Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Coincide With an Increase in Osteonecrosis as Indication for Total Hip Arthroplasty in Older Patients?

BACKGROUND: Osteonecrosis of the femoral head is a common indication for total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is unclear to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted its incidence. Theoretically, the combination of microvascular thromboses and corticosteroid use in patients who have COVID-19 may increase the risk of osteonecrosis. We aimed to (1) assess recent osteonecrosis trends and (2) investigate if a history of COVID-19 diagnosis is associated with osteonecrosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized a large national database between 2016 and 2021. Osteonecrosis incidence in 2016 to 2019 was compared to 2020 to 2021. Secondly, utilizing a cohort from April 2020 through December 2021, we investigated whether a prior COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with osteonecrosis. For both comparisons, Chi-square tests were applied. RESULTS: Among 1,127,796 THAs performed between 2016 and 2021, we found an osteonecrosis incidence of 1.6% (n = 5,812) in 2020 to 2021 compared to 1.4% (n = 10,974) in 2016 to 2019; P < .0001. Furthermore, using April 2020 to December 2021 data from 248,183 THAs, we found that osteonecrosis was more common among those who had a history of COVID-19 (3.9%; 130 of 3,313) compared to patients who had no COVID-19 history (3.0%; 7,266 of 244,870); P = .001). CONCLUSION: Osteonecrosis incidence was higher in 2020 to 2021 compared to previous years and a previous COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with a greater likelihood of osteonecrosis. These findings suggest a role of the COVID-19 pandemic on an increased osteonecrosis incidence. Continued monitoring is necessary to fully understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on THA care and outcomes.

The Telemedicine Experience in Primary Care Practices in the United States: Insights From Practice Leaders.

PURPOSE: The need to rapidly implement telemedicine in primary care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was addressed differently by various practices. Using qualitative data from semistructured interviews with primary care practice leaders, we aimed to report commonly shared experiences and unique perspectives regarding telemedicine implementation and evolution/maturation since March 2020. METHODS: We administered a semistructured, 25-minute, virtual interview with 25 primary care practice leaders from 2 health systems in 2 states (New York and Florida) included in PCORnet, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute clinical research network. Questions were guided by 3 frameworks (health information technology evaluation, access to care, and health information technology life cycle) and involved practice leaders' perspectives on the process of telemedicine implementation in their practice, with a specific focus on the process of maturation and facilitators/barriers. Two researchers conducted inductive coding of qualitative data open-ended questions to identify common themes. Transcripts were electronically generated by virtual platform software. RESULTS: Twenty-five interviews were administered for practice leaders representing 87 primary care practices in 2 states. We identified the following 4 major themes: (1) the ease of telemedicine adoption depended on both patients' and clinicians' prior experience using virtual health platforms, (2) regulation of telemedicine varied across states and differentially affected the rollout processes, (3) visit triage rules were unclear, and (4) there were positive and negative effects of telemedicine on clinicians and patients. CONCLUSIONS: Practice leaders identified several challenges to telemedicine implementation and highlighted 2 areas, including telemedicine visit triage guidelines and telemedicine-specific staffing and scheduling protocols, for improvement.

Musculoskeletal Telemedicine Trends Preceding the COVID-19 Pandemic and Potential Implications of Rapid Telemedicine Expansion.

Introduction: Telemedicine was rapidly deployed at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Little has been published on telemedicine in musculoskeletal care prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study is aimed at characterizing trends in telemedicine for musculoskeletal care preceding the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This retrospective study used insurance claims from the Truven MarketScan database. Musculoskeletal-specific outpatient visits from 2014 to 2018 were identified using the musculoskeletal major diagnostic category ICD-10 codes. Telemedicine visits were categorized using CPT codes and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding Systems. We described annual trends in telemedicine in the overall dataset and by diagnosis grouping. Multivariable logistic regression modeling estimated the association between patient-specific and telemedicine visit variables and telemedicine utilization. Results: There were 36,672 musculoskeletal-specific telemedicine visits identified (0.020% of all musculoskeletal visits). Overall, telemedicine utilization increased over the study period (0% in 2014 to 0.05% in 2018). Orthopedic surgeons had fewer telemedicine visits than primary care providers (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.55-0.59). The proportion of unique patients utilizing telemedicine in 2018 was higher in the south (OR 2.28, 95% CI 2.19-2.38) and west (OR 5.58, 95% CI 5.36-5.81) compared to the northeast. Those with increased comorbidities and lower incomes and living in rural areas had lower rates of telemedicine utilization. Conclusions: From 2014 to 2018, there was an increase in telemedicine utilization for musculoskeletal visits, in part due to insurance reimbursement and telemedicine regulation. Despite this increase, the rates of telemedicine utilization are still lowest in some of the groups that could derive the most benefit from these services. Establishing this baseline is important for assessing how the roll-out of telemedicine during the pandemic impacted how/which patients and providers are utilizing telemedicine today.

Pediatric anesthesia practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective cohort study.

Background and Aims: The onset of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic brought together the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) and the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA) to release a joint statement on anesthesia use. Their statement included a recommendation to use regional anesthesia whenever possible to mitigate the risk associated with aerosolizing procedures. We sought to examine the utilization of anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing a surgical procedure for fractures or ligament repairs before and during COVID-19. Methods: Using the Premier Health Database, we retrospectively analyzed pediatric patients undergoing a surgical intervention for fractures or ligament repair before and during COVID-19. We sought to determine if there were differences in anesthesia use among this cohort during the two time periods. Fracture groups included shoulder and clavicle, humerus and elbow, forearm and wrist, hand and finger, pelvis and hip, femur and knee, leg and ankles, and foot and toes. Ligament procedures included surgical intervention for the anterior cruciate ligament and ulnar collateral ligament repair. Results: We identified a total of 5935 patients undergoing a surgical procedure for fractures or ligament repairs before and during COVID-19. After exclusion for unknown anesthesia use, 2,807 patients were included in our cohort with 81.5% (n = 2288) of patients undergoing a procedure under general anesthesia, 6.4% (n = 181) under regional anesthesia, and 12.0% (n = 338) under combined general-regional anesthesia. There did not appear to be a significant difference in the type of anesthesia used before and during COVID-19 (p = 0.052). Conclusions: Our study did not identify a difference in anesthesia use before and during COVID-19 among pediatric patients undergoing a surgical procedure. Further studies should estimate the change in anesthesia used during the time period when elective procedures were resumed.

Accelerometry Data Delineate Phases of Recovery and Supplement Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Following Lumbar Laminectomy.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are traditionally used to track recovery of patients after spine surgery. Wearable accelerometers have adjunctive value because of the continuous, granular, and objective data they provide. We conducted a prospective study of lumbar laminectomy patients to determine if time-series data from wearable accelerometers could delineate phases of recovery and compare accelerometry data to PROMs during recovery tracking. METHODS: Patients with lumbar stenosis for whom lumbar laminectomy was indicated were prospectively recruited. Subjects wore accelerometers that recorded their daily step counts from at least 1 week preoperatively to 6 months postoperatively. Subjects completed the Oswestry Disability Index and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey preoperatively and at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Daily aggregate median steps and individual visit-specific median steps were calculated. The Pruned Linear Exact Time method was used to segment aggregate median steps into distinct phases. Associations between visit-specific median steps and PROMs were identified using Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: Segmentation analysis revealed 3 distinct postoperative phases: step counts rapidly increased for the first 40 days postoperatively (acute healing), then gained more slowly for the next 90 days (recovery), and finally plateaued at preoperative levels (stabilization). Visit-specific median steps were significantly correlated with PROMs throughout the postoperative period. PROMs significantly exceeded baseline at 6 months postoperatively, while step counts did not (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous data from accelerometers allowed for identification of 3 distinct stages of postoperative recovery after lumbar laminectomy. PROMs remain necessary to capture subjective elements of recovery.

Comparison of total joint arthroplasty care patterns prior to the Covid-19 pandemic and after resumption of elective surgery during the Covid-19 Outbreak: A retrospective, large urban academic center study.

BACKGROUND: After the suspension of elective surgeries was lifted in June 2020 in New York State, challenges remained regarding coordination of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) cases. Using the experience from a high-volume health system in New York City, we aimed to describe patterns of care after resumption of elective TJA. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 7,699 TJAs performed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perioperative characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between TJAs based on time period of performance: 1) pre-pandemic (PP, June 8th-December 8th, 2019), 2) initial period post-resumption of elective surgeries (IR, June 8th-September 8th, 2020), and 3) later period post-resumption (LR, September 9th-December 8th, 2020). RESULTS: LOS > 2 days (83%, 67%, 70% for PP, IR, LR periods respectively) and discharge rates to post-acute care (PAC) facilities were lower during the pandemic periods (ORIR vs. PP: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.40-0.59, p < 0.001; ORLR vs. PP: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.53-0.75, p < 0.001). Compared to the pre-pandemic period, the risk for 30-day readmission was lower during the IR period (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.40-0.98, p = 0.041) and similar during the LR period (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.65-1.41, p = 0.832). CONCLUSIONS: Despite decreased LOS and discharge to PAC for TJAs performed during the pandemic, 30-day readmissions did not increase. Given the increased costs and lack of superior functional outcomes associated with discharge to PAC, these findings suggest that discharge to PAC facilities need not return to pre-pandemic levels.

Evaluating Resource Utilization for In-Person and Virtual Joint Classes in Total Joint Arthroplasty: An Analysis of Attendance Patterns at a Large Metropolitan Health System.

BACKGROUND: Provider-run "joint classes" educate total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients on how to best prepare for surgery and maximize recovery. There is no research on potential healthcare inequities in the context of joint classes or on the impact of the recent shift toward telehealth due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Using data from a large metropolitan health system, we aimed to (1) identify demographic patterns in prepandemic joint class attendance and (2) understand the impact of telehealth on attendance. METHODS: We included data on 3,090 TJA patients from three centers, each with a separately operated joint class. Attendance patterns were assessed prepandemic and after the resumption of elective surgeries when classes transitioned to telehealth. Statistical testing included standardized differences (SD > 0.1 indicates significance) and a multivariate linear regression. RESULTS: The in-person and telehealth attendance rates were 69.9% and 69.2%, respectively. Joint class attendance was significantly higher for non-White, Hispanic, non-English primary language, Medicaid, and Medicare patients (all SD > 0.1). Age was a determinant of attendance for telehealth (SD > 0.1) but not for in-person (SD = 0.04). Contrastingly, physical distance from hospital was significant for in-person (SD > 0.1) but not for telehealth (SD = 0.06). On a multivariate analysis, distance from hospital (P < .05) and telehealth (P < .0001) were predictors of failed class attendance. CONCLUSION: This work highlights the relative importance of joint classes in specific subgroups of patients. Although telehealth attendance was lower, telehealth alleviated barriers to access related to physical distance but increased barriers for older patients. These results can guide providers on preoperative education and the implementation of telehealth.

Pre-existing Disparities and Potential Implications for the Rapid Expansion of Telemedicine in Response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Concerns exist regarding exacerbation of existing disparities in health care access with the rapid implementation of telemedicine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, data on pre-existing disparities in telemedicine utilization is currently lacking. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study: (1) the prevalence of outpatient telemedicine visits before the COVID-19 pandemic by patient subgroups based on age, comorbidity burden, residence rurality, and median household income; and (2) associated diagnosis categories. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SUBJECT: Commercial claims data from the Truven MarketScan database (2014-2018) representing n=846,461,609 outpatient visits. MEASURES: We studied characteristics and utilization of outpatient telemedicine services before the COVID-19 pandemic by patient subgroups based on age, comorbidity burden, residence rurality, and median household income. Disparities were assessed in unadjusted and adjusted (regression) analyses. RESULTS: With overall telemedicine uptake of 0.12% (n=1,018,092/846,461,609 outpatient visits) we found that pre-COVID-19 disparities in telemedicine use became more pronounced over time with lower use in patients who were older, had more comorbidities, were in rural areas, and had lower median household incomes (all trends and effect estimates P<0.001). CONCLUSION: These results contextualize pre-existing disparities in telemedicine use and are crucial in the monitoring of potential disparities in telemedicine access and subsequent outcomes after the rapid expansion of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hip fracture characteristics and outcomes during COVID-19: a large retrospective national database review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted healthcare in various vulnerable patient subpopulations. However, data are lacking on the impact of COVID-19 on hip fractures, seen mainly in older patients. Using national claims data, we aimed to describe the epidemiology during the first COVID-19 wave in the USA. METHODS: We compared patients admitted for hip fractures during March and April of 2020 with those admitted in 2019 in terms of patient and healthcare characteristics, COVID-19 diagnosis, and outcomes. An additional comparison was made between COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. Outcomes included length of hospital stay (LOS), admission to an ICU, ICU LOS, use of mechanical ventilation, 30-day readmission, discharge disposition, and a composite variable of postoperative complications. RESULTS: Overall, 16 068 hip fractures were observed in 2019 compared with 7498 in 2020. Patients with hip fractures in 2020 (compared with 2019) experienced earlier hospital discharge and were less likely to be admitted to ICU, but more likely to be admitted to home. Amongst 83 patients with hip fractures with concomitant COVID-19 diagnosis, we specifically observed more non-surgical treatments, almost doubled LOS, a more than 10-fold increased mortality rate, and higher complication rates compared with COVID-19-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted not only volume of hip fractures, but also patterns in care and outcomes. These results may inform policymakers in future outbreaks and how this may affect vulnerable patient populations, such as those experiencing a hip fracture.

The Impact of Immunization and Use of Oseltamivir on Influenza-Related Hospitalizations: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues into flu season, it is critical to minimize hospitalizations to maximize capacity and preserve critical care resources. We sought to identify risk factors for influenza-related hospitalization, specifically the role of immunization and oseltamivir prescriptions. METHODS: Patients with influenza diagnoses were identified from the MarketScan database (2014-2018). Primary risk factors of interest were an influenza vaccination within 6 months prior to infection and oseltamivir prescriptions (filled on the day diagnosis, the following day, or 2-5 days). A multivariable logistic regression model was run to identify risk factors for influenza-related hospitalizations within 30 days of diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 2 395 498 influenza infections, 0.27% were hospitalized. Of those prescribed oseltamivir the day of diagnosis, 0.13% were later hospitalized, compared to 0.67% among those who filled prescriptions the following day and 11.8% when filled within 2 to 5 days. Upon adjustment, oseltamivir prescriptions filled on the day of diagnosis were associated with significantly decreased odds of hospitalization (OR 0.51 CI 0.48-0.55). Prescriptions filled within 1 to 5 days of diagnosis were associated with significantly increased odds of hospitalization (1 day OR 2.01 CI 1.81-2.24; 2-5 days OR 34.1 CI 31.7-36.6). Flu vaccination was associated with a lower odds for hospitalization (OR 0.84 CI 0.74-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: We recommend oseltamivir be prescribed to patients when they first present with influenza-like symptoms to reduce the burden on the healthcare system. We also identified reduced odds of hospitalization associated with influenza vaccination, which is already well established, but particularly important this coming flu season.

Cancellation of Elective Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Capacity in New York State: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, New York State ordered the suspension of all elective surgeries to increase intensive care unit (ICU) bed capacity. Yet the potential impact of suspending elective surgery on ICU bed capacity is unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 5 years of New York State data on ICU usage. Descriptions of ICU utilization and mechanical ventilation were stratified by admission type (elective surgery, emergent/urgent/trauma surgery, and medical admissions) and by geographic location (New York metropolitan region versus the rest of New York State). Data are presented as absolute numbers and percentages and all adult and pediatric ICU patients were included. RESULTS: Overall, ICU admissions in New York State were seen in 10.1% of all hospitalizations (n = 1,232,986/n = 12,251,617) and remained stable over a 5-year period from 2011 to 2015. Among n = 1,232,986 ICU stays, sources of ICU admission included elective surgery (13.4%, n = 165,365), emergent/urgent admissions/trauma surgery (28.0%, n = 345,094), and medical admissions (58.6%, n = 722,527). Ventilator utilization was seen in 26.3% (n = 323,789/n = 1232,986) of all ICU patients of which 6.4% (n = 20,652), 32.8% (n = 106,186), and 60.8% (n = 196,951) was for patients from elective, emergent, and medical admissions, respectively. New York City holds the majority of ICU bed capacity (70.0%; n = 2496/n = 3566) in New York State. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing elective surgery comprised a small fraction of ICU bed and mechanical ventilation use in New York State. Suspension of elective surgeries in response to the COVID-19 pandemic may thus have a minor impact on ICU capacity when compared to other sources of ICU admission such as emergent/urgent admissions/trauma surgery and medical admissions. More study is needed to better understand how best to maximize ICU capacity for pandemics requiring heavy use of critical care resources.