Search

Softball is the third most popular women's collegiate sport in the United States, with 19,680 total athletes as of the 2015–2016 season. Despite its popularity and growth in recent years, research focusing on the biomechanics of the windmill pitch and its associated shoulder injuries is relatively scarce. The incidence of shoulder injury is highest during the preseason and the beginning of the regular season. The windmill pitch can be divided into distinct phases, with the shoulder experiencing the greatest force during the delivery phase. Significant demands placed on the shoulder during the windmill pitch put pitchers at a higher risk of developing shoulder injuries than position players. Maximum shoulder compression/distraction forces during the windmill pitch have been shown to be comparable to those experienced during the baseball overhand throw, dispelling the myth that the windmill pitch is not taxing on the shoulder. Injuries associated with the high compression/distraction forces include lesions to the rotator cuff, glenoid labrum, and biceps brachii. Pitcher-specific training, cross-training, and whole-body conditioning should be incorporated into current training regimens to decrease the risk of shoulder injuries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hip/groin running-related injuries (RRIs) are relatively uncommon. It is unclear if runners of either sex are disproportionately affected. Our objective was to systematically review differences in hip/groin RRIs between males and females. A structured and comprehensive search of four medical literature databases was performed (PubMed, Embase, Ovid Medline, and CINAHL). Terms searched were as follows: risk, epidemiology, hip injury, groin injury, overuse injury, running, sprinting, and track and field. Studies reporting sex-specific data on hip/groin RRIs in adult runners were included. Data was extracted and reviewed independently by two authors. Sex-specific injury rates, risk factors, and return to sport (RTS) following hip/groin RRI were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna-Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. Ten studies with 7,353 total runners were included: 2,315 (47%) males and 2,559 (53%) females. The mean age of the included runners was 37.3 ± 8.9 years and the mean weekly running distance was 10.4 ± 8.4 km. Hip/groin injuries comprised 10.1% (491/4,874) of total RRIs, including 6.3% of RRIs sustained by males and 11.0% by females. Three studies reported significantly higher rates of hip/groin RRIs in female runners. One study reported significantly higher rates of gluteus medius and adductor RRIs for females and males, respectively. One study identified female sex as an independent risk factor for hip/groin RRIs. Three studies reported on RTS after hip/groin RRIs: the pooled RTS rate was 81.4% (57/70) at 1 to 368 days after injury. Data was pooled when possible; however, there was considerable clinical, methodological, and statistical heterogeneity across studies. Hip/groin RRIs comprise a greater percentage of total injuries among injured female runners relative to males. Females may be at a higher risk for sustaining hip/groin RRIs though more research on risk factors and RTS is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Women residents are underrepresented in orthopaedic surgery. The causes of the deficit of women in orthopaedic surgery are multifactorial, but by identifying the perceptions of women in orthopaedic residency training and comparing them with the perceptions of men, we can improve our understanding of ways to enhance the recruitment of qualified and diverse candidates. Questions/purposes: (1) What differences exist in the perceived experiences of residents identifying as women and men regarding professional, social, and personal interactions during residency training? (2) Are there differences in the percentage of women and men residents who have experienced harassment or discrimination in preresidency interviews, and are there differences in the type of harassment or discrimination experienced? Methods: A survey was generated using Academy of Critical Care: Development, Evaluation, and Methodology guidelines. Two focus groups with seven attending orthopaedic surgeons who participate in the Collaborative Orthopaedic Education Research Group and who are experts on gender diversity in orthopaedics were held to improve survey validity. The survey included binary-response, Likert, and free-text questions on the perception of professional, social, and personal interactions held by the resident being surveyed. The questions focused on a respondent's perception of interactions with staff members, patients, resident colleagues, and attending surgeons, as well as sexual harassment. Program directors at 10 selected Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)–accredited orthopaedic residency programs that participate in the Collaborative Orthopaedic Education Research Group shared the survey with residents at their institutions. There were 95 programs in the Collaborative Orthopaedic Education Research Group at the time this survey was distributed. In this program, directors or other interested teaching faculty in orthopaedic residency programs voluntarily participate to discuss and develop quality research on resident and fellow education. These 95 programs account for 46% of the ACGME-accredited programs in the United States at the time the survey was created and distributed. The 10 residency programs had a total of 232 enrolled residents; 15% (34) identified as women. This gender distribution models the national sample of orthopaedic residents. Survey reliability was assessed by calculating the Cronbach alpha after determining the variance in each relevant (nondemographic) survey item. The final survey was found to have excellent internal reliability (alpha = 0.95). Responses from residents identifying as women and those identifying as men were compared using Fisher exact tests for all categorical data, and two-tailed independent t-tests were used for all continuous data. Differences in each survey category (professional interactions, social interactions, personal interactions, and sexual harassment in preresidency interview experiences) were calculated. Results: Women reported experiencing microaggressions (left undefined to the survey respondent, but generally considered to be subtle, stunning, often automatic, and nonverbal exchanges that are "put downs") at work more frequently than men did (40% [six of 15] versus 5% [four of 74]; p < 0.001). Specifically, women perceived being interrupted (53% [eight of 15] versus 5% [four of 75]); p < 0.001) by men colleagues, called by their first name (67% [10 of 15] versus 4% [3 of 72]; p < 0.001), and given administrative tasks (27% [four of 15] versus 1% [one of 75]; p = 0.004) more often than men. More women than men perceived that patients (33% [five of 15] versus 0 of 74 [0%]; p < 0.001) and hospital staff (27% [four of 15] versus 7% [five of 74]; p = 0.01) respected their opinion less than that of men. More women than men perceived that group humor negatively targeted their gender (47% [seven of 15] versus 1% [one of 75]; p < 0.001) and that criticism of their surgical skill was based on their gender rather than their ability (33% [five of 15] versus 5% [four of 78]; p = 0.005). In residency or subinternship interviews, 20% of women reported experiencing sexual harassment as defined by a listing of known types of harassment in the question stem, compared with 0% of men (p = 0.004). Women reported harassment in the form of verbal remarks of a sexual nature and obscene images in the workplace, whereas men did not report any form of harassment during interviews. Conclusion: These findings suggest that the greatest discrepancies in the perceived experiences of women and men residents lie in professional interactions, and women residents are more likely to experience sexual harassment and disparaging humor than men residents. Clinical Relevance: Addressing these discrepancies, particularly in the professional setting, will help to create a more inclusive work environment and attract more women to orthopaedic surgery. Annual distribution of the survey used in this study by program directors to residents in their programs can help to identify discrepant perceptions that, coupled with the collection of objective data, can be targeted for improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of patient sex on outcomes after treatment of osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) lesions of the knee through a systematic review of current evidence.Methods: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines using the PubMed, PubMed Central, Embase, Ovid Medline, Cochrane Libraries, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases. Relevant outcomes included functional (e.g., International Knee Documentation Committee and Subjective Knee Evaluation, Lysholm Knee Score) and clinical outcomes (e.g., symptom/pain resolution, reoperation rates) for males and females after operative or nonoperative treatment of knee OCD lesions.Results: Ten articles with a total of 691 (73%) males and 260 (27%) females were included. Mean age ranged from 11.3 ± 2.1 years to 34.5 ± 10.3 years, and follow-up ranged from 6 months to 16.3 years. In four studies reporting functional outcomes, no significant differences were found between males and females in any metric assessed (all P > .05). Seven studies reported clinical outcomes after treatment of knee OCD lesions. One study determined males were more likely to have a successful nonoperative outcome than females (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.00-3.40). Another study found males had a lower risk of developing symptomatic knee pain following operative or nonoperative treatment at a mean 14-year follow-up (HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.07-0.81). The remaining 5 studies reported statistically comparable clinical outcomes between males and females (all P > .05).Conclusion: The present systematic review found mostly comparable clinical and functional outcomes between males and females following treatment of knee OCD lesions. Despite sex-related differences in the prevalence of these lesions and limited evidence of differences in clinical outcomes, these data suggest that sex does not independently predict outcomes after treatment.Level Of Evidence: III, systematic review of Level II and III studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]