Search

Background: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) estimates are useful for gauging clinical relevance when interpreting changes or differences in patient-reported outcomes scores. These values are lacking in the setting of elbow trauma. Our primary purpose was to estimate the MCID of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) computer adaptive test (CAT), the PROMIS upper extremity (UE) CAT, and the QuickDASH using an anchor-based approach for patients recovering from elbow trauma and related surgeries. Secondarily, we aimed to estimate the MCID using the 1/2 standard deviation method. Materials & methods: Adult patients undergoing treatment for isolated elbow injuries between July 2014 and April 2020 were identified at a single tertiary academic medical center. Outcomes, including the PROMIS PF CAT v1.2/2.0, PROMIS UE CAT v1.2, and QuickDASH, were collected via a tablet computer. For inclusion, baseline (6 months before injury up to 11 days postoperatively or after injury) and follow-up (11 to 150 days postoperative or after injury) PF or UE CAT scores were required, as well as a response to an anchor question querying improvement in physical function. The MCID was calculated using (1) an anchor-based approach using the difference in mean score change between anchor groups reporting “No change” and “Slightly Improved/Improved” and (2) the 1/2 standard deviation method. Results: Of the 146 included patients, the mean age was 46 ± 18 years and 67 (46%) were women. Most patients (129 of 146 or 88%) were recovering from surgery, and the remaining 12% were recovering from nonoperatively managed fractures and/or dislocations. The mean follow-up was 157 ± 192 days. Scores for each instrument improved significantly between baseline and follow-up. Anchor-based MCID values were calculated as follows: 5.7, 4.6, and 5.3 for the PROMIS PF CAT, PROMIS UE CAT, and QuickDASH, respectively. MCID values estimated using the 1/2 standard deviation method were 4.3, 4.8, and 11.7 for the PROMIS PF CAT, PROMIS UE CAT, and QuickDASH, respectively. Conclusions: In the setting of elbow trauma, we propose MCID ranges of 4.3 to 5.7 for the PROMIS PF CAT, 4.6 to 4.8 for the PROMIS UE CAT, and 5.3 to 11.7 for the QuickDASH. These values will provide a framework for clinical relevance when interpreting clinical outcomes studies, or powering clinical trials, for populations recovering from trauma.

Background and/or Hypothesis: Prior literature has supported similar complication rates and outcomes for humeral shaft fractures treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with a plate/screw construct versus intramedullary nailing (IMN). The purpose of this study is to determine whether surgical encounter total direct costs (SETDCs) differ between ORIF and IMN for these fractures. Methods: Adult patients (≥ 18 years) treated for isolated humeral shaft fractures by ORIF or IMN between June 18, 2014 and June 17, 2019 at a single tertiary academic center were available for inclusion. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN groups, obtained through our institution's information technology value tool, were adjusted to 2019 US dollars and converted to relative costs per institutional policy. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results: Demographic factors did not differ between ORIF and IMN cohorts with the exception of age (mean of 18.6 years older for IMN; P

Background: Distal humerus fracture open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) represents a substantial cost burden to the health care system. The purpose of this study was to describe surgical encounter cost variation for distal humerus ORIF, and to determine demographic-, injury-, and treatment-specific factors that influence cost. Methods: We retrospectively identified adult patients (≥18 years) treated for isolated distal humerus fractures between July 2014 and July 2019 at a single tertiary academic referral center. For each case, surgical encounter total direct costs (SETDCs) were obtained via our institution's information technology value tools, which prospectively record granular direct cost data for every health care encounter. Costs were converted to 2019 dollars using the personal consumption expenditure indices for health and summarized with descriptive statistics. Univariate and multivariate linear regression models were used to identify factors influencing SETDC. Results: Surgical costs varied widely for the 47 included patients, with a standard deviation (SD) of 33% and interquartile range of 76%-124% relative to the mean SETDC. Implant and facility costs were responsible for 46.2% and 32.6% of the SETDC, respectively. Implant costs also varied considerably, with an SD of 21% and range from 13%-36% relative to the mean SETDC. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that SETDC increased 24% (P < .001) on performing an olecranon osteotomy, and by 15% for each additional 1 hour of surgical time (P < .001). These findings were independent of age, sex, body mass index, open fracture, need for an additional small plate construct as a reduction aid, and fracture pattern (all insignificant in the multivariate analysis, with P >.05 for each factor). Conclusion: Substantial variations in surgical encounter total direct costs for distal humerus ORIF exist, as do wide variations in associated implant costs that comprise nearly half of the entire surgical cost. Performing an olecranon osteotomy, and increased surgical time, significantly increased surgical costs. Although use of an olecranon osteotomy may not be a completely controllable factor as it is confounded by fracture severity and operative time, this may suggest that surgeons should try to use an olecranon osteotomy judiciously. Although complexity of the fracture pattern was statistically insignificant, it is confounded by the need for an olecranon osteotomy and increased surgical time and likely is a clinically relevant and nonmodifiable driver of surgical cost. These findings highlight opportunities to reduce cost variation, and potentially improve the value of care, for distal humerus ORIF patients.

Background:. Patient expectations before cubital tunnel release (CuTR), a common procedure that leads to incomplete symptom resolution for many patients, are unclear. Study purposes included (1) describing preoperative patient expectations, and (2) identifying factors affecting expectations. Methods:. Included patients underwent isolated unilateral CuTR between 2015 and 2021 at a single tertiary academic medical center. Expectations regarding the level of symptomatic improvement were queried preoperatively. Univariate and multivariable binary logistic regression was performed to determine factors associated with expecting great improvement. Results:. Of the 92 included patients, 43 (47%) patients expected great improvement, whereas 27 (29%), four (4%), and five patients (5%) expected some, little, and no improvement, respectively. The remainder (14%) had no expectations. Multivariable modeling demonstrated that retired or unemployed/disabled work status, and commercial insurance status (versus Medicare or Medicaid) were associated with lower expectations independent of the surgeon, surgical technique, revision versus primary CuTR, preoperative atrophy or constant numbness, diabetes, and all studied demographic factors, including social deprivation. Conclusions:. Roughly half of the patients expect great relief, and a third expect lesser degrees of relief, following CuTR. Preoperative expectations are significantly higher in patients with Medicaid and Medicare insurance, representing an opportunity for education, given the association between public insurance payer status and worse health outcomes in general. Age, BMI, preoperative atrophy and/or numbness, and the presence of medical comorbidities do not influence expectations but have been shown to yield worse outcomes or influence need for revision CuTR, representing an opportunity for intervention to align patient and surgeon expectations.

Background:. Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is common, yet patient treatment expectations remain unclear. The primary purpose was to describe patient expectations before CTR. Secondarily, we aimed to identify factors influencing expectations. Methods:. Included patients underwent unilateral or bilateral CTR between 2015 and 2017 at a single academic center. Expectations regarding the level of relief/improvement were queried. Area deprivation index (ADI) was used to measure social deprivation. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with expecting great relief/improvement. Results:. Of 307 included patients, mean age was 54 ± 16 years and 63% were women. Patients most commonly expected great (58%) or some (23%) relief/improvement. Few patients expected little (3%) or no (4%) relief/improvement, and 13% had no expectations. In the multivariable analysis, male sex, lower social deprivation, and lower BMI were associated with expecting great relief/improvement. Age, surgical technique (open versus endoscopic), use of the operating room versus procedure room, and preoperative factors (constant numbness, weakness/atrophy, duration of symptoms, and QuickDASH) were not associated with expectations. Conclusions:. Most patients expect some to great improvement after CTR. This was independent of several factors with a known association with worse outcomes (advanced age, atrophy/weakness, and constant numbness). Male sex was associated with the expectation of great improvement, in which superior outcomes relative to females have not been borne out in the literature. These findings highlight patient counseling opportunities. The observed association between social deprivation and expectations warrants further investigation, as the socioeconomically disadvantaged experience worse healthcare outcomes in general.

Background:. Performing open carpal tunnel release (oCTR) in an office-based procedure room setting (PR) decreases surgical costs when compared with the operating room (OR). However, it is unclear if the risk of major medical, wound, and iatrogenic complications differ between settings. Our purpose was to compare the risk of major medical complications associated with oCTR between PR and OR settings. Methods:. Utilizing the MarketScan Database, we identified adults undergoing isolated oCTR between 2006 and 2015 performed in PR and OR settings. ICD-9-CM and/or CPT codes were used to identify major medical complications, surgical site complications, and iatrogenic complications within 90 days of oCTR. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare complication risk between groups. Results:. Of the 2134 PR and 76,216 OR cases, the risk of major medical complications was 0.89% (19/2134) and 1.20% (914/76,216), respectively, with no difference observed in the multivariable analysis (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.84; 95% CI 0.53–1.33; P = 0.45). Risk of surgical site complications was 0.56% (12/2134) and 0.81% (616/76,216) for the PR and OR, respectively, with no difference in the multivariable analysis (OR 0.68; 95% C.I. 0.38–1.22; P = 0.19). Iatrogenic complications were rarely observed (PR 1/2134 [0.05%], OR 71/76,216 [0.09%]), which precluded multivariable modeling. Conclusion:. These results support a similar safety profile for both the PR and OR surgical settings following oCTR with similar pooled major medical complications, pooled wound/surgical site complications, and iatrogenic complications.

Background:. The optimal surgical treatment for scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC) and scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse (SNAC) remains unclear. To inform clinical decision-makers, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing proximal row carpectomy (PRC) and four-corner arthrodesis (FCA). Methods:. A Markov microsimulation model was used to compare clinical outcomes, costs, and health utilities between PRC and FCA. The model used a 10-year time horizon and a 1-month cycle length, and it was evaluated from the societal perspective. Utilities and clinical parameters including transition probabilities for debridement for infection, removal of implants, conversion to total wrist arthrodesis, revision FCA, and revision total wrist arthrodesis were obtained from published literature. Timing of complications was estimated from the literature. Direct medical costs were derived from Medicare ambulatory surgical cost data, and indirect costs for missed work due to surgical procedures and complications were included. The effectiveness outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and 1-way threshold analysis for utilities were performed. Results:. In the base-case model, PRC dominated FCA (i.e., PRC had lower cost and greater effectiveness). The mean (and standard deviation) for the total cost and QALYs per patient were $30,970 ± $5,931 and 8.24 ± 1.28, respectively, for PRC and $44,526 ± $11,205 and 8.23 ± 1.26, respectively, for FCA. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, PRC dominated FCA in 57% of the 1 million iterations. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve indicated that PRC is the most cost-effective strategy regardless of the willingness-to-pay threshold up to $100,000/QALY. Conclusions:. PRC dominated FCA in the base-case analysis and in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. These results suggest that PRC is the optimal strategy for Stage-I or II SLAC and for SNAC in patients ≥55 years of age. Level of Evidence:. Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background:. The Press Ganey Outpatient Medical Practice Survey is a commonly utilized questionnaire that attempts to measure satisfaction with outpatient health care. A wide variety of factors have been associated with lower satisfaction scores among orthopaedic patients, including age, sex, presence of psychological disorders, and driving distance to the point of care. The impact of clinic workflows is less clear. In this study, we hypothesized that an increased clinic wait time was an independent predictor of lower patient satisfaction as measured by the Press Ganey survey. Methods:. We retrospectively reviewed 4,216 new outpatient orthopaedic surgery visits between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016, at a single academic institution. For patients with multiple visits, only the first new patient visit was analyzed. Satisfaction was defined as achieving a score above the 33rd percentile of the cohort. Univariate analysis followed by multivariable binary logistic regression was used to detect factors associated with patient satisfaction. Results:. Of the 4,216 unique patients, the mean age (and standard deviation) was 52.8 ± 15.8 years, and 58.9% of the patients were female. The mean total wait time was 17.8 ± 19.4 minutes. Univariate analysis revealed greater odds of achieving satisfaction on the Press Ganey survey for a wait time of

Background:. Trigger finger release (TFR) is a common surgical procedure, representing a financial burden to the healthcare system. Our null hypothesis is that the choice surgical setting [operating room (OR) versus procedure room (PR)] and anesthetic type [local-only or monitored anesthesia care (MAC)] do not affect surgical encounter costs for TFR. Methods:. Adult patients undergoing isolated unilateral TFR between May 2014 and December 2017 by 5 fellowship-trained hand surgeons at a single academic medical center were identified by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code (26055). We excluded patients undergoing revision surgery, tenosynovectomy, or additional procedures. Using our institution’s information technology value tools, we calculated total direct costs for each surgical encounter, which were compared between groups. Univariate and multivariable gamma regression were used to model costs. Results:. Of 210 included patients, 54% (113/210) of cases were performed in the PR and 46% (97/210) in the OR. No significant differences in demographics were observed between PR and OR groups. Compared to local-only in the PR, the OR with local-only, and OR with MAC, demonstrated 2.2- and 3.2-fold greater median costs. Multivariable models suggested that use of the OR independently led to 221% [95% Confidence interval: 137%–345%; P < 0.01] greater mean costs than the PR, and use of MAC was associated with 30% (95% confidence interval: 13%–49%; P < 0.01) greater mean costs for OR cases than local-only, while controlling for other confounders. Conclusion:. Performing TFR in the PR setting under local-only anesthesia minimizes surgical encounter direct costs for this common procedure.