Search

This repository hosts the code for the statistical compositional analysis performed for the paper: "Stepwise-edited, human melanoma models reveal mutations’ effect on tumor and microenvironment".

Supplemental Material, FAO970463-ICMJE for Arthrofibrosis of the Ankle by Brian Timothy Velasco, Shalin S. Patel, Kimberly K. Broughton, David B. Frumberg, John Y. Kwon and Christopher P. Miller in Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics

Supplemental material, FAI891957_ICMJE_disclosures for Do We Have to Walk Before We Can Run? Surgical Management of Calcaneus Fractures by John Y. Kwon and Caroline Williams in Foot & Ankle International

Supplemental material, Supplemenatry_Table_1 for Cost-Utility Analyses in US Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgery: A Systematic Review by Aditya V. Karhade and John Y. Kwon in Foot & Ankle Specialist

Category: Practice Management Introduction/Purpose: Utilization by patients of physician rating websites continues to expand. There is limited information on how these websites function and influence patient perception and physicians’ practices. No study has specifically investigated online ratings and comments of orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons. In this study, we identified what factors impact online ratings and comments for this subset of surgeons. Methods: A total of 210 orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons in or near metropolitan areas were randomly selected from the American Orthopaedic of Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) website. Demographic information, ratings (number of stars), and comments were reviewed on the three most visited public domain physician ratings websites: HealthGrades.com (HealthGrades), Vitals.com (Vitals), and Ratemds.com (Ratemds). Content differences between positive and negative comments were evaluated. Results: Orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons had a mean rating of 4.03 ± 0.57 out of 5 stars. A high percentage (84%) of the total number of ratings were either 1-star (17%) or 5-stars (67%). Most positive comments related to outcome, physician personality, and communication while most negative comments related to outcome, bedside manner, and waiting time. Chi-square analysis revealed statistically significant proportions of positive comments pertaining to surgeon-dependent factors (eg, physician personality, knowledge, skills) and of negative comments concerning surgeon-independent factors (eg, waiting time, logistics). Conclusion: This is the first study examining online ratings and written comments of orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons. Surgeons had a generally favorable rating and were likely to have positive comments. Patients were likely to write positive comments about surgeon personality and communication, and negative comments pertaining to bedside manner and waiting time. Knowledge and management of online content may allow surgeons to improve patient satisfaction and online ratings.

We performed a prospective study of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases to examine variations in treatment among medical centers. In a prospective cohort study of 1659 patients with CD and 946 patients with UC seen at 7 high-volume referral centers, we collected data on demographics, disease characteristic, and medical and surgical treatments. We used logistic regression to determine differences in treatment among centers, controlling for potential confounders. We found significant variations among centers in treatment of CD with immunomodulators (odds ratio [OR], 3.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.09 – 5.32) but not anti-tumor necrosis factor agents (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.97 – 2.77). There was less variation in treatment of UC; we found no difference in use of immunomodulators (OR,1.83 95% CI, 1.00 – 3.36) or anti-TNF therapy (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.40 – 1.65). Development and implementation of evidence-based standards of care for IBD may help reduce variation and improve outcomes.