Comparison of Survivorship and Failure Modes Between Anatomic and Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Across Multiple Government Joint Registries for a Single Platform Shoulder System

[...]recent years have seen a dramatic shift in utilization of rTSA in which rTSA is increasingly used to treat OA in patients with an intact rotator cuff, with a corresponding decline in use of aTSA.1-5 The reasons for this shift in usage are multi-factorial but may be due to the perceived lower risk of revision surgery with rTSA relative to aTSA, as the quality of the rotator cuff muscles and tendon are not necessary for a functional rTSA but are pre-requisite for a functional aTSA. Furthermore, these registries have high rates of government-mandated compliance such that all patients are enrolled and very few patients are lost to follow-up, thus minimizing the potential for selection bias that is inherently present in nearly all nongovernment registry clinical outcome studies. [...]to better understand the relative differences in primary aTSA and primary rTSA usage and performance, we analyzed two different government joint registries for survivorship and for reasons for revision associated with one platform shoulder system and compared trends in usage of aTSA and rTSA over a period of over 10 years to elucidate reasons for any market trends. Additionally, reasons for revision and the cumulative revision rate were assessed across the government joint registries to quantify and compare the performance of this platform shoulder prosthesis for primary aTSA and primary rTSA in each country over the study period. Over the period of analysis, use of primary aTSA and primary rTSA with the particular platform system has increased year to year in both Australia and the UK, with the exception of a decline in 2020 and 2021 due to COVID-19.

The future of health care service in orthopedic practice: telemedicine or in-person visits?

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction and preference for telemedicine vs. in-person visits for outpatient shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal consultation during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and in the future. METHODS: Patients who had telemedicine visits for shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal complaints at a single institution from March through June 2020 were invited to respond to a post-visit survey. The survey included a standardized questionnaire that focused on the patient's satisfaction with the telemedicine visits during the pandemic and preference for using the telemedicine platform in the future, following the pandemic. Additional details regarding their virtual visits (severity of medical condition, as well as previous virtual or emergency department visits) were also obtained. Data regarding patient demographic characteristics and visit details (primary diagnosis, type of visit, length of visit, and treating physician) were extracted from the electronic medical records. RESULTS: In total, 153 patients participated in the study. Overall, high satisfaction scores regarding the telemedicine visits were noted: 91% of patients reported that their concerns were adequately addressed, 89% would recommend telemedicine to a friend, and 94% stated that they would use the telemedicine platform again in the presence of a situation similar to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the majority of patients (76%) reported a preference for in-person visits for the same musculoskeletal complaint if it were not for COVID-19. A telemedicine visit duration > 10 minutes and a first-time telemedicine visit correlated with higher satisfaction rates (P = .037 and P = .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has provided a boost to the use of our telemedicine platform, with a high satisfaction rate among patients with shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal complaints, largely owing to safety reasons and limited access to in-person doctor visits. However, a considerable number of patients would have preferred in-person visits for similar health complaints if there were no pandemic. Further research on optimizing the selection of patients for telemedicine visits and addressing their expectations and concerns regarding their visits will improve patients' preference for future telemedicine visits.

Ethical Implications of Resuming Elective Orthopedic Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had unprecedented impact on the United States health care system. One of the consider-ations was the decision to halt elective orthopedic surgery to preserve consumption of scarce resources. However, as the number of COVID-19 cases decrease, there will be discus-sions regarding the modality of resuming elective orthopedic surgery. Ethical considerations will come to the forefront in terms of determining the best course of action, patient selection, resource rationing, and financial implications. These factors will be examined through the lens of the four tenets of bioethics, beneficence, maleficence, autonomy, and justice, to elucidate the best approach in ethically manag-ing elective orthopedic surgery during a global pandemic.

Modification of a Validated Risk Stratification Tool to Characterize Geriatric Hip Fracture Outcomes and Optimize Care in a Post-COVID-19 World.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To demonstrate how a risk assessment tool modified to account for the COVID-19 virus during the current global pandemic is able to provide risk assessment for low-energy geriatric hip fracture patients. (2) To provide a treatment algorithm for care of COVID-19 positive/suspected hip fractures patients that accounts for their increased risk of morbidity and mortality. SETTING: One academic medical center including 4 Level 1 trauma centers, 1 university-based tertiary care referral hospital, and 1 orthopaedic specialty hospital. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One thousand two hundred seventy-eight patients treated for hip fractures between October 2014 and April 2020, including 136 patients treated during the COVID-19 pandemic between February 1, 2020 and April 15, 2020. INTERVENTION: The Score for Trauma Triage in the Geriatric and Middle-Aged ORIGINAL (STTGMAORIGINAL) score was modified by adding COVID-19 virus as a risk factor for mortality to create the STTGMACOVID score. Patients were stratified into quartiles to demonstrate differences in risk distribution between the scores. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Inpatient and 30-day mortality, major, and minor complications. RESULTS: Both STTGMA score and COVID-19 positive/suspected status are independent predictors of inpatient mortality, confirming their use in risk assessment models for geriatric hip fracture patients. Compared with STTGMAORIGINAL, where COVID-19 patients are haphazardly distributed among the risk groups and COVID-19 inpatient and 30 days mortalities comprise 50% deaths in the minimal-risk and low-risk cohorts, the STTGMACOVID tool is able to triage 100% of COVID-19 patients and 100% of COVID-19 inpatient and 30 days mortalities into the highest risk quartile, where it was demonstrated that these patients have a 55% rate of pneumonia, a 35% rate of acute respiratory distress syndrome, a 22% rate of inpatient mortality, and a 35% rate of 30 days mortality. COVID-19 patients who are symptomatic on presentation to the emergency department and undergo surgical fixation have a 30% inpatient mortality rate compared with 12.5% for patients who are initially asymptomatic but later develop symptoms. CONCLUSION: The STTGMA tool can be modified for specific disease processes, in this case to account for the COVID-19 virus and provide a robust risk stratification tool that accounts for a heretofore unknown risk factor. COVID-19 positive/suspected status portends a poor outcome in this susceptible trauma population and should be included in risk assessment models. These patients should be considered a high risk for perioperative morbidity and mortality. Patients with COVID-19 symptoms on presentation should have surgery deferred until symptoms improve or resolve and should be reassessed for surgical treatment versus definitive nonoperative treatment with palliative care and/or hospice care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of Levels of Evidence.

Increased Mortality and Major Complications in Hip Fracture Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A New York City Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To examine one health system's response to the essential care of its hip fracture population during the COVID-19 pandemic and report on its effect on patient outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Seven musculoskeletal care centers within New York City and Long Island. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-eight recent and 115 historical hip fracture patients. INTERVENTION: Patients with hip fractures occurring between February 1, 2020, and April 15, 2020, or between February 1, 2019, and April 15, 2019, were prospectively enrolled in an orthopaedic trauma registry and chart reviewed for demographic and hospital quality measures. Patients with recent hip fractures were identified as COVID positive (C+), COVID suspected (Cs), or COVID negative (C-). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Hospital quality measures, inpatient complications, and mortality rates. RESULTS: Seventeen (12.2%) patients were confirmed C+ by testing, and another 14 (10.1%) were suspected (Cs) of having had the virus but were never tested. The C+ cohort, when compared with Cs and C- cohorts, had an increased mortality rate (35.3% vs. 7.1% vs. 0.9%), increased length of hospital stay, a greater major complication rate, and a greater incidence of ventilator need postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 had a devastating effect on the care of patients with hip fracture during the pandemic. Although practice patterns generally remained unchanged, treating physicians need to understand the increased morbidity and mortality in patients with hip fracture complicated by COVID-19. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of Levels of Evidence.

The Response of an Orthopedic Department and Specialty Hospital at the Epicenter of a Pandemic: The NYU Langone Health Experience.

As the world grapples with the COVID-19 pandemic, we as health care professionals thrive to continue to help our patients, and as orthopedic surgeons, this goal is ever more challenging. As part of a major academic tertiary medical center in New York City, the orthopedic department at New York University (NYU) Langone Health has evolved and adapted to meet the challenges of the COVID pandemic. In our report, we will detail the different aspects and actions taken by NYU Langone Health as well as NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital and the orthopedic department in particular. Among the steps taken, the department has reconfigured its staff's assignments to help both with the institution's efforts and our patients' needs from reassigning operating room nurses to medical COVID floors to having attending surgeons cover urgent care locations. We have reorganized our residency and fellowship rotations and assignments as well as adapting our educational programs to online learning. While constantly evolving to meet the institution's and our patient demands, our leadership starts planning for the return to a new "normal".