Search

The purpose of this study is to compare the injury incidence of the 2018-2019 and 2020 National Football League (NFL) seasons with the 2021 season.Publicly released NFL weekly injury reports were queried to identify players listed as "out" or placed on injured reserve (IR) for at least one game in the 2018-2021 seasons. Injuries were then categorized into upper extremity, lower extremity, spine/core, and head. Incidence per 1,000 athlete exposures were calculated for each season and proportions of injuries by position were calculated separately for the 2018-2019, 2020, and 2021 cohorts. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were used to compare injury rates.Overall injury incidence in the 2021 NFL season increased compared to the pre-COVID-19 seasons (2018-2019) in all anatomical zones except for the upper extremity. [28.70 vs. 23.09 per 1,000 exposures, IRR 1.24 (95% CI: 1.14-1.36); p0.001]. The injury rate remained elevated and further increased in 2021 compared to the 2020 season for all anatomical zones other than the spine/core [28.70 vs. 21.64 per 1,000 exposures, IRR 1.33 (1.19-1.47); p0.001]. No significant difference existed during the early season (weeks 1-4); however, injury rates after week 4 increased in 2021 compared to both the 2018-2019 and 2020 seasons.The injury incidence in the 2021 season remained elevated and increased further compared to both the 2018-2019 and 2020 seasons. Traumatic injuries resulting in missed games increased despite return to a more traditional season since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The injury rates significantly increased in mid- to late season.III, cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the content and quality of YouTube videos concerning patellar dislocations. METHODS: “Patellar dislocation” and “kneecap dislocation” were searched on the YouTube library. The Uniform Resource Locator of the first 25 suggested videos was extracted, for a total of 50 videos. The following variables were collected for each video: number of views, duration in minutes, video source/uploader, content type, days since upload, view ratio (views/day), and number of likes. Video source/uploader was categorized as academic, physician, nonphysician, medical source, patient, commercial, and other. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Global Quality Scale (GQS), Patellar Dislocation Specific Score (PDSS), and DISCERN scores were used to assess each video. A series of linear regression models were used to explore relationships between each of these scores and the aforementioned variables. RESULTS: The median video length was 4.11 minutes (interquartile range 2.07-6.03, range 0.31-53.56), and the total number of views for all 50 videos was 3,697,587 views. The mean overall JAMA benchmark score ± standard deviation was 2.56 ± 0.64, GQS: 3.54 ± 1.05, total PDSS: 5.76 ± 3.42. Physicians were the most common video source/uploader (42%). Academic sources had the greatest mean JAMA benchmark score (3.20), whereas nonphysician and physician sources had the greatest mean GQS scores (4.09 and 3.95, respectively). Videos uploaded by physicians had the greatest PDSS scores (7.5). CONCLUSIONS: The overall transparency, reliability, and content quality of YouTube videos on patellar dislocation measured by the JAMA benchmark score and PDSS, respectively, are poor. Additionally, the overall educational and video quality, as assessed by the GQS, was intermediate. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It is important to understand the quality of information patients receive on YouTube so providers can guide patients to greater-quality sources.

To examine the trends between various categories of institutions with their respective published orthopaedic sports medicine content and to determine the publication output and citation rate from the 25 highest-ranked medical schools compared with lower-ranked institutions.Publications between 2015 and 2019 from theOf the 12,152 publications identified, 5,044 publications met the inclusion criteria. Nonprofit research institutions garnered the greatest number of citations on average (6.44 based on first author, SD 8.83, n = 214; 6.62 based on corresponding author, SD 9.65, n = 208;Publications are cited at different rates, depending on their institution of origin. In addition, high-ranking medical schools produce a disproportionately greater output of publications than lower-ranking schools, but there is no statistically significant difference in citation rates on an individual publication basis.Knowing how an institution's ranking influences publication and citation rates can help us understand bias in the scientific literature.

PURPOSE To compare Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) with traditional ("legacy") patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in regard to correlations, ease of use, and quality criteria for upper (UE) and lower extremity (LE) orthopaedic conditions. METHODS A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify published articles that referenced the various PROMIS PF measures. Two authors independently reviewed selected studies. The search returned 857 studies, 85 of which were selected for independent review by 2 authors. Of these, 54 were selected for inclusion. Mixed linear models were performed to assess for differences between legacy PROMs and PROMIS measures. RESULTS The combined sample size of all included studies yielded 6,074 UE and 9,366 LE patients. Overall, PROMIS PF measures demonstrated strong correlations with legacy PROMs among UE (weighted Pearson correlation, 0.624, standard error [SE] = 0.042; weighted Spearman correlation, 0.566, SE = 0.042) and LE patients (weighted Pearson correlation, 0.645, SE = 0.062; weighted Spearman correlation, 0.631, SE = 0.041). PROMIS PF questionnaires completed by UE patients had fewer questions than legacy PROMs (5.9 vs 17.7, P = .0093) and were completed in less time (90.5 vs 223.8 seconds, P = .084). PROMIS PF questionnaires completed by LE patients had fewer questions than legacy PROMs (4.81 vs 15.33, P < .001) and were completed in less time (63.6 vs 203.2 seconds, P = .0063). The differences for the reliability measures were not significant. CONCLUSIONS PROMIS PF scores correlate strongly with commonly used legacy PROMs in orthopaedics, particularly in UE and LE patients. PROMIS PF forms can be administered efficiently and to a broad patient population while remaining highly reliable. Therefore, they can be justified for standardized use among orthopaedic patients with UE and LE conditions, improving the ability to aggregate and compare outcomes in orthopaedic research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV evidence.

Introduction Affecting more than 30 million adults annually, osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disorder in the United States. A variety of management options for knee OA exists, including physical therapy, weight loss, intra-articular corticosteroid injections, and total joint arthroplasty. With many treatments available, patients often utilize the internet to educate themselves about their condition and management options. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality, transparency, and readability of online information for the treatment of knee OA. Methods The search terms "knee," "arthritis," and "treatment" were entered into an incognito mode Google browser. Websites were classified by type (commercial, academic, nonacademic medical practice, government/patient advocacy, and other) and graded on content quality, transparency, and readability using the following scores, respectively: modified DISCERN, Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark, and Flesch-Kincaid (FK) grade level. Results Of the 95 websites evaluated, commercial (mean, 38.2) and academic (37.3) sites had the highest total DISCERN scores, which were significantly greater than nonacademic medical practice (31.8) and government/patient advocacy sites (33.4) (p≤0.035). Nonacademic medical practice sites had the lowest mean total DISCERN (31.8) and JAMA (1.47) scores and the highest FK grade level readability (9.5). There was a significant positive correlation between mean total DISCERN and JAMA scores (r=0.46, p0.001). Conclusion The mean overall quality of websites regarding the treatment of OA was good as evidenced by greater modified DISCERN scores. However, website quality ranged from poor to excellent, indicating that some websites are still missing key information patients may find useful when assessing treatment options online.

Background: The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is commonly injured in elite-level female athletes, which usually requires ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Purpose: To analyze return to play (RTP) and changes in performance of players in the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) after ACLR. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: NWSL players who sustained an ACL tear and underwent surgery between the 2013 and 2020 seasons were identified by multiple online resources. Players were classified as forwards, defenders, midfielders, and goalkeepers. RTP was assessed according to games played, games started, percentage of minutes played, plus/minus net per 90 minutes (a measure of a player’s contribution to their team’s performance while on the field), goals scored, and assists. A subanalysis was performed based on the median age at the time of the injury (≤24 vs ≥25 years). Nonparametric testing methods were used throughout the analysis. Results: A total of 30 NWSL athletes were included. Midfielders had the highest percentage of injuries (n = 11; 36.7%), followed by forwards (n = 10; 33.3%). Overall, 27 players returned to the NWSL at a median of 12.1 months (IQR, 10.9-14.3 months), constituting a 90.0% RTP rate. There was a significant decrease in the percentage of minutes played from 1 year before the injury to 1 year after the injury (median, 87.9% [IQR, 80.7%-90.6%] vs 25.1% [IQR, 16.3%-57.2%], respectively; P = .031). Forwards and midfielders had a significant decrease in the number of assists from 1 year before the injury to 1 year after the injury (median, 3.0 [IQR, 1.0-3.0] vs 0.0 [IQR, 0.0-1.0], respectively; P = .037) as well as the number of goals scored when averaging across 2 seasons before the injury to 2 seasons after the injury (median, 3.0 [IQR, 1.5-5.5] vs 1.0 [IQR, 0.5-3.5], respectively; P = .031). On subanalysis, older players started in significantly more games (median, 12.0 [IQR, 3.8-18.5] vs 3.0 [IQR, 0.5-6.0], respectively; P = .048) and had a higher percentage of minutes played (median, 63.0% [IQR, 18.8%-77.3%] vs 14.9% [IQR, 2.0%-21.2%], respectively; P = .046) at 1 year after the injury versus younger players. Conclusion: There was a 90.0% RTP rate after ACLR in the NWSL. Players who returned to the NWSL had a lower percentage of minutes played in their first year after RTP, with older players starting in more games and having a greater percentage of minutes played. Compared with preinjury performance, forwards and midfielders had a significant decrease in the number of assists at 1 year after the injury as well as the number of goals scored at 2 years after the injury.

Background: A Lisfranc injury can occur to either the ligament or bone, which causes instability when attempting to perform strength and balance maneuvers. Purpose/Hypothesis: The study's aims were to (1) analyze the return-to-play (RTP) rate and performance level of players in the National Football League (NFL) after Lisfranc injury and (2) determine the economic and financial impact of Lisfranc injuries to the NFL. We hypothesized that there would be a low RTP rate following Lisfranc injury in the NFL. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Multiple online public records were used to identify NFL players with Lisfranc injuries between the 2009 and 2020 seasons. Players were assessed according to their RTP statistics: snap count, approximate value (AV), games played, and games started. Nonparametric methods were used to compare player statistics before and after injury. Also, player salaries while injured were calculated (in 2022 US dollars after adjusting for inflation) to approximate economic loss for those players who returned to play. Results: A total of 33 NFL athletes sustained a Lisfranc injury during the study period. Most Lisfranc injuries were experienced by offensive linemen (n = 8; 24.2%), followed by running backs (n = 7; 21.2%). Overall 27 players (81.8%) returned to play after injury at a median of 11.0 months (IQR, 10.2-11.8 months). There were no significant differences between pre- and postinjury snap counts or number of games played and started. In terms of player performance, there was a statistically significant decrease in AV at 1 year postinjury (median [IQR], 6.0 [4.0-10.0] preinjury vs 5.0 [2.5-7.5] postinjury; P = .022). The overall cost of recovery amounted to $104.7 million, with quarterbacks (n = 4) accounting for the greatest cost at $32.6 million. The next 2 most expensive positions were offensive and defensive linemen (n = 5 each) at $19.4 million each. Conclusion: Our results did not support the hypothesis, as the RTP rate for NFL athletes sustaining Lisfranc injuries was 81.8%. This injury was associated with a significant decrease in AV 1 year postinjury. In terms of economic impact, quarterbacks accounted for almost one-third of expenses while constituting only 14.8% of injuries.

Background: The term “social determinants of health” (SDOH) refers to social and economic factors that influence a patient’s health status. The effect of SDOH on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computer adaptive test (CAT) scores and postoperative resource utilization in patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) have yet to be thoroughly studied. Purpose: To investigate the impact SDOH have on PROMIS CAT outcomes and postoperative resource utilization in patients with ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The electronic medical record was used to identify the SDOH for patients who underwent ACLR by 1 of 3 sports medicine fellowship–trained orthopaedic surgeons between July 2017 and April 2020. PROMIS CAT measures of Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), and Depression (PROMIS-D) were completed at the preoperative, 6-month postoperative, and 12-month postoperative time points. Postoperative health care utilization was recorded as well. Independent 2-group t tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to analyze mean differences between patient groups based on SDOH. Results: Two-hundred and thirty patients who underwent ACLR were included (mean age, 27 years; 59% male). Compared with White patients, Black patients were represented more frequently in the lowest median household income (MHI) quartile (63% vs 23%, respectively; P < .001). White patients were represented more frequently in the highest area deprivation index (ADI) quartile when compared with Black patients (67% vs 12%, respectively; P = .006). Significantly worse PROMIS-PF, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS-D scores at all 3 time points were found among patients who were Black, female, smokers, and in the lower MHI quartiles, with higher ADI and public health care coverage. In terms of resource utilization, Black patients attended significantly fewer postoperative physical therapy visits when compared with their respective counterparts. Those in the lower MHI quartiles attended significantly fewer postoperative imaging encounters, and female patients attended significantly more postoperative virtual encounters than male patients. Conclusion: Specific SDOH variables, particularly those that reflect racial and socioeconomic disparities, were associated with differences in postoperative health care utilization and ACLR outcomes as measured by PROMIS CAT domains.

Purpose To investigate the impact social determinants of health (SDOH) have on accessing orthopaedic treatment after an anterior cruciate ligament injury, as well as patient-reported and surgical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Methods A systematic search of the PubMed, MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, Embase, and Web of Science databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify studies that reported at least 1 SDOH and its effect on patient-reported outcomes or surgical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Our search identified 937 studies. After eliminating 273 duplicates, 2 authors screened 664 articles on the basis of title and abstract. After this initial screening, 76 studies were evaluated for data extraction. Studies were categorized based on the social determinant(s) of health reported. Results Twenty-two articles published between 2002 and 2020 were included in this study, encompassing 15 retrospective cohort studies, 3 prospective cohort studies, 3 cross-sectional studies, and 1 case-control study from 9 journals across 3 countries. Of these articles, 9 investigated race/ethnicity, 8 investigated insurance status, 4 investigated income, 5 investigated education level, 2 investigated employment status, and 5 investigated socioeconomic status. Reported outcomes included time to treatment, concomitant knee injury, patient-reported outcome measurement scores, postoperative complications, need for additional surgery, and postoperative healthcare utilization. Conclusions Certain SDOH, including black race, Hispanic ethnicity, public health insurance, and lower socioeconomic status contribute to a delay in access to care, which may result in increased severity of concomitant knee injuries encountered at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and inferior outcomes. Study Design Level III, systematic review of level I-III evidence.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Preliminary evidence has suggested favorable correlation between National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) assessments and traditional ("legacy") patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in spine surgery. There has been a significant increase in PROMIS research with regards to spinal conditions. PURPOSE The purpose of this systematic review is to provide an assessment of PROMIS Physical Function (PF) measures in this patient population. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING Systematic review. METHODS A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify published articles that referenced the various PROMIS PF measures. Two authors independently reviewed selected studies. The search returned 1,060 studies, 124 of which were selected for independent review by two authors. Of these, 37 were selected for inclusion. Mixed linear models were performed to assess for differences between legacy PROMs and PROMIS measures. RESULTS The combined sample size of all included studies yielded 10,296 total patients. Overall, PROMIS Physical Function (PF) measures demonstrated strong correlations with legacy PROMs when evaluating spine patients (weighted Pearson correlation, 0.589, standard error [SE]=0.023; weighted Spearman correlation, 0.702, SE=0.028). PROMIS questionnaires had significantly fewer questions than did legacy PROMs (4.2±0.30 vs. 9.53±0.82, p=.015). In spine studies, the PROMIS PF forms were completed in significantly less time than legacy PROMs (48.1±2.9 vs. 174.7±12.6 seconds, p