Search

IntroductionWhile short-term surgical outreach trips improve access to care in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), there is rising concern about their long-term impact. In response, many organizations seek to incorporate capacity building programs into their outreach efforts to help strengthen local health systems. Although leading organizations, like the World Health Organization (WHO), advocate for this approach, uniform guidelines are absent.MethodsWe performed a systematic review, using search terms pertaining to capacity building guidelines during short-term surgical outreach trips. We extracted information on authorship, guideline development methodology, and guidelines relating to capacity building. Guidelines were classified according to the Global-QUEST framework, which outlines seven domains of capacity building on surgical outreach trips. Guideline development methodology frequencies and domain classifications frequencies were calculated; subsequently, guidelines were aggregated to develop a core guideline for each domain.ResultsA total of 35 studies were included. Over 200 individual guidelines were extracted, spanning all seven framework domains. Guidelines were most frequently classified into Coordination and Community Impact domains and least frequently into the Finance domain. Less than half (46%) of studies collaborated with local communities to design the guidelines. Instead, guidelines were predominantly developed through author trip experience.ConclusionAs short-term surgical trips increase, further work is needed to standardize guidelines, create actionable steps, and promote collaborations in order to promote accountability during short-term surgical outreach trips.

BackgroundQuality measures provide a way to assess health care delivery and to identify areas for improvement that can inform patient care delivery. When operationalized by a hospital or a payer, quality measures can also be tied to physician or hospital reimbursement. Prior work on quality measures in orthopaedic surgery have identified substantial gaps in measurement portfolios and have highlighted areas for future measure development. This study aims to identify the portfolio of quality measures in pediatric orthopaedic surgery.MethodsWe used methodology of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and reviewed PubMed/ MEDLINE and EMBASE, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS), National Quality Forum (NQF), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), for quality measures and candidate quality measures. Quality measure and candidate quality measures were categorized as structure, process, or outcome. Measures were also classified into 1 of the 6 National Quality Strategy priorities (safety, effective, patient centered, timely, efficient, and equitable).ResultsA review of PubMed/EMBASE returned 1640 potential quality measures and articles. A review of AAOS, NQF, and AHRQ databases found 80 potential quality measures. After screening we found a total of 18 quality measures and candidate quality measures specifically for pediatric orthopaedic surgery. Quality measures addressed conditions such as supracondylar humerus fractures, developmental dysplasia of the hip, and osteochondritis dissecans. There were 10 process measures, 8 outcome measure, and 0 structure measures. When we categorized by National Quality Strategy priorities and found 50% (9/18) were effective clinical care, 44% (8/18) were person and care-giver centered experience and outcomes, 6% (1/18) were efficient use of resources.ConclusionsThere are few quality measures and candidate quality measures to assess pediatric orthopaedic surgery. Of the quality measure available, process measures are relatively over-represented. Pediatric orthopaedic surgeons can lead the development of outcome (eg, patient-reported outcomes after surgery) and structure measures (eg, subspecialty training certification) to assess quality of care in pediatric orthopaedic surgery.Level of evidenceLevel II-systematic review.

The Management of Distal Radius Fractures Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline is based on a systematic review of published studies for the treatment of distal radius fractures in adults older than 18 years. The scope of this guideline is limited to the treatment of acute distal radius fractures and does not address distal radius malunion. This guideline contains seven recommendations to assist orthopaedic surgeons and all qualified physicians managing patients with acute distal radius fractures based on the best current available evidence. It serves as an information resource for professional healthcare practitioners and developers of practice guidelines and recommendations. In addition to providing pragmatic practice recommendations, this guideline also highlights gaps in the literature and informs areas for future research and quality measure development.

BackgroundPoorly controlled diabetes mellitus (DM) increases the risk for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). While institutional protocols include hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) screening in TJA patients, the costs and benefits of routine preoperative screening have not been described.MethodsThe authors created a decision tree model to evaluate short-term costs and risk reduction for PJIs with routine screening of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. Probabilities and costs were obtained from published sources. They calculated net costs and absolute risk reduction in PJI for routine screening versus no screening. The authors also performed sensitivity analyses of model inputs including probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) consisting of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations.ResultsIn patients with DM, routine screening before THA resulted in net cost savings of $81 per patient with 286 patients needing to be screened to prevent 1 PJI, while screening before TKA incurred net additional costs of $25,810 per PJI prevented. Routine screening in patients with DM undergoing THA or TKA was cost-saving across 75.5% or 21.8% of PSA simulations, respectively. In patients with no history of DM, routine screening before THA or TKA incurred net additional costs of $24,583 or $87,873 per PJI prevented, respectively.ConclusionsRoutine HbA1c screening in patients with DM prior to THA with referral of patients with elevated HbA1c for glycemic optimization may prevent PJI and reduce healthcare costs. In contrast, routine screening in patients with DM prior to TKA or in patients with no history of DM is not cost-saving.Level of evidenceEconomic Level IV.

BackgroundSmoking cessation represents an opportunity to reduce both short and long-term effects of smoking on complications after lumbar fusion and smoking-related morbidity and mortality. However, the cost-effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions prior to lumbar fusion is not fully known.MethodsWe created a decision-analytic Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 5 smoking-cessation strategies (behavioral counseling, nicotine replacement therapy [NRT], bupropion or varenicline monotherapy, and a combined intervention) prior to single-level, instrumented lumbar posterolateral fusion (PLF) from the health payer perspective. Probabilities, costs, and utilities were obtained from published sources. We calculated the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with each strategy over multiple time horizons and accounted for uncertainty with probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) consisting of 10,000 second-order Monte Carlo simulations.ResultsEvery smoking-cessation intervention was more effective and less costly than usual care at the lifetime horizon. In the short term, behavioral counseling, NRT, varenicline monotherapy, and the combined intervention were also cost-saving, while bupropion monotherapy was more effective but more costly than usual care. The mean lifetime cost savings for behavioral counseling, NRT, bupropion monotherapy, varenicline monotherapy, and the combined intervention were $3,291 (standard deviation [SD], $868), $2,571 (SD, $479), $2,851 (SD, $830), $6,767 (SD, $1,604), and $34,923 (SD, $4,248), respectively. The minimum efficacy threshold (relative risk for smoking cessation) for lifetime cost savings varied from 1.01 (behavioral counseling) to 1.15 (varenicline monotherapy). A PSA revealed that the combined smoking-cessation intervention was always more effective and less costly than usual care.ConclusionsEven brief smoking-cessation interventions yield large short-term and long-term cost savings. Smoking-cessation interventions prior to PLF can both reduce costs and improve patient outcomes as health payers/systems shift toward value-based reimbursement (e.g., bundled payments) or population health models.Level of evidenceEconomic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

PurposeA question prompt list (QPL) is a tool that lists possible questions a patient may want to ask their surgeon. Its purpose is to improve patient-physician communication and increase patient engagement. Although QPLs have been developed in other specialties, one does not exist for hand conditions. We sought to develop a QPL for use in the hand surgery clinic using a mixed-methods design.MethodsWe drafted a QPL based on prior work outside of hand surgery and then used an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design (both qualitative and quantitative methods) to finalize the QPL. Qualitative evaluation included both a written questionnaire completed by a patient advisory board, hand therapists, and hand surgeons, as well as cognitive interviews conducted with clinic patients using the tool. Revisions to the QPL were made after each phase of qualitative analysis. The final QPL was then evaluated quantitatively using the system usability score (SUS) questionnaire to assess its usability.ResultsA patient advisory board consisting of 6 patients, 5 hand therapists, and 6 hand surgeons completed the written questionnaire. Thirteen patients completed a cognitive interview of the QPL. We completed a content analysis of the qualitative data and incorporated the findings into the QPL. Twenty patients then reviewed the final QPL pamphlet and completed the SUS questionnaire. The resulting SUS score of 78.8 indicated above-average usability of the QPL tool.ConclusionsThe QPL developed in this study, from the perspective of multiple stakeholders, provides a usable tool to engage and prompt patients in asking questions during their visit with their hand surgeon with the potential to improve communication and patient-centered care.Clinical relevanceThis study provides clinicians with a QPL developed for use in the hand surgery clinic setting, aimed at facilitating more thorough patient-provider discussion.

PurposeTo test the null hypothesis that exposure to societal cost information does not affect choice of treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).MethodsWe enrolled 304 participants using the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform to complete a survey in which participants were given the choice between carpal tunnel release (CTR) or a less-expensive option (orthosis wear) in a hypothetical mild CTS scenario. Patients were randomized to receive information about the societal cost of CTR (cost cohort) or no cost information (control). The primary outcome was the probability of choosing CTR measured on a 6-point ordinal scale. We employed qualitative content analysis to evaluate participants' rationale for their choice. We also explored agreement with various attitudes toward health care costs on an ordinal scale.ResultsParticipants in the cost cohort exhibited a greater probability of choosing surgery than those in the control cohort. The relative risk of choosing surgery after exposure to societal cost information was 1.43 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.85). Among participants who had not previously been diagnosed with CTS (n = 232), the relative risk of choosing surgery after exposure to societal cost information was 1.55 (95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.06). Lack of personal monetary responsibility frequently emerged as a theme in those in the cost cohort who chose surgery. The majority (94%) of participants expressed at least some agreement that health care cost is a major problem whereas only 58% indicated that they consider the country's health care costs when making treatment decisions.ConclusionsParticipants who received societal cost information were more likely to choose the more expensive treatment option (CTR) for mild CTS.Clinical relevanceExposure to societal cost information may influence patient decision making in elective hand surgery. A complete understanding of this influence is required prior to implementing processes toward greater cost transparency for diagnostic/treatment options. Sharing out-of-pocket costs with patients may be a beneficial approach because discussing societal cost information alone will likely not improve value of care.

» The use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is not supported for elective cases of patients undergoing soft-tissue hand procedures that are ≤2 hours in length. » The use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is not supported for patients with diabetes undergoing elective, soft-tissue hand surgical procedures. » There is a paucity of literature evaluating the use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, those with cardiac valves, and those taking corticosteroids; because of this, there is no evidence to vary from our general recommendations.

The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for evaluation of scaphoid nonunion may be an example of low-value imaging for the treatment of scaphoid nonunion. The purpose of this study was to investigate variation in MRI use for scaphoid nonunion, the association of MRI with a vascularized bone graft (VBG) and to develop consensus on MRI use for scaphoid nonunion. We identified patients >18 years of age who underwent scaphoid nonunion surgery between 2010 and 2019 using a claims database. Patients who had, and did not have, an MRI within 90 days prior to their diagnosis of scaphoid nonunion were included and a multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate variation in MRI and VBG use. Subsequently, a literature review was performed, and a preliminary consensus statement was developed pertaining to the routine use of MRI for scaphoid nonunion. A consortium of nine hand surgeons evaluated the importance, feasibility, usability, and scientific acceptability of the statement through a modified RAND Coroporation/University of California, Los Angeles Delphi. Panelists evaluated the statement in two voting rounds with an intervening face-to-face discussion. We identified 1,324 eligible patients with surgical repair of a scaphoid nonunion. Two hundred and sixty-three (19.9%) underwent an MRI within 90 days prior to surgery. Differences in age, insurance type, and comorbidity burden existed between patients who received MRI and those who did not. The MRI cohort was more likely to receive VBG (10.6%) compared to those without an MRI (4.7%). Panelists agreed on the voting domains of the consensus statement and therefore the statement, "There is no benefit of routine MRI/MRA in the treatment of scaphoid nonunion with or without presumed avascular necrosis," was considered valid. MRI use within 90 days of surgical repair of scaphoid nonunion varies, is associated with greater rates of VBG use, and may represent low-value imaging given the lack of sufficient evidence on this topic. As MRI use for scaphoid nonunion varies and may represent low-value imaging, a validated consensus statement may help guide the evaluation of patients with scaphoid nonunion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As value-based care arrangements continue to assess quality of care and costs, comprehensive and patient-centered definitions of quality of care are required. While patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly integrated into quality assessments following total joint arthroplasty (TJA), patient perceptions of quality paired with the phase of surgical care has not been described. The purpose of this study was to assess how TJA patients perceive measures of quality of care and assess if these perceptions change based on the phase of care. Methods: Patients who had undergone a TJA within the past two years or had a scheduled TJA within the next 6 months completed a questionnaire designed using best-worst scaling, a method used to measure individuals' priorities by asking participants to make repeated selections of the best and worst items in a series of subsets of items. Subanalyses were calculated to compare each phase of care (preoperative, short term postoperative, and long term postoperative). Results: A total of 153 patients completed the questionnaire; 36 were preoperative, 55 were short term postoperative, and 62 were long term postoperative. Patients placed the highest value on improving activities of daily living (β = 1.03, CI = 0.90-1.16), decreasing pain (β = 0.65, CI = 0.53-0.76), and avoiding re-intervention (β = 0.64, CI = 0.52-0.76). Decreasing pain ranked as a higher priority preoperatively compared to short term postoperatively, and subsequently increased in priority again after 6 months. Avoiding reintervention was less important to patients preoperatively compared to postoperatively. Avoiding complications was more important to patients preoperatively compared to postoperatively. Conclusions: Matching outcome assessments with how patients assess their quality of care throughout the TJA recovery process can inform phase-specific quality improvement initiatives and value definitions. Activities of daily living should be measured across phases of care and into long-term recovery. TJA value dashboards should align with these patient-driven perceptions of quality. Level of evidence: Level III, cohort study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to determine if adverse social determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with differential complication rates following surgical fixation of distal radius fractures and assess which SDOH domain (economic, educational, social, health care, or environmental) is most associated with postoperative complications. Using a national administrative claims database, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing open treatment for an isolated distal radius fracture between 2010 and 2020. Patients were stratified based on the presence/absence of at least one SDOH code and propensity score matched to create two cohorts balanced by age, sex (male or female), insurance type, and comorbidities. Social determinants of health examined included economic, educational, social, health care, and environmental factors. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the isolated effect of SDOH on 90-day and 1-year complication rates. After propensity matching, 57,025 patients in the adverse SDOH cohort and 57,025 patients in the control cohort were included. Patients facing an adverse SDOH were significantly more likely to experience 90-day complications, including emergency department visits (Odds ratio (OR): 3.18 [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.07–3.29]), infection (OR: 2.37 [95% CI: 2.12–2.66]), wound dehiscence (OR: 2.06 [95% CI: 1.72–2.49]), and 1-year complications, including complex regional pain syndrome (OR: 1.35 [95% CI: 1.15–1.58]), malunion/nonunion (OR: 1.18 [95% CI: 1.08–1.29]), and hardware removal (OR: 1.13 [95% CI: 1.07–1.20]). Additionally, patients facing an adverse SDOH had a significantly increased risk of 90-day complications, regardless of fracture severity, and patients with economic and social challenges had the highest odds of both 90-day and 1-year postoperative complications. Social determinants of health are associated with increased complications following distal radius fracture fixation, even when controlling for demographic and clinical factors. We recommend routine screening for adverse SDOH and inclusion of SDOH data into health records to not only inform quality improvement initiatives and risk adjustment for outcome-based quality measurements but also to allow providers to begin to discuss and address such barriers during the perioperative period. Prognosis II. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were originally developed as research tools; however, there is increasing interest in using PROMs to inform clinical care. Prior work has shown the benefits of implementing PROMs at the point of care, but a patient's health numeracy (their ability to understand and work with numbers) may affect their ability to interpret PROM results. Materials and Methods: We recruited patients presenting to an outpatient orthopedic clinic. Forty-nine patients completed a survey that included demographic information, the short-form General Health Numeracy Test, and accuracy questions about four PROM displays (bar graph, table, line graph, pictograph) that indicated the same PROM results. Results: Patients with higher health numeracy answered all display accuracy questions correctly (P=.016). Patients who preferred using the table were more likely to answer display accuracy questions incorrectly (odds ratio, 0.013, P=.024). The two most frequently preferred PROM formats were bar graphs and tables, and most patients preferred to learn about their PROM function scores via a combination of displays and verbal discussions. Conclusion: Patient health numeracy is associated with the ability to correctly interpret visual displays of PROMs. Implementation of PROMs at point of care currently does not account for health numeracy. Efforts to account for health numeracy when using PROMs at point of care may improve the efficacy of using PROMs to improve outcomes in orthopedic surgery. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(5):e255–e260.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In this study, we tested the null hypothesis that robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) vs conventional THA was not associated with (1) the amount of postoperative opioid use and (2) the incidence of new, persistent opioid use. Materials and Methods: We used a large, national administrative database to identify patients 50 years and older undergoing primary robotic or conventional THA. Patients with hip fractures or a history of malignancy, hip infection, or opioid use disorder were excluded. Patients who filled an opioid prescription within 1 year to 30 days preoperatively or who underwent a subsequent procedure within 1 year after THA were excluded. Outcomes included the morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) filled within the THA perioperative period and the incidence of new, persistent opioid use. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations between robotic-assisted THA and new, persistent opioid use, adjusting for age, sex, insurance plan, region, location of surgery, and comorbidities. Results: In the postoperative period, robotic-assisted THA, compared with conventional THA, was associated with a lower mean total MMEs filled per patient (452.2 vs 517.1; P<.001) and a lower mean MMEs per patient per day (71.53 vs 74.64; P<.001). Patients undergoing robotic-assisted THA had decreased odds of developing new, persistent opioid use compared with patients undergoing conventional THA (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.74–0.90]). Conclusion: Robotic-assisted THA is associated with lower postoperative opioid use and a decreased odds of developing new, persistent opioid use compared with conventional THA. For the purposes of reducing opioid use, our results support the adoption of robotic-assisted THA. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(5):289–294.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]