Search

Introduction The creation of research groups and consortiums has become more common in all medical and surgical specialities. The purpose of this investigation was to assess and describe collaborative research groups and consortiums within orthopaedic surgery. In addition, we aimed to define the demographics of the research consortium members with particular attention to female and minority members. Methods  Journals with a musculoskeletal/orthopaedic focus and a few medical journals were selected to identify articles published by research groups and consortiums. Articles published from 2020 to 2022 were manually reviewed. Bibliographic information, author information and level of evidence (LOE) were recorded. For identified consortium members, sex and race were defined in a binary manner. Results A total of 92 research consortiums were identified. A list of members was identified for 77 groups (83.7%), totalling 2,260 researchers. The remaining group members were not able to be identified due to the lack of information in the included publications, research group websites or after communicating with the corresponding author for respective articles. Most researchers were male (n=1,748, 77.3%) and white (n=1,694, 75%). Orthopaedic surgeons comprised 1,613 (71.4%) identified researchers. The most common fellowship training for orthopaedic surgeons was paediatrics (n=370, 16.4%), trauma (n=266, 11.8%) and sports medicine (n=229, 10.1%). The consortiums published 261 articles: women were lead (first) authors in 23% and senior (last) authors in 11.1%. Non-white researchers were lead authors in 24.5% (n=64) and senior authors in 17.2% (n=45). The most common level of evidence was level 3, accounting for 45.6% (n=119) of all publications. Level 1 evidence accounted for 12.6% (n=33) of published articles. Discussion Representation of women in orthopaedic research consortiums exceeds their representation in almost every orthopaedic professional society. There is less publicly available data to compare the involvement of under-represented minorities (URMs) in research consortiums to general practice. Further investigations should analyse possible avenues in which gender and racial disparity could be improved within orthopaedic surgery research., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2024, Ozdag et al.)

Our purpose was to assess the diagnostic validity (sensitivity (Sn) and specificity (Sp)) of physical examination maneuvers for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). This meta-analysis utilized the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Studies assessing exam maneuvers (including components of the CTS-6) for CTS were identified in MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online) and Embase (Excerpta Medica Database) databases. Assessed maneuvers assessed included: Phalen's test, Tinel's sign, Durkan test, scratch-collapse test, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament (SWM), and static 2-point discrimination (2PD) test. Data extracted included: article name, total number of subjects/hands, type of exam, and exam Sn/Sp. Forest plots were presented to display the estimated Sn/Sp and boxplots were used to demonstrate the locality, spread, and skewness of the Sn/Sp through the quartiles. After screening 570 articles, 67 articles involving 8924 hands were included. Forty-eight articles assessed Phalen's test, 45 assessed Tinel's sign, 21 assessed the Durkan test, seven assessed the scratch-collapse test, 11 assessed SWM, and six assessed the static 2PD test. Phalen's test demonstrated the greatest median Sn (0.70, (Q1, Q3): (0.51, 0.85)), followed by the Durkan test (0.67, (Q1, Q3): (0.46, 0.82)). 2PD demonstrated the highest median Sp (0.90, (Q1, Q3): (0.88, 0.90)), followed by SWM (0.85, (Q1, Q3): (0.51, 0.89)). There is considerable variability with respect to the validity of physical exam tests used in the diagnosis of CTS. Upper-extremity surgeons should be aware of inherent limitations for individual exam maneuvers. In the absence of a uniformly accepted diagnostic gold standard, a combination of exams, along with pertinent patient history, should guide the diagnosis of CTS., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2023, Ozdag et al.)

The aim of this investigation was to analyze the 50 most frequently cited articles on hand and wrist surgery of all time and those published during the 21 st century. We aimed to evaluate the article, author, and journal characteristics for these publications in order to create a modern reading list of impactful upper-extremity articles. A search of the Journal Citation Reports 2022 edition to identify journals containing possible hand or wrist-related articles was performed. Related journals were identified and then searched on the Web of Science database to identify hand and wrist articles. The top 50 most cited articles overall and the top 50 most cited articles from 2000-2021 were identified and indexed. Several bibliometric parameters, such as study type, study topic, study design, level of evidence, citation count, citation density, the institution of the lead author, the gender of lead and senior authors, and country were analyzed. For the most cited articles of all time, the number of citations ranged from 224 to 1109 with a mean of 368 citations and 15.0 citation density. Citations for the top 50 articles from 2000-2021 ranged from 153 to 950 with a mean of 233 citations and 14.5 citation density. For both groups, the most common level of evidence was level IV (33% and 27%). No correlation between journal impact factor and citation count or citation density was found. In both groups, "fracture" was the most common topic and papers were predominantly written by male authors. Frequently cited publications on hand and wrist surgery are often clinical papers that contain low levels of evidence and tend to focus on topics related to fracture care. Female authors remain underrepresented., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2022, Delma et al.)

Purpose:  To assess the outcomes of operatively treated terrible triad (TT) elbow injuries for a single surgeon at the start of clinical practice. We aimed to define postoperative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion (ROM), and complications during the period immediately following fellowship training, in order to describe the learning process for surgical treatment of TT.  Methods: All operatively treated TTs from 2017 to 2020 were included. All cases were performed by a single, fellowship-trained upper-extremity surgeon and represented a consecutive series at the start of clinical practice. Baseline demographics, injury characteristics, and surgical details were recorded for each case. PROMs [QuickDisability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and (visual analog scale) pain scale], ROM, and complications were recorded at the time of final follow-up. A perioperative glucocorticoid protocol was used in all cases without diabetes., Results:  There was a total of 21 included TT cases with a mean follow-up of 20 months. The operative time averaged 89 min for the first 10 cases and 83 min for the subsequent 11 cases. The mean QuickDASH and VAS pain score at final follow-up were 19 and 2.3, respectively. The mean flexion-extension arc was 122° and two cases (9%) had < 100° arc of motion. The mean pronation-supination arc was 145°. Three cases (14%) had a postoperative complication, all of which underwent reoperation. Of the 21 included cases, these reoperations represented cases #1, #14, and #17 respectively.  Conclusions: Upper-extremity surgeons at the start of clinical practice may be able to achieve outcomes similar to more experienced surgeons for operatively treated TT elbow fracture dislocations. There does not appear to be a substantial "learning curve" after fellowship training with respect to PROMs, complication rates, or operative time associated with surgical treatment of TT elbow injuries., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2022, Ozdag et al.)