Search

The prosperous financial relationship between physicians and industry remains a highly scrutinized topic. Recently, a publicly available website was developed in conjunction with the U.S. Affordable Care Act to shed light on payments from industry to physicians with the goal of increasing transparency. The purpose of this study was to assess possible relationships between industry payments and orthopaedic surgeon gender, subspecialty training, and practice settings., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using publicly available information from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to identify the 25 orthopaedic surgeons with the highest compensation from each of the 10 largest orthopaedic companies from 2013 to 2017. Statistical analyses were conducted to investigate the factors that contributed to payment differences., Results: Among the 347 highest-compensated orthopaedic surgeons, only 1 woman (0.29%) was identified. Orthopaedic surgeons in the subspecialties of spine (32.9%), adult reconstruction (27.9%), and sports medicine (14.5%) made up a majority of the 25 highest earners. A larger proportion of the physicians in this study worked in private practice (57.6%) compared with an academic setting (42.4%). Orthopaedic surgeons who subspecialize in sports medicine had significantly higher total mean payment amounts when compared with all other specialties. The primary method of compensation was found to be through licensing or royalty payments., Conclusions: The large majority of orthopaedic surgeons who are highly compensated from industry are men. Among these, the greatest number specialize in the spine, while sports medicine surgeons receive significantly higher total mean payment amounts. Additional studies are warranted to evaluate the disparities between men and women and encourage policies to promote gender equality., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJSOA/A347)., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated. All rights reserved.)

Background: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on orthopedic surgery practice, but there has been little investigation of the effects of COVID-19 on the orthopedic surgery literature. Additionally, because orthopedic research plays a vital role in physician education, changes to the characteristics and content of published literature can have lasting impacts on future teaching and learning. This paper represents the first known analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on peer-reviewed articles published in orthopedic surgery journals., Methods: The 20 orthopedic journals with the highest impact factors in 2019, according to the Journal Citation Reports , were included in this study. Using PubMed and COVID-19 related keywords as well as manual screening, a final count of 199 articles were assessed for this study and subsequently sorted by country of origin, orthopedic subspecialty, article type, and general theme. Kruskal Wallis and Pearson's Chi-squared tests were used to analyze continuous and categorical variables, respectively., Results: Fourteen journals published articles relating to COVID-19, representing 26 countries with the United States (37%) and United Kingdom (13%) publishing the greatest proportion of all COVID-19 articles. Sixty percent of publications discussed COVID-19's impact on the overall field of orthopedic surgery, with the remainder focusing on specific subspecialties. Forty-seven percent of publications were original research articles while 46% were editorials or commentaries. The median time to publication for all COVID-19 related articles was 24.5 days, compared to the 129 days reported for orthopedic journals prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (p < 0.001). In the first 100 articles published, 49% (n = 49) originated exclusively from United States institutions, whereas only 25% (n = 25) of the next ninety-nine articles had US-only institutions (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the characteristics, content, and time to publication of the orthopedic surgery literature. The data and ideas presented in this paper should help streamline future, formal analysis on the lasting implications of COVID-19 on orthopedic surgery practice, teaching, and learning., Competing Interests: None., (© 2021 Professor P K Surendran Memorial Education Foundation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Sunshine Act aims to increase the transparency of physicians receiving compensation from pharmaceutical and medical device companies. Nine states have supplementary legislation in addition to the Federal Sunshine Act. The purpose of this study is to assess the characteristics of financial compensation to orthopaedic residents on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments Database in states with more restrictive regulations compared with those without additional restrictions., Methods: A complete list of accredited orthopaedic residency programs in the United States was compiled using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and American Osteopathic Academy of Orthopedics websites. The website of each orthopaedic residency program was searched to compile a list of residents who attended their program from 2014 to 2016. The CMS Open Payments Database was used to search the residents identified for the corresponding years. All data available on the CMS Open Payments Database were recorded., Results: Over the 3-year period, 3,622 residents were identified from 151 programs. A total of 41% of the residents were reported as receiving compensation from the industry. The percent of residents reported from programs in less restrictive states was 45% versus 28% in more restrictive states (P < 0.001). Residents had a mean of 5.3 transactions per year in less restrictive states and 2.4 transactions per year in more restrictive states (P < 0.001). The mean compensation per resident reported was $2,730 for less restrictive sates versus $1,937 for more restrictive states (P < 0.001)., Discussion: Overall, 41% of orthopaedic residents were reported on the CMS Open Payments Database with fewer transactions and less compensation going to residents in states with more restrictive legislature. Potential implications on resident education remain unknown.

Objectives: Residents receiving industry payments are not legally required to be reported on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments Database. The purpose of this study is to review reporting of orthopedic surgery residents and identify the trends for which payments or transfers in value were received., Design: The CMS Open Payments Database was used to search for all available orthopedic residents from 2014 to 2016. All data available on the CMS Open Payments Database was recorded., Setting/participants: This is a database study. Participants are residents reported in the CMS Open Payments Database., Results: Over the 3-year period, 6832 resident "entities" were identified from 151 programs. A total of 3217 entities (47%) were reported as receiving payments from industry during this time period. This totaled $3,786,754 over the 3 year study period. The largest itemized categories for payment were education (32.5%) and grants (30.9%) totaling more than $2.4 million. Other areas of payment included travel (17.0%), food (16.0%), consultation fee (1.7%), research (0.8%), speaker fee (0.7%), gift (0.1%), honoraria (0.1%), and other (0.02%)., Conclusion: Overall, 47% of orthopedic resident entities were reported on the CMS Open Payments Database. The vast majority of payments were related to education and grants. Residents should become familiar with how to navigate the Open Payments Database and be educated on maintaining appropriate relationships with industry., (Copyright © 2020 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Isolated greater tuberosity fractures account for up to a fifth of all proximal humeral fractures. There have been several retrospective cohort studies and case series reporting outcomes after treatment of this pathology. This study aims to report on the clinical outcomes of surgically treated isolated greater tuberosity fractures, as well as diagnostic workup and complications associated with fracture fixation., Methods: A systematic review was performed under PRISMA guidelines to identify studies that reported the results or clinical outcomes of isolated greater tuberosity fracture. The searches were performed using MEDLINE through PubMed, the Elsevier Embase database, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews., Results: Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria comprising 345 patients and 345 shoulders. The mean age was 52.9 years and mean follow-up was 3.4 months. The mean postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon Score, the most frequently utilized patient reported outcome measure across studies, was 90.1% of ideal maximum. All studies used standard shoulder radiographs in their initial workup and most commonly referred to a minimum of 5mm displacement as an indication for surgery. Fifty five percent of patients were treated using open fixation and 35.9 with arthroscopic fixation. Ninety three percent of patients were able to return to work. A total of fifty-two (15.1%) complications were reported in the included studies., Conclusions: The current literature describes overall satisfactory functional outcomes and minimal occupational morbidity following either open or arthroscopic fixation of isolated greater tuberosity fractures despite a notable rate of complications., Level of Evidence: IV, systematic review., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)