Search

Objective: To analyze and quantify the change in United States of America Medicare reimbursement rates for the 30 most commonly performed spinal imaging procedures., Materials and Methods: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services was utilized to find and extract the 28 most billed spinal imaging procedures. All data was adjusted for inflation and listed in 2020 US dollars. Percent change in reimbursement and Relative Value Units between 2005 and 2020, both unadjusted and adjusted, were calculated and compared. Additionally, percent change per year and compound annual growth rate were calculated and compared., Results: After adjusting for inflation, the average reimbursement for all analyzed spinal imaging procedures between the years 2005 and 2020 decreased by 45.9%. The adjusted reimbursement rate for all procedures decreased at an average 4.3% per year and experienced an average compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of - 4.4%. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) had the most substantial adjusted decline of all imaging modalities at - 72.6%, whereas x-ray imaging had the smallest decline at - 27.33%. The average total RVUs per procedure decreased by 50.1%, from 7.96 to 3.97., Conclusion: From the years 2005 to 2020, Medicare reimbursement significantly decreased for all advanced imaging modalities involving the most common spinal imaging procedures. Among all practices, imaging procedures may be experiencing some of the largest decreases from Medicare reimbursement cutbacks., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to International Skeletal Society (ISS).)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to quantify social media usage among Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) members., Methods: All active OTA members were searched for involvement among common social media platforms. Surgeons were then classified as "active" on any given social media site if they posted within the past 6 months. Surgeons were also identified by the region they practiced in, sex, and their practice setting (academic vs. private). Finally, a surgeon's score and number of reviews from common physician review websites were examined., Results: A total of 1465 OTA members were included in the analysis. Most surgeons were male (89.1% [n = 1305]) and practiced in a private setting (54.5% [n = 799]). A total of 590 surgeons (40.3%) had at least one form of social media account. Social media sites most used were LinkedIn with 48.7% (n = 713) and ResearchGate with 29.2% (n = 428). Academic surgeons were more likely to have a ResearchGate, LinkedIn, and Twitter account while private surgeons were more likely to have a personal website ( P < 0.05). Finally, there was no correlation between surgeons more active on social media and average scores on Vitals.com or Healthgrade.com ( P > 0.05)., Conclusions: Most orthopaedic trauma surgeons do not have professional social media accounts. Although social media may help spread scholarship, having a professional social media account does not correlate with better online physician reviews or increased online reviews among orthopaedic trauma surgeons., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The increased focus on patient satisfaction has led to growth in the use of physician rating websites., Purpose: To analyze the factors associated with online 5-star patient reviews for orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons., Study Design: Cross-sectional study., Methods: A total of 70 orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons were randomly selected from the AOSSM website. A search was performed for these surgeons on Yelp.com. All reviews other than 5 stars (of a possible 5 stars) were excluded from the study. Each review was categorized as referring to a surgical or nonsurgical aspect of care, and each comment within the review was categorized as being clinically or nonclinically related. Comments were further subcategorized by specific features such as bedside manner, clinical outcomes, and patient education. Categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test., Results: Overall, 400 five-star reviews were included in the study, comprising 1225 total positive comments. Of the 400 five-star reviews, 200 (50%) were from surgically treated patients, and 200 (50%) were from nonsurgically treated patients. Of the 1225 positive comments, 505 (41%) were clinically related, and 720 (59%) were nonclinical. The most common positive clinical comments were for clear treatment plans (191 reviews [48%]), good outcomes (173 reviews [43%]), and providing alternative treatment plans (55 reviews [14%]). The most common positive nonclinical comments were for good physician bedside manner (287 reviews [72%]), friendly/professional staff (194 reviews [49%]), and ease of scheduling (68 reviews [17%])., Conclusion: The majority of 5-star patient reviews left positive comments regarding nonclinical aspects of care such as physician bedside manner and friendly staff. The most common positive comments regarding clinical aspects concerned good outcomes and clear treatment plans. The overall most common positive comment, in both surgically and nonsurgically treated patients, referred to good bedside manner., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: S.T. has received education payments from ImpactOrtho. A.C. has received education payments from Arthrex and consulting fees from Zimmer Biomet. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to characterize factors that contribute to 1-star negative reviews regarding orthopaedic trauma surgeons., Methods: A search was done for Orthopaedic Trauma Association members on Yelp.com , Healthgrade.com , and Vitals.com in New York, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas, Phoenix, Seattle, Baltimore, Denver, Houston, Philadelphia, and Washington, DC. All single-star reviews (out of a possible 5 stars) were included in this study. Reviews were categorized as either clinical or nonclinical and then further subcategorized. Categorical variables were analyzed using a chi-square test. The rate ratio (the ratio of the rate for nonsurgical divided by surgical reviews) was determined for each category., Results: Two hundred eighty-eight single-star reviews were included in the study, comprising 655 total complaints. Of all complaints, 274 (41.8%) were clinically related and 381 (58.2%) were nonclinical. Of the 288 single-star reviews, 96 (33.3%) were from surgically treated patients and 192 (66.7%) were from nonsurgical patients. Most complaints were in reference to nonclinical aspects of care such as physician bedside manner (173 reviews, 60%), not enough time spent with provider (58 reviews, 20%), and wait time (42 complaints, 15%). The most common clinical complaints were for complication (61 reviews, 21%), disagree with decision/plan (49 reviews, 17%), and uncontrolled pain (45 reviews, 16%). Surgical patients had a significantly higher rate of clinical complaints than nonsurgical patients (1.57 vs. 0.64 clinical complaints per review, P < 0.001). Nonsurgical patients had a significantly higher rate of nonclinical complaints than surgical patients (1.43 vs. 1.10 nonclinical complaints per review, P < 0.001)., Discussion: Most 1-star reviews referenced a nonclinical aspect of care with a physician's bedside manner being the most common complaint. Surgical patients were markedly more likely to reference a clinical aspect of care, such as complications or misdiagnosis compared with nonsurgical patients, who more commonly referenced nonclinical aspects of care., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Background: Medicare reimbursement is rapidly declining in many specialties. An in-depth analysis of Medicare reimbursement for routinely performed diagnostic imaging procedures in the United States is warranted., Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate Medicare reimbursement trends for the 20 most common lower extremity imaging procedures performed between 2005 and 2020, including radiographs, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We hypothesized that Medicare reimbursement for imaging procedures would decline substantially over the studied period., Study Design: Cohort study., Methods: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-up Tool from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was analyzed for reimbursement rates and relative value units associated with the top 20 most utilized Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes in lower extremity imaging from 2005 to 2020. Reimbursement rates were adjusted for inflation and listed in 2020 US dollars using the US Consumer Price Index. To compare year-to-year changes, the percentage change per year and compound annual growth rate were calculated. A 2-tailed t test was used to compare the unadjusted and adjusted percentage change over the 15-year period., Results: After adjusting for inflation, mean reimbursement for all procedures decreased by 32.41% ( P = .013). The mean adjusted percentage change per year was -2.82%, and the mean compound annual growth rate was -1.03%. Compensation for the professional and technical components for all CPT codes decreased by 33.02% and 85.78%, respectively. Mean compensation for the professional component decreased by 36.46% for radiography, 37.02% for CT, and 24.73% for MRI. Mean compensation for the technical component decreased by 7.76% for radiography, 127.66% for CT, and 207.88% for MRI. Mean total relative value units decreased by 38.7%. The commonly billed imaging procedure CPT 73720 (MRI lower extremity, other than joint, with and without contrast) had the greatest adjusted decrease of 69.89%., Conclusion: Medicare reimbursement for the most billed lower extremity imaging studies decreased by 32.41% between 2005 and 2020. The greatest decreases were noted in the technical component. Of the modalities, MRI had the largest decrease, followed by CT and then radiography., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: N.H. has received education payments from Goode Surgical and ImpactOrtho. K.P. has received education payments from Arthrex. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Background: Physician review websites (PRWs) are increasing in usage and popularity. Our purpose is to characterize one-star reviews of orthopedic oncology surgeons to understand factors in healthcare that contribute to patient satisfaction., Methods: Orthopedic oncology surgeons were randomly selected from the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society. A search for one-star reviews was performed on Google Reviews, Healthgrades, and Vitals.com. Reviews were classified as clinical or nonclinical. Statistical analyses were performed regarding the frequency of reviews and complaints for each category., Results: Of the 7,733 reviews discovered, 908 (11.7%) were identified as one-star reviews. Of 907 usable complaints, 362 (40.8%) were clinical and 545 (59.2%) were nonclinical. The most common nonclinical complaints included bedside manner (65%) and limited time with providers (19%). The most common clinical complaints included complications (26%) and disagreements with the treatment plan (26%). There were 120 surgical and 221 nonsurgical reviews. Surgical patients had a higher rate of clinical complaints. Nonsurgical patients had a higher rate of total complaints., Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study examining PRWs regarding orthopedic oncology surgeons. Most one-star reviews were due to nonclinical complaints from nonsurgical patients. The most common factors are bedside manner, limited time with provider, phone communication issues, and rude/unprofessional conduct., Competing Interests: All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Leeann Qubain et al.)

Background: Medicare payment has been examined in a variety of medical and surgical specialties. This study examines Medicare payment in the subspecialty of orthopaedic oncology., Methods: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-up Tool was used to obtain payment information from 2000 to 2020 for procedures related to orthopaedic oncology billed to Medicare., Results: For the 38 included orthopaedic oncology procedures, inflation-adjusted Medicare payment decreased an average of 13.6% overall from 2000 to 2020. After adjusting for inflation, the payment for procedures related to spine and pelvis increased by 7.6%, procedures relating to limb salvage increased by 14.6%, procedures associated with the surgical management of complications decreased by 26.9%, and procedures relating to metastatic disease management decreased by 34.8%., Conclusion: Medicare payment has declined by 13.6% from 2000 to 2020. This variation in Medicare payment represents a difference in valuation of these procedures by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and could be used to direct healthcare policy., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Objective: Spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks are associated with elevated intracranial pressure and idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). Skull base erosion and widening of the foramen ovale have been reported in patients with IIH. This study sought to investigate changes in the size of the foramen ovale and foramen spinosum in patients with IIH, spontaneous CSF leak, and encephalocele., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Tertiary care academic medical center., Patients: Adult patients treated from 2014 to 2018 with computed tomographic imaging of the head and who were diagnosed with IIH, encephalocele, or CSF leak., Intervention: Two blinded observers measured the long and short axes of the foramen ovale and foramen spinosum on axial computed tomographic images. Measurements were used to calculate the approximate elliptical cross-sectional area of the foramina., Main Outcome Measures: Length, width, and area of the foramen ovale and foramen spinosum., Results: A total of 264 patients were identified meeting the inclusion criteria and were placed into three groups. There were 170 patients with IIH, 48 with spontaneous CSF leak or encephalocele (CSF/E group), and 46 with traumatic or iatrogenic CSF leak (control group). Mean foramen ovale short axis (4.85 ± 1.00 mm) and cross-sectional area (30.17 ± 9.25 mm2) in the CSF/E group were significantly increased compared with measurements in patients with IIH or the control groups. Foramen ovale size was positively correlated with age in the CSF/E group. No significant difference in foramen spinosum size was found., Conclusion: Skull base defect resulting in spontaneous CSF leak or encephalocele is associated with enlargement of the foramen ovale on axial computed tomography., Competing Interests: The authors disclose no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.)

Background: The growing focus on subjective patient experiences has created an increase in popularity for physician rating websites. The purpose of this study was to characterize extremely negative reviews of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons., Methods: Pediatric orthopaedic surgeons were randomly selected using the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America comprehensive list of surgeons. A search was then performed on Healthgrades.com, Vitals.com, and Yelp.com for 1-star reviews. Reviews were classified into clinical and nonclinical categories. Statistical analyses were performed regarding the frequency of reviews and complaints for each respective category., Results: Of the 279 one-star reviews categorized, 248 reviews (88.9% of reviews) included nonclinical complaints, and 182 reviews (65.2% of reviews) included clinical complaints. Nonsurgical patients were associated with 255 reviews, and the remaining 24 were related to surgical patients. Of the 430 comments within reviews, 248 referenced nonclinical aspects of care, and 182 referenced clinical care. Clinical factors most frequently noted included clinical disagreement (37%), unclear treatment plan (25%), complication (17%), misdiagnosis (15%), uncontrolled pain (13%), and delay in care (8%). The most addressed nonclinical factors included physician bedside manner (68%), time spent with provider (21%), wait time (18%), unprofessional staff (17%), scheduling issues (9%), cost (8%), and billing (8%). Compared with surgical reviews, nonsurgical reviews were more likely to contain nonclinical complaints (rate ratio: 1.5; P<0.05) and less likely to contain clinical complaints (rate ratio: 0.7; P<0.05). The most common complaint by surgical patients was complications (91.7%)., Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the factors associated with negative reviews of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. The majority of reviews of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons were left by nonsurgical patients and were related to nonclinical aspects of care. We also found surgeon-dependent factors such as poor physician bedside manner, unclear treatment plan, or parents' disagreement with treatment plan were the most common reasons for negative reviews., Level of Evidence: Level IV., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Decreases in Medicare reimbursement have been noted among many medical specialties. An in-depth analysis of the subspecialty of orthopaedic sports medicine is needed to determine changes in Medicare reimbursement in this field., Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose was to elucidate the trends in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for orthopaedic sports medicine procedures between 2000 and 2020. It was hypothesized that Medicare reimbursement decreased substantially during the study period., Study Design: Economic decision and analysis; Level of evidence, 4., Methods: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-up Tool was used to extract Medicare reimbursement information between 2000 and 2020 for 67 procedures related to orthopaedic sports medicine. These values were adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index. The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) was calculated to measure the annual rate of change, and descriptive analyses were performed using the Student t test., Results: Between 2000 and 2020, inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for the 67 included procedures decreased by an average of 33% (CAGR = -2.2%; R 2 = 0.78). Reimbursement decreased for procedures related to the shoulder and elbow by 34% (CAGR = -2.3%; R 2 = 0.80), for hip-related procedures by 23% (CAGR = -1.4%; R 2 = 0.77), for knee-related procedures by 31% (CAGR = -2.0%; R 2 = 0.81), and for procedures relating to the foot and ankle by 38% (CAGR = -2.5%; R 2 = 0.79)., Conclusion: Study findings indicated that inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement decreased substantially between 2000 and 2020 for orthopaedic sports medicine procedures, ranging from a 23% decrease for hip-related procedures to a 38% decrease for foot and ankle-related procedures. The results of this study could be used to provide further context for health care policy decisions and help ensure sustainable financial environments for orthopaedic sports medicine surgeon., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: A.C. has received education payments from Arthrex and consulting fees from Arthrex and Zimmer Biomet. N.B.H. has received an education grant from Goode Surgical. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Background: Although lower back injuries (LBIs) are common among National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) female volleyball athletes, their incidence and etiology has not been well-defined., Purpose: To describe the epidemiology of LBIs in collegiate female volleyball athletes over a 5-year period from the academic years 2009 to 2010 and 2013 to 2014., Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study., Methods: The incidence and characteristics of spine injuries were identified utilizing the NCAA Injury Surveillance Program database. Rates of injury were calculated as the number of injuries by the total number of athlete-exposures (AEs). AEs were defined as any student participation in any single NCAA-sanctioned practice or competition. The injury rate was computed as the number of injuries per the total number of AEs and reported as a ration of injuries per 10,000 exposures. The ratio was then reported as overall number as well as stratified for event, time of season, and athletic NCAA division. Incidence rate ratios were then calculated to compare rates between event type. Results with 95% CIs that did not include 1.0 were considered statistically significant., Results: An estimated 3384 LBIs occurred in NCAA female volleyball players during this 5-year time frame. These LBIs occurred at a rate of 4.89 injuries per 10,000 AEs. LBIs were 2.76 times more likely in preseason when compared with regular season. More injuries occurred in practice (85%) when compared with competition (15%). The outside hitter and middle blocker were the most commonly position to sustain an LBI. Almost 70% of injuries were new injuries, and another 29% were recurrent injuries. The most common mechanism of injury was equally split between contact (50.4%) and overuse (45.5%) injuries, whereas the remaining mechanisms of injury were secondary for unknown reasons (4.14%). Most players returned to play within 24 hours (72.3%) followed by 1 to 6 days (16.4%), and finally 7 to 12 days (11.3%). No patient required surgical intervention., Conclusion: The rate of LBIs was high (4.89/10,000 AEs) and injuries commonly recurred (29.2%). Most injuries were new, with most athletes returning to play with 24 hours., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: J.L.M. has received education payments from Arthrex. A.C. has received consulting fees from Arthrex, Zimmer Biomet, and Trice Medical and speaking fees from Arthrex. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

The orphan nuclear receptor Nurr1 (also called nuclear receptor-4A2) regulates inflammatory gene expression in glial cells, as well as genes associated with homeostatic and trophic function in dopaminergic neurons. Despite these known functions of Nurr1, an endogenous ligand has not been discovered. We postulated that the activation of Nurr1 would suppress the activation of glia and thereby protect against loss of dopamine (DA) neurons after subacute lesioning with 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP). Our previous studies have shown that a synthetic Nurr1 ligand, 1,1-bis(3'-indolyl)-1-( p -chlorophenyl)methane (C-DIM12), suppresses inflammatory gene expression in primary astrocytes and induces a dopaminergic phenotype in neurons. Pharmacokinetic analysis of C-DIM12 in mice by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry demonstrated that approximately three times more compound concentrated in the brain than in plasma. Mice treated with four doses of MPTP + probenecid over 14 days were monitored for neurobehavioral function, loss of dopaminergic neurons, and glial activation. C-DIM12 protected against the loss of DA neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta and DA terminals in the striatum, maintained a ramified phenotype in microglia, and suppressed activation of astrocytes. In vitro reporter assays demonstrated that C-DIM12 was an effective activator of Nurr1 transcription in neuronal cell lines. Computational modeling of C-DIM12 binding to the three-dimensional structure of human Nurr1 identified a high-affinity binding interaction with Nurr1 at the coactivator domain. Taken together, these data suggest that C-DIM12 is an activator of Nurr1 that suppresses glial activation and neuronal loss in vivo after treatment with MPTP, and that this receptor could be an efficacious target for disease modification in individuals with Parkinson's disease and related disorders., (Copyright © 2018 by The Author(s).)

The non-pathogenic parvovirus, adeno-associated virus (AAV), is an efficient vector for transgene expression in vivo and shows promise for treatment of brain disorders in clinical trials. Currently, there are more than 100 AAV serotypes identified that differ in the binding capacity of capsid proteins to specific cell surface receptors that can transduce different cell types and brain regions in the CNS. In the current study, multiple AAV serotypes expressing a GFP reporter (AAV1, AAV2/1, AAVDJ, AAV8, AAVDJ8, AAV9, AAVDJ9) were screened for their infectivity in both primary murine astrocyte and neuronal cell cultures. AAV2/1, AAVDJ8 and AAV9 were selected for further investigation of their tropism throughout different brain regions and cell types. Each AAV was administered to P0-neonatal mice via intracerebroventricular injections (ICV). Brains were then systematically analyzed for GFP expression at 3 or 6 weeks post-infection in various regions, including the olfactory bulb, striatum, cortex, hippocampus, substantia nigra (SN) and cerebellum. Cell counting data revealed that AAV2/1 infections were more prevalent in the cortical layers but penetrated to the midbrain less than AAVDJ8 and AAV9. Additionally, there were differences in the persistence of viral transgene expression amongst the three serotypes examined in vivo at 3 and 6 weeks post-infection. Because AAV-mediated transgene expression is of interest in neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's Disease, we examined the SN with microscopy techniques, such as CLARITY tissue transmutation, to identify AAV serotypes that resulted in optimal transgene expression in either astrocytes or dopaminergic neurons. AAVDJ8 displayed more tropism in astrocytes compared to AAV9 in the SN region. We conclude that ICV injection results in lasting expression of virally encoded transgene when using AAV vectors and that specific AAV serotypes are required to selectively deliver transgenes of interest to different brain regions in both astrocytes and neurons.