Search

Context Amputations are routine in orthopedics, specifically during trauma and when patients have recurrent surgical site infections. When undergoing amputations, patients must combat the psychosocial factors associated with the loss of an extremity, including stigmatization. Objectives This study analyzes the presence of person-centered language (PCL) within amputation-related orthopedic publications in the top orthopedic journals. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis with a database search on February 14, 2021 utilizing PubMed. Utilizing a previously published search string, we isolated studies that were published in the top 20 orthopedic journals based on the Google h5-index. In addition to the top 20 orthopedic journals, we included the top two hand and foot & ankle journals in our search to incorporate more amputation literature. Our search yielded 687 returns. The sample was then randomized, and the first 300 studies that fit our inclusion criteria were examined for prespecified non-PCL terminology. Results Our results show that 157 (52.2%) studies were adherent to PCL according to the American Medical Association’s Manual of Style 10th Edition (AMAMS). Of the 143 (47.7%) studies that were not adherent to PCL, 51 studies (35.7%) had more than one type of non-PCL language. The term “amputee,” which is being labeled as identity-first language (IFL), was found in 101 articles (33.7%). Further investigation found that 73.3% (74/101) of the studies containing IFL were found to have other non-PCL terms. Of the other studies in the sample, non-PCL was found 34.7% (88/199) of the time. This analysis was done due to the discrepancies in stigmatization of the term “amputee.” No statistical association was found between adherence to PCL and study characteristics. Conclusions Our findings show that amputation literature within the top orthopedic journals has limited adherence to PCL. Additionally, the use of the term “amputee,” which is widely accepted by the amputation community, resulted in a greater rate of non-PCL terminology within orthopedic amputation literature. Efforts should be implemented within orthopedics to avoid the use of stigmatizing language, regarding individuals that underwent amputations, to minimize psychosocial stressors.

Background: Systematic reviews on the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in orthopaedic surgery are abundant in current published literature. However, a beautification of results (referred to as spin) has been noted in abstracts across various aspects of medicine. Purpose: To determine the prevalence of spin in systematic reviews of PRP-related orthopaedic surgery abstracts. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Murad and Wang guidelines, we conducted a search in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Database for reviews on PRP-related orthopaedic surgery. The search included studies published from inception until June 30, 2021. Included were systematic reviews written in English that involved the use of PRP in the treatment of orthopaedic injuries in human participants. The abstracts of the included reviews were evaluated for the top 9 types of spin as described by Yavchitz et al in 2016. We determined the relationship between spin and study characteristics using odds ratios. Results: Of an initial 1560 studies, 176 were included. We found that 50 studies (28.4%) contained at least 1 form of spin. The 2 most common forms of spin found in our sample were type 5 (“Conclusion claims the beneficial effect of treatment despite high risk of bias”; n = 27 [15.3%]) and type 3 (“Selective reporting or overemphasis of efficacy in outcomes favoring beneficial effect of intervention”; n = 18 [10.2%]). No statistical significance was found between study characteristics and the presence of spin. Conclusion: Spin was present in 28% of the systematic reviews that covered PRP-related orthopaedic treatments. Spin was not associated with general study characteristics, including adherence to PRISMA guidelines or funding. Journals and authors should be aware of spin in articles and avoid its usage.

The elderly population comprises the fastest growing segment of the world's population. As patients age, the incidence and prevalence of certain pain syndromes increase. Pain may be underreported as some elderly patients incorrectly believe that pain is a normal process of aging. A comprehensive pain assessment includes a thorough medical history and physical examination, review of systems and pertinent laboratory results, imaging studies, and diagnostic tests. Pain physicians should have a broad range of understanding of the pharmacologic and physiological changes that occur in the geriatric population. The present review on pain management in the elderly focuses on relevant information for the pain clinician. Included are appropriate pain assessment, physical examination, pathophysiologic changes in the elderly, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes, and present pain management modalities. Elderly patients present with increased fat mass, decreased muscle mass, and decreased body water, all of which have important ramifications on drug distribution. Hepatic phase I reactions involving oxidation, hydrolysis, and reduction appear to be more altered by age than phase II conjugation such as acetylation, glucuronidation, sulfation, and glycine conjugation. There is a predictable age-related decline in cytochrome P-450 function and, combined with the polypharmacy that much of the elderly population experiences, this may lead to a toxic reaction of medications. One of the newer opiates, oxymorphone, has recently been studied as it is metabolized in a non-cytochrome P-450 pathway and therefore bypasses many of the drug-drug interactions common to the elderly. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended to investigate all possible options for optimal management, including pharmacotherapy, interventional procedures, physical rehabilitation, and psychological support.