57% refused randomization). Follow-up was short term (2 years or less in all but one study). Complication rates ranged from 0% to 12.5%, with complications occurring in both groups (no significant difference between groups in any study)., Conclusions: Randomized sham-controlled studies in orthopaedic sports medicine have significant methodologic deficiencies that may invalidate their conclusions. Randomized trial design (with or without placebo control) may be optimized through the inclusion of per-protocol analysis, blinding index, equivalence or noninferiority trial design, and a nontreatment group., Level of Evidence: Level II Systematic Review of Level II studies., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To develop and validate a standardized patient satisfaction measurement tool for adult patients undergoing primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR)., Methods: A 4-phase iterative process that included item generation and pilot survey development, item reduction, survey readability, and survey validation was used. To develop and validate the Hospital for Special Surgery ACL Satisfaction Survey (HSS ACL-SS), 70 patients were included in the survey development phase and 77 patients were included in the validation phase. The HSS ACL-SS was compared with other currently used ACLR outcome measures including the International Knee Documentation Committee score, Tegner-Lysholm score, Short Form 12 (SF-12) Mental Component Score, and SF-12 Physical Component Score. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity, and floor and ceiling effects were assessed., Results: The HSS ACL-SS consists of 10 items identified by patients as being important for satisfaction after ACLR. In the validation phase, the mean score on the HSS ACL-SS (of 50) among all patients was 37.9 ± 9.9 (range, 10-50). Statistically significant positive correlations were seen between the HSS ACL-SS score and the International Knee Documentation Committee score (r = 0.351, P = .002) and Tegner-Lysholm score (r = 0.333, P = .003). No statistically significant correlation was found between the satisfaction score and the SF-12 Mental or Physical Component Score. The lowest possible score (10 of 50 points) was achieved in 1 patient (1.3%) and the highest possible score (50 of 50 points) was achieved in 7 patients (9.1%), indicating no significant floor or ceiling effects of the instrument. Internal consistency for all 10 items was strong (Cronbach α, 0.995). The mean intraclass correlation coefficient between test and retest responses was 0.701, indicating moderate agreement., Conclusions: The HSS ACL-SS is a validated and reliable patient-derived satisfaction measure with excellent psychometric properties for active adults undergoing ACLR. The results of this study show that the HSS ACL-SS may be a useful tool to measure postoperative patient satisfaction., Level of Evidence: Level II, development of diagnostic or monitoring criteria in consecutive patients., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine whether requiring postoperative opioid refills has an effect on both baseline and postoperative functional scores, as well as rates of achieving clinical success 2 years after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS)., Methods: Data from consecutive patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS from January 2012 to December 2016 were analyzed. Patients with at least 1 postoperative opioid refill were matched 1:2 by age and body mass index to patients not requiring refills. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes including the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living Subscale, HOS-Sports Subscale, and modified Hip Harris Score, as well as visual analog scale (VAS) pain and satisfaction surveys, were compared between the 2 groups, as well as between patients who requested 1 refill versus those requiring 2 or more refills. The minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) were calculated for the study group and compared between patient groups., Results: A total of 128 patients (14.5%) requesting at least 1 postoperative opioid refill and 256 with no refills were included in the study. Analysis showed that the refill group had lower patient-reported outcomes (P < .05 for all), a lower VAS satisfaction score average (73.2 ± 30.7 vs 80.1 ± 25.9, P = .029), and a higher VAS pain score average (27.2 ± 26.1 vs 19.9 ± 22.7, P = .007). Similar trends were seen when patients with 1 refill were compared with those with 2 or more refills. Analysis of meaningful clinical outcomes showed that patients in the refill group had lower rates of achieving the PASS (68.3% vs 77.2%, P = .006). However, there were no statistically significant differences in achieving the minimal clinically important difference between the 2 groups (P > .05 for all)., Conclusions: Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS who require 1 or more opioid refills postoperatively are likely to have lower baseline and postoperative functional scores, as well as to achieve the PASS at lower rates, compared with patients who do not require an additional opioid prescription to what is routinely given after surgery., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective case-control study., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess adverse effects of preoperative corticosteroid injections (CSIs) in patients with rotator cuff disease, especially before rotator cuff repair (RCR)., Methods: A systematic review of the MEDLINE database was performed according to guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for all studies reporting on adverse clinical effects of CSIs on rotator cuff tendon., Results: A total of 8 articles were identified that report on adverse outcomes and risks associated with corticosteroid injections in the setting of rotator cuff tendinosis. Among these included articles, a single CSI for rotator cuff tendinosis was associated with increased risk of revision rotator cuff repair (odds ratio [OR]: range 1.3 [1.1-1.7] to 2.8 [2.2-3.4]) when administered up to a year before surgery and postoperative infections (OR: 2.1 [1.5-2.7]) when administered within a month before RCR. The risk of adverse outcomes after rotator cuff repair are greatest if a CSI is administered within 6 months of surgery (OR: 1.8 [1.3-2.6]) or if ≥2 injections are given within a year of surgery (OR: range 2.1 [1.8-2.5] to 3.3 [2.7-4.0])., Conclusion: Several recent clinical trials have demonstrated that CSIs are correlated with increased risk of revision surgery after RCR in a temporal and dose dependent matter. Caution should be taken when deciding to inject a patient, and this treatment should be withheld if an RCR is to be performed within the following 6 months., Level of Evidence: IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To define the psychometric properties of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression computer adaptive tests (CATs) in patients undergoing knee cartilage surgical procedures., Methods: The PROMIS PF, PI, and Depression CATs were administered preoperatively and at 6 months alongside legacy knee patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing knee cartilage surgical procedures. Statistical analysis consisted of the time to completion, psychometric analysis for correlative strengths, absolute and relative floor and ceiling effects, and Cohen effect size., Results: Our study included 250 patients (57.2% male patients), averaging 1.87, 1.53, and 1.91 minutes for completion of the PF, PI, and Depression CATs, respectively. Preoperatively, the PROMIS PF and PI CATs showed wide ranges of correlation coefficients with respect to function (r = 0.14-0.72 and r = 0.29-0.77, respectively) and health-related quality-of-life PROMs (r = 0.64-0.70). At 6 months, the PROMIS PF CAT (r = 0.82-0.93) and PI CAT (r = 0.77-0.93) both exhibited excellent correlations with respect to legacy function and health-related quality-of-life PROMs except for the Marx Activity Rating Scale (r = 0.36-0.44). None of the PROMIS instruments exhibited any significant floor or ceiling effects., Conclusions: The PROMIS PF, PI, and Depression CATs performed better with respect to legacy PROMs in the postoperative period than the preoperative period. In addition, the PROMIS PF and PI measures performed best with respect to the International Knee Documentation Committee questionnaire, and no floor or ceiling effects were identified for the PROMIS instruments. The PROMIS instruments may be more suited to track outcomes postoperatively than to establish preoperative baselines in cartilage surgery patients., Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine the effect of the preoperative duration of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS)-associated symptoms on clinical outcomes at a minimum of 5 years after hip arthroscopy., Methods: We identified FAIS patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between January 2012 and January 2014 with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up. Patient demographic characteristics and clinical outcomes, comprising the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), pain score, and satisfaction score, were analyzed. The minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptomatic state, and substantial clinical benefit were calculated. Patients were stratified based on the preoperative duration of symptoms: less than 2 years versus 2 years or longer. Multivariate regressions were constructed to determine the association between the preoperative symptom duration and clinical outcomes at 5 years after hip arthroscopy., Results: A total of 310 patients were included with a mean age (±standard deviation) of 34.1 ± 11.9 years and body mass index of 25.3 ± 5.1. The study group showed statistically significant improvements in the HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, mHHS, pain score, and satisfaction score (P < .001 for all). A preoperative duration of symptoms of 2 or more years was an independent predictor of worse HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, mHHS, and pain score (P < .05 for all). Furthermore, a longer duration of symptoms was associated with a lower likelihood of achieving the minimal clinically important difference for the HOS-ADL (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; P = .037), HOS-SS (OR, 0.38; P = .003), and mHHS (OR, 0.43; P = .009); the patient acceptable symptomatic state for the HOS-SS (OR, 0.44; P = .006) and mHHS (OR, 0.46; P = .006) but not the HOS-ADL despite trending toward significance (OR, 0.59; P = .098); and substantial clinical benefit for the HOS-ADL (OR, 0.50; P = .011), HOS-SS (OR, 0.52; P = .020), and mHHS (OR, 0.47; P = .007)., Conclusions: Patients with a preoperative duration of FAIS-associated symptoms of 2 or more years prior to hip arthroscopy experience inferior outcomes and a lower frequency of clinically significant outcome improvement than patients with a shorter duration of symptoms at medium-to long-term follow-up., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative trial., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To quantify the cost of resident involvement in academic sports medicine by examining differences in operative time, relative value units (RVUs) per case, and RVUs per hour between attending-only cases and cases with resident involvement., Methods: A retrospective analysis of common sports medicine procedures identified by Current Procedural Terminology code was performed using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2006 to 2015. Matched cohorts were generated based on demographic variables, comorbidities, preoperative laboratory values, and surgical procedures. Bivariate analysis examined mean differences in operative time, RVUs per case, and RVUs per hour between attending-only cases and cases with resident involvement. A cost analysis was performed to quantify differences in RVUs generated per hour in terms of dollars per case., Results: A total of 14,840 attending-only cases and 2,230 resident-involved cases were used to generate 2 matched cohorts (N = 4,460). Resident cases had greater mean operative times than attending-only cases, with operative time increasing as residents became more senior (P < .01). Residents participated in cases with larger mean RVUs per case (P < .01). Cases with lone attendings showed greater RVUs per hour (P < .01). The cost of resident involvement increased nearly 8-fold from postgraduate year 1 to postgraduate year 6 residents ($25.70 vs $200.07)., Conclusions: In academic sports medicine, the involvement of resident physicians increases operative time. The associated decrease in attending physician efficiency in RVUs per hour equates to an average cost per case of $159.18, with costs increasing as residents become more senior., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative trial., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To (1) define Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB), Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS), and Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the visual analog scale (VAS) Satisfaction in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS), and (2) identify preoperative predictors of achieving each outcome end-point., Methods: Data from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between November 2014 and January 2017 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients with clinical and radiographic diagnosis of FAIS, who failed nonoperative treatment, underwent primary hip arthroscopy to address the FAIS, and had at minimum 2-year follow-up. Baseline data and postoperative patient-reported outcome scores were recorded at 2 years postoperatively. To quantify clinical significance of outcome achievement on the VAS)Satisfaction, we calculated MCID, PASS, and SCB for this outcome measure. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify preoperative predictors of achieving SCB, PASS, and MCID satisfaction., Results: A total of 335 patients were included in the final analysis, with an average age and body mass index (BMI) of 32.8 (standard deviation ± 12.4) years and 25.2 (standard deviation ± 5.3), respectively, and the majority being female (69.3%). The values on the VAS satisfaction were identified to represent MCID, PASS, and SCB, respectively: 52.8, 80.9, and 89.7. The rates of achieving clinically significant improvement on the VAS Satisfaction was 85.6%, 68.1%, and 56.9% for MCID, PASS, and SCB, respectively. A larger preoperative alpha angle was predictive for achieving SCB (odds ratio [OR], 1.076; P = .046), whereas lower BMI (OR, 0.955; P = .047) and larger preoperative alpha angle (OR, 1.12; P = .025) were predictors for achieving PASS., Conclusions: This study identified threshold VAS satisfaction scores of 52.8, 80.9, and 89.7 for achieving MCID, SCB, and PASS, respectively, at 2-year follow-up following hip arthroscopy for FAIS. Furthermore, preoperative variables including larger preoperative alpha angles and lower BMI are predictors of achieving superior clinical satisfaction., Level of Evidence: Level IV, Case Series., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) thresholds for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) computerized adaptive test (CAT) instrument in patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscal surgery., Methods: The PROMIS PF CAT was administered preoperatively and postoperatively to patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscal surgery. At 6 months postoperatively, patients graded their knee function based on a domain-specific anchor question. A satisfaction anchor question was used to indicate achievement of the PASS. Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined the relevant psychometric values. Cutoff analysis was performed to find preoperative patient-reported outcome scores predicting achievement of clinically significant outcomes (CSOs)., Results: A total of 73 patients (41.1% female patients) were included, with a mean age of 44.9 ± 12.8.0 years and average follow-up period of 24.0 ± 1.2 weeks. The MCID on the PROMIS PF CAT was calculated to be 2.09 (area under the curve [AUC], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-0.94). Net score improvement equivalent to achievement of SCB was found to be 6.50 (AUC, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.55-0.99). The PASS was found to be 46.1 (AUC, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.96). A preoperative score below 37.6 on the PROMIS PF CAT predicted achievement of the MCID (AUC, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.87), whereas scores above 41.9 predicted achievement of the PASS (AUC, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.90). Higher baseline functional status and the absence of pre-existing arthritis were also found to be statistically significant predictors of achieving CSOs., Conclusions: Our study defined the MCID, SCB, and PASS for the PROMIS PF CAT. We found that a preoperative score below 37.6 was predictive of achieving a meaningful clinical change with surgery whereas a preoperative score above 41.9 was predictive of patients who would attain an acceptable postoperative health state. In addition, exercising more days per week and the absence of arthritis increased the likelihood of achieving postoperative CSOs., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine the relationship between preoperative patient expectation and postoperative satisfaction and overall patient-reported outcome (PRO) of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome., Methods: Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome completed the validated Hip Preservation Surgery Expectations Survey (21 questions; 0-100 range), as well as multiple PROs before surgery. High expectation was defined as an expectation score greater than 1 standard deviation above the mean. Patients with osteoarthritis, dysplasia, and those having undergone previous hip surgery were excluded. At 1 year postoperatively, patient visual analog scale (VAS) satisfaction, VAS pain, and PROs were assessed. Univariable and multivariate analyses were performed., Results: One-hundred fifty-three subjects (mean age 34.4 ± 12.6 years, female: 114 [71.3%], body mass index: 25.9 ± 5.3 kg/m 2 ) participated. The mean expectation score was 84.5 ± 12.3. Significant correlations between high expectation scores (>96.7) and achieving the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) for modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS; r = 0.339; P = .043) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living Subscale (HOS-ADL; r = 0.207; P = .032) were observed. There were no significant correlations between high expectation scores and preoperative or postoperative PROs or patient satisfaction scores. χ 2 analysis demonstrated patients with greater expectations had increased rates of reaching MCID mHHS (92.3% vs 74.7%; P = .08), PASS mHHS (85.7% vs 69.7%; P = .046), and PASS HOS-ADL (93.8% vs 67.4%; P = .031)., Conclusions: High preoperative expectation is associated with increased rates of MCID/PASS achievement on mHHS and increased rate of PASS achievement on HOS-ADL. Preoperative expectations did not have an impact on Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale; however, patients with high preoperative expectations also have a high baseline Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale. In addition, preoperative expectations are not associated with postoperative VAS satisfaction scores., Level of Evidence: III; non-randomized cohort, therapeutic., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To identify predictors of achieving clinically significant sport function in athletic patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS)., Methods: Data were analyzed for all patients who treated for FAIS between 2012 to 2016 and reported being athletes, including recreational and competitive athletes. All patients had a minimum of 2-year follow-up with patient-reported athletic function in the form of the Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific (HOS-SS), visual analog score-pain, and patient satisfaction. Achieving clinically significant sports function was defined as either reaching the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) or the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for HOS-SS at 2-year follow-up. An exploratory factor analysis was used to determine specific domains for the predictor variables and to reduce the redundancy in these variables. A logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors of achieving clinically significant sports function [corrected]., Results: Of 780 qualifying patients, 626 completed the 2-year minimum follow-up (80%), with a mean age and body mass index of 31.6 ± 11.9 years and 24.6 ± 8.6, respectively. A total of 500 patients (86.5%) achieved high functional status, with 77.9% achieving MCID HOS-SS and 68.7% achieving PASS HOS-SS. Logistic regression analysis identified increased the α angle (odds ratio [OR] 0.976; P = .027), preoperative pain duration (OR 0.729; P = .011), and body mass index (BMI) (OR 0.919; P = .018), as well as the presence of femoral chondral defects (OR 0.769; P = .013), as negative predictors for achieving MCID. Negative predictors for achieving PASS HOS-SS included the presence of a preoperative limp (OR 0.384; P = .013), anxiety or depression (OR 0.561; P = .041), and increased BMI (OR 0.945; P = .018) and preoperative pain duration (OR 0.987; P < .001)., Conclusions: Several predictors of achieving clinically significant sport function performance exist, including a history of anxiety or depression, BMI, preoperative α angle, limp, femoral chondral damage, *and preoperative symptom duration. Our results suggest there are both modifiable and nonmodifiable preoperative factors that have the potential to predict achieving high athletic function after hip arthroscopy for FAIS., Level of Evidence: IV, Case Series., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To perform a population-level analysis of the shifts in use of hip arthroscopy by different age groups and to describe the proportion of hip arthroscopy procedures performed by high-volume surgeons., Methods: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was combined with New York State census data to calculate changes in annual hip arthroscopy incidence by age and gender (2004-16). Annual (January to January) surgeon volumes were calculated and stratified into 4 thresholds that have been associated with significant differences in revision hip surgery rates to calculate changes in hip arthroscopy rates by surgeon volume over time., Results: There was a 495% increase in hip arthroscopies from 2004 to 2016, from 2.35 to 15.47 per 100,000 residents in New York State. The largest increase was in the 10-19 years age group-a 2,150% increase for female patients (= 1.26, P < .001) and a 1,717% increase for male patients (incident rate ratio = 1.21, P < .001). The number of labral repairs performed with femoroplasty increased 52.8% (P < .001). The number of hip arthroscopy surgeons increased from 3.4 to 6.5 per 1 million residents. The number of hip arthroscopies performed by high-volume surgeons increased from 0% in 2004 to 24.7% in 2016., Conclusions: The use of hip arthroscopy has increased over the past 10 years, especially in the adolescent population ages 10-19. Over the same time period, there has been an emergence of high-volume hip arthroscopy surgeons and an increased proportion of procedures performed by these surgeons. Patients of high-volume surgeons tend to be younger, while lower volume surgeons tend to have older patients., Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To examine the preoperative performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE) Computer Adaptive Test (CAT) with respect to legacy scores in patients receiving rotator cuff repair (RCR). In addition, to define the impact of Workers' Compensation (WC) status on both performance and floor and ceiling effects., Methods: The PROMIS UE CAT was administered preoperatively alongside legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to patients undergoing isolated arthroscopic RCR from November 2017 to September 2018. Performance was assessed using Spearman correlation coefficients, and floor and ceiling effects were examined., Results: One hundred twenty-two patients (WC, n = 32; non-WC, n = 90; 62.3% male, 53.6 ± 11.5 years) were included. PROMs assessing physical function (r = 0.41-0.77) correlated more strongly to the PROMIS UE CAT than did multidomain or mental health PROMs (r = 0.25-0.61). In WC patients, the PROMIS UE CAT demonstrated diminished correlative strength relative to shoulder function PROMs. WC patients also demonstrated relative floor effects for Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE; 18.8%) and Constant-Murley (15.6%) and relative ceiling effects for the Brief Resilience Scale (53.1%), Short Form 12 Mental Component Score (50%), and Veterans Rand 12 Mental Component Score (53.1%) and were more likely to report the minimum SANE score (P < .01) and the maximum Brief Resilience Scale score (P < .01). No absolute or relative floor/ceiling effects for the PROMIS UE CAT were found., Conclusions: Compared with a non-WC cohort, WC patients have significantly lower preoperative PROMIS UE CAT scores, are more likely to report the absolute minimum and maximum scores for various PROMs, and demonstrated relative floor and ceiling effects for PROMs assessing mental health. The absence of significant floor/ceiling effects for the PROMIS UE CAT may suggest improved outcome discrimination and may support the adoption of PROMIS UE for the assessment of functional status in WC patients with rotator cuff pathology., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative trial., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To critically review recent literature on outcomes following primary surgical repair of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)., Methods: In December 2018, a search of the MEDLINE database was conducted for English language articles reporting clinical outcomes of ACL repair from 2003 to 2018. Included studies were evaluated for patient demographics, patient-reported outcome measures, return to sports/work, patient satisfaction, and postoperative complications. Subgroup analysis was conducted for studies that included patients with only type 1/proximal ACL ruptures., Results: Twenty-eight studies satisfied the inclusion criteria, comprising 2,401 patients (52.3% male, 35.7% female, 12.0% unspecified gender) with mean age ranging from 6.0 to 43.3 years. Most studies were conducted in Europe (82.1%), were level of evidence IV (60.7%), and were designed as case series (57.1%). Fourteen investigations (50.0%) used primary suture repair and 14 (50.0%) used dynamic intraligamentary stabilization. Preoperative ranges for Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee Score subjective, and Tegner scores were 28 to 100, 94.1 to 100, and 2 to 9, respectively. Postoperative ranges for the same measures were 80 to 100, 54.3 to 98, and 3.67 to 7, respectively. Time to return to sport/work ranged from 3.1 ± 3.3 to 17.4 ± 1.5 weeks. Frequency of rerupture, revision ACL surgery, and overall reoperations were as high as 23.1%, 33.3%, and 51.5%, respectively. Overall ACL repair survivorship ranged from 60.0% to 100.0%. In subgroup analysis for proximal ruptures treated with repair, the rates of revision ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and total reoperations were as high as 12.9% and 18.2%, respectively., Conclusions: Based on our cumulative findings across 2,401 patients from the 28 included studies, it appears that ACLR results in better survivorship and patient-perceived postoperative improvement when compared with ACL repair. At present, ACLR appears to remain the superior treatment strategy in the vast majority of cases., Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To investigate the rate of return to dance and factors influencing this primary outcome after hip arthroscopy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome., Methods: A consecutive series of self-identified dancers with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome was included. To assess for the impact of hypermobility on outcomes, patients were classified as having either generalized joint laxity (GJL) or no GJL based on the Beighton-Horan Joint Mobility Index. A return-to-dance survey, the modified Harris Hip Score, and the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living and HOS-Sports-Specific subscales were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. The preoperative-to-postoperative outcome score change was compared using the minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state. Return to dance was evaluated regarding (1) return to any dance activity, (2) return to prior level of dance, and (3) number of hours of dance participation after surgery. Clinical and demographic predictors and return to dance were analyzed using univariate or bivariate analysis where appropriate., Results: The study included 64 consecutive dancers (62 female and 2 male patients) (mean age, 22.3 ± 9.4 years; body mass index, 22.8 ± 4.1) with a mean follow-up period of 23.0 months. Postoperatively, 62 patients (97%) returned to dance at an average of 6.9 ± 2.9 months; 40 patients (62.5%) reported that they returned to a better level of participation, whereas 20 dancers (31%) returned to the same level of participation. Statistically significant increases were observed for the HOS-Activities of Daily Living subscale (60.5 ± 19.5 vs 92.4 ± 11.8, P < .001), HOS-Sports-Specific subscale (40.3 ± 20.3 vs 83.5 ± 19.4, P < .001), and modified Harris Hip Score (57.0 ± 13.6 vs 86.6 ± 13.9, P < .001). There was, however, a significant decrease in the number of hours of dance postoperatively: 11.5 ± 8.2 h/wk preoperatively versus 9.0 ± 7.3 h/wk postoperatively (P = .041). All postoperative hip outcome measures showed statistically significant (P < .001) and clinically relevant improvements. Patient-reported outcomes and return time showed no significant differences between the patient groups with GJL and without GJL (P = .1 and P = .489, respectively). For competitive dancers, a correlation was shown with a shorter time to return to dance (r 2  = 0.45, P = .001), but there were no significant differences by skill level in patient-reported outcomes or dance hours., Conclusions: After hip arthroscopy, 97% of dancers returned to dance at an average of 6.9 months, with most dancers dancing at a level higher than their preoperative status. Dance experience level was the only significant factor influencing return-to-dance outcomes, with competitive dancers showing a faster return to dancing.conclusion LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purposes of this study were (1) to evaluate the percentage of gluteus medius and minimus tendon footprint restoration that can be achieved with fixation using single-row repair versus double-row repair and (2) to evaluate the yield load of a repair of the gluteus medius and minimus tendon using single-row versus double-row repair techniques., Methods: Twelve human fresh-frozen cadaveric hip specimens (6 matched pairs, 4 female, mean age 47.5 ± 14.5 years) were tested. Specimens were excluded if they had any prior hip surgery or injury, if any abnormality of the tendon was noted on dissection, or if they had a body mass index <20 or >35 or a T-score <2.0 on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scanning. Matched pairs were randomized to receive either double-row repair with 2 standard suture anchors and 2 knotless anchor devices or a single-row repair with suture anchors only. The percentage of the footprint area covered after repair was determined using a computer-assisted digitization algorithm. With a mechanical testing system, each repaired specimen was tested for mechanical strength first with cyclic loading and then load to failure testing., Results: Footprint coverage of the lateral facet was significantly greater for double-row repair (mean 76.6%) compared with single-row repair (mean 50.3%) (P = .03). There was no significant difference between single- and double-row repair for posterior-superior or anterior facet coverage. Mechanical testing showed a higher mean yield load for double-row anchor repair (197.6 ± 61.7 N vs 163.5 ± 35.4 N for single-row repair), but this did not reach statistical significance (P = .15). The predominant mode of failure was suture pullout through the musculotendinous unit (9/12 specimens: 5 double-row and 4 single-row)., Conclusions: For hip abductor tears, double-row suture repair yields improved footprint coverage compared with single-row repair. Although it did not reach statistical significance, there was a higher mean yield load in the double-row group., Clinical Relevance: Double-row suture fixation technique for hip abductor tears maximizes strength and footprint coverage of the repair., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to perform a population-level analysis to evaluate the effect of socioeconomic markers on the use of meniscus surgery in patients with meniscus tears., Methods: We queried all hospital-based clinic visits from 2011 to 2014 in the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database, which also contains all New York inpatient/outpatient visits. Patients with known prior knee surgery, meniscus tear before 2011, or other ligament injuries were excluded. The primary outcome was a meniscus procedure (meniscectomy or meniscus repair). Survival analysis was used to calculate the rate of meniscus surgery within 6 months. A multivariate model identified patient factors (age, sex, race, and payer) associated with surgical intervention., Results: There were 32,012 patients identified who met the inclusion criteria. The rate of meniscus procedure within 6 months of diagnosis was 49.6%. Meniscectomy was performed in 98.8% of cases compared with 1.2% for meniscus repair. Rates of meniscus procedures were higher in patients who were older, male, and white, as well as those first diagnosed by a surgeon. The highest rates of meniscus procedures were in those with private, worker's compensation, or other insurance types. Multivariable analysis showed that female sex, non-white race, and public or self-pay insurance were independently associated with lower rates of meniscus surgery., Conclusions: These results suggest both insurance-based and race-based disparities regarding surgical treatment. Additionally, the strongest variable for surgical management was a meniscus tear being first diagnosed by a surgeon., Level of Evidence: Level of Evidence IV, retrospective case-control study., (Copyright © 2018 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To define minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) in revision hip arthroscopy., Methods: The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) were administered to revision hip arthroscopy patients. At 1 year postoperatively, patients graded their hip function based on anchor responses. SCB was defined as both a net change and an absolute value. Receiver operating characteristic analysis with area under the curve was used to confirm psychometric values. A distribution-based method was used for MCID., Results: Forty-nine patients were included with a mean age of 29.7 (±8.6) years. The most common indication for revision hip arthroscopy was residual femoroacetabular impingement (FAI; N = 34; 69.4%) followed by capsular management (N = 8; 16.3%). At 1-year follow-up, 34 patients reported feeling improved. Outcome score change corresponding to MCID and SCB net change for the mHHS, HOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL), HOS Sports, and iHOT-33 was 7.9/23.1, 7.9/16.2, 13.1/25.0, and 12.8/25.5, respectively. A higher proportion of patients with residual FAI achieved MCID compared with patients with other diagnoses. On the preoperative HOS ADL, HOS Sports, and iHOT-33, patients scoring below 67.7 (0.78), 55.6 (0.81), and 35.7 (0.73) were significantly more likely to achieve SCB postoperatively. Thirty-four patients (73.9%) were classified as receiving physical function improvement, and on the HOS Sports, MCID was achieved by 65% whereas 43% met the SCB criteria., Conclusions: MCID values ranged from 7.9 on the mHHS and the HOS ADL to 13.1 on the HOS Sports. SCB net change ranged from 16.2 on the HOS ADL to 25.2 on the iHOT-33, whereas absolute SCB ranged from 82.4 on the iHOT-33 to 84.7 on the mHHS. Residual FAI and capsular management were the most common indications for revision surgery with patients who underwent surgery for the former found to be most likely to achieve clinically significant improvement., Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series., (Copyright © 2018 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To use a population-level dataset to evaluate the rate of 30-day complications after rotator cuff repair, and to evaluate the risk factors for complication and unplanned hospital readmission., Methods: We used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2011 to 2015 to identify patients who underwent rotator cuff repair and concomitant procedures using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Postoperative complications and unplanned hospital readmissions were identified. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and perioperative variables were used in a multivariate logistic regression model to identify the risk factors for infection, any complication, and unplanned hospital readmission., Results: A total of 23,741 patients were identified who underwent rotator cuff repair. Overall, 1.39% of patients experienced at least 1 complication, with 0.66% minor complications and 0.85% major complications. Unplanned readmission occurred in 1.16% of patients. Infection was the most common complication, occurring in 0.3% of patients (n = 72), and was the most common reason for return to the operating room. Open rotator cuff repair and male gender were independent risk factors for all outcomes. Increased age and numerous medical comorbidities were associated with the risk of any complication or unplanned hospital readmission., Conclusions: Rotator cuff repair has a low incidence of short-term complications. Infection was the most common complication. Open repair, male gender, increased age, and medical comorbidities all significantly increased the risk of complications and hospital readmission., Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series., (Copyright © 2017 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the association between serum vitamin D level and the prevalence of lower extremity muscle strains and core muscle injuries in elite level athletes at the National Football League (NFL) combine., Methods: During the 2015 NFL combine, all athletes with available serum vitamin D levels were included for study. Baseline data were collected, including age, race, body mass index, position, injury history specific to lower extremity muscle strain or core muscle injury, and Functional Movement Screen scores. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D was collected and defined as normal (≥32 ng/mL), insufficient (20-31 ng/mL), and deficient (<20 ng/mL). Univariate regression analysis was used to examine the association of vitamin D level and injury history. Subsequent multivariate regression analysis was used to examine this relation with adjustment for collected baseline data variables., Results: The study population included 214 athletes, including 78% African American athletes and 51% skilled position players. Inadequate vitamin D was present in 59%, including 10% with deficient levels. Lower extremity muscle strain or core muscle injury was present in 50% of athletes, which was associated with lower vitamin D levels (P = .03). Athletes with a positive injury history also showed significantly lower vitamin D levels as compared with uninjured athletes (P = .03). African American/black race (P < .001) and injury history (P < .001) was associated with lower vitamin D. Vitamin D groups showed no differences in age (P = .9), body mass index (P = .9), or Functional Movement Screen testing (P = .2). Univariate analysis of inadequate vitamin D levels showed a 1.86 higher odds of lower extremity strain or core muscle injury (P = .03), and 3.61 higher odds of hamstring injury (P < .001). Multivariate analysis did not reach an independent association of low vitamin D with injury history (P = .07)., Conclusions: Inadequate vitamin D levels are a widespread finding in athletes at the NFL combine. Players with a history of lower extremity muscle strain and core muscle injury had a higher prevalence of inadequate vitamin D., Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective study-case series., (Copyright © 2017 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To define minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for adolescents undergoing arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery., Methods: A prospective institutional hip preservation registry was reviewed to identify hip arthroscopies performed for FAI. Patients with pre-existing hip conditions such as slipped capital femoral epiphysis and Legg-Calve-Perthese were excluded. Included patients were 18 years and younger. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) were administered as part of the registry. MCID was calculated using a distribution-based method, and SCB was calculated using a physical function anchor question. Receiver operating characteristic analysis with area under the curve (AUC) was used for psychometric analyses., Results: Forty-seven adolescents were identified. The majority of patients were female (n = 32, 68.1%) with a mean age of 16.5 (±1.1) years. The MCID (% achieving) for the mHHS, HOS activities of daily living (ADL), HOS Sport, and iHOT-33 was 9.5 (85%), 9.8 (79%), 12.1 (85%), and 10.7 (94%), respectively. Ninety-two percent of adolescents reported some form of improved hip physical ability on the anchor question. The following 1-year absolute outcome scores were significantly representative of an SCB state on the mHHS, HOS ADL, HOS Sport, and mHHS, respectively (AUC): 93.5 (0.79), 98.5 (0.84), 96.9 (0.81), and 85.9 (0.76)., Conclusions: Adolescents undergoing arthroscopic FAI surgery achieve clinically significant outcome improvement. We found that the vast majority of adolescents achieve MCID on hip-specific patient-reported outcome tools. However, although adolescents readily achieve MCID, a considerable improvement in postoperative outcome score is often needed to perceive a substantial benefit (SCB). The available hip outcome tools may be subject to ceiling effects for measuring clinically significant outcome improvement in adolescents., Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series., (Copyright © 2017 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To investigate differences between sport types for patient-reported outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR)., Methods: Included patients were enrolled as part of a prospective institutional ACL registry. Inclusion criteria were preoperative self-identification as a competitive athlete, maximum score on the preoperative Marx Activity Scale, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Demographic, intraoperative, and outcome data were extracted from the registry. Outcome tools administered as part of the registry included International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm-Tegner Scales, Marx Activity Scale (MAS), and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12)., Results: A total of 294 patients with a mean age of 25.5 years (standard deviation 12.1) met the study inclusion criteria; mean follow-up was 3.7 years. Included sports categories were soccer (n = 92; 31.3%), skiing (n = 67; 22.8%), basketball (n = 56; 19.1%), lacrosse (n = 38; 12.9%), football (n = 29; 9.9%), and Tennis (n = 12; 4.1%). At baseline, compared with other sports, lacrosse players have higher outcome scores while skiers had lower scores. At 2-year follow-up, however, across all outcome tools, football players demonstrated significantly higher outcome scores than all other athletes (IKDC, 93.2, P = .001; Lysholm, 93.2, P = .03; MAS, 13.1, P = .03; SF-12 Mental Component Summary, 57.9, P = .0002). Conversely, at 2-year follow-up, soccer players demonstrated a significantly lower Lysholm (86.7, P = .02) and a trend toward lower IKDC (85.6, P = .09) scores., Conclusions: Patient-reported outcomes after ACLR among active athletes are comparable. Football players demonstrate quantitatively higher outcome scores whereas soccer players have lower scores. However, these outcome score differences may not be clinically significant and may be subject to confounding variables. Continued attention should be paid to understanding sport-specific outcome after ACLR., Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic case series., (Copyright © 2016 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate reported medium- to long-term outcomes after high tibial osteotomy (HTO) with associated cartilage restoration procedures., Methods: A review of the MEDLINE database was performed. The inclusion criteria were English language, clinical outcome study with HTO as the primary procedure, use of a form of cartilage repair included, and the mean follow-up period of at least 2 years. Each identified study was reviewed for study design, patient demographics, type of procedures performed, clinical outcomes, progression to total knee arthroplasty, and complications., Results: Eight hundred and twenty-seven patients (839 knees) were included. The most common cartilage preservation technique used in conjunction with HTO was microfracture (4 studies; 22.2%). The mean Lyscholm scores, reported in 50% of the studies, ranged from 40 to 65.7 preoperatively and improved to a range of 67 to 94.6 postoperatively. Four studies (22.2%) used a visual analog scale for evaluation of pain and all had a mean visual analog scale of less than 3 postoperatively. Among studies evaluating conversion to arthroplasty, the rate of conversion was 6.8% and the range of mean number of years from HTO to conversion was 4.9 to 13.0. The overall reported complication rate was 10.3%., Conclusions: HTO with cartilage restoration procedures provides reliable improvement in functional status in the medium- to long-term period after surgery and has potential to delay or avoid the need for knee arthroplasty surgery., Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies., (Copyright © 2016 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine the publication rates of podium presentation abstracts at the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) annual scientific meetings from 2004 to 2012., Methods: A database of podium presentation abstracts at the annual meetings of the AANA was compiled. Abstract presentations that reached manuscript publication were determined by a PubMed search of the MEDLINE database and Google Scholar. The journal and publication date were then recorded for all identified published abstracts., Results: A total of 658 abstracts were selected for podium presentations at AANA annual meetings from 2004-2012 (range, 53-102 per year). Of these 658 abstracts, 443 (67.3%) went on to eventual publication in peer-reviewed journals. The mean time from the meeting to publication was 20.0 months. Most abstracts were published within 3 years of the meeting (n = 380, 85.8%), with a significant number of published abstracts reaching publication before the time of the meeting (n = 41, 9.3%). Published abstracts were most frequently published in Arthroscopy (n = 186, 42.0%), The American Journal of Sports Medicine (20.3%), and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (6.1%)., Conclusions: The overall publication rate of podium presentations at AANA annual meetings (67.3%) was similar to publication rates for other major orthopaedic annual meetings. Most published abstracts (85.8%) were published within 3 years, and the mean time to publication was 20.0 months., Clinical Relevance: The rates of publication of podium presentations at AANA annual meetings show the impact and importance of these meetings in the advancement of orthopaedic research., (Copyright © 2016 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate how patient satisfaction after surgical femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) treatment is measured and reported in the current evidence base., Methods: A review of the MEDLINE database was performed. Clinical outcome studies of FAI that reported a measure of patient satisfaction were included. Patient demographics, clinical outcome scores, and patient satisfaction measures were extracted. The NewCastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to grade quality. Statistical analysis was primarily descriptive., Results: Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; the mean NOS score among included studies was 5.7. Most studies were level 3 or 4 (n = 25, 96.1%). A 0 to 10 numeric scale, described by some studies as a visual analog scale, was the most commonly used method to assess satisfaction (n = 21; 80.8%), and mean reported scores ranged from 6.8 to 9.2 out of 10. Four studies (15.4%) used an ordinal scale, and 1 study (3.8%) used willingness to undergo surgery again as the measure of satisfaction. None of the included studies assessed preoperative satisfaction or patient expectation. Pooled cohort analysis was limited by significant overlapping study populations. Predictors of patients' satisfaction identified in included studies were presence of arthritis and postoperative outcome scores., Conclusions: Patient satisfaction was not uniformly assessed in the literature. Most studies used a 0- to 10-point satisfaction scale, but none distinguished between the process of care and the outcome of care. Although satisfaction scores were generally high, the quality of the methodologies in the studies that reported satisfaction was low, and the studies likely included overlapping patient populations. More work needs to be done to develop standardized ways for assessing patient satisfaction after arthroscopic hip surgery and other procedures in orthopaedic sports medicine., Level of Evidence: Level III, systematic review of Level III studies., (Copyright © 2016 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)