Does Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage for Physical Therapy Visits for Common Orthopedic Diagnoses? A Survey Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyze the association between physical therapists' recommended number of visits for a full recovery from common orthopedic injuries/surgeries and the extent of insurance coverage for these visits. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted with board-certified physical therapists. A qualitative questionnaire was used to gather physical therapists' demographics and the recommended number of physical therapy visits to achieve a full recovery after 11 common orthopedic diagnoses. Physical therapists also were asked to report whether they believe that insurance provides an adequate number of visits overall. In addition to the qualitative survey, insurance coverage details of major Alabama companies were obtained for comparison. Descriptive statistics of the participating therapists were analyzed for sex, age, degree/training, and years of experience. Kruskal-Wallis statistics were used to analyze variance between the aforementioned groupings when compared with the reported average number of sessions. RESULTS: The survey (N = 251) collected data on the average number of physical therapy sessions that are necessary for a complete recovery as recommended by physical therapists for 11 common orthopedic diagnoses. From this survey, the average number of necessary visits ranged from 11.3 visits (ankle sprains) to 37.3 visits (anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction), with the overall average number of visits being 23.8. Only 24% of physical therapists believed that insurance companies provided enough coverage. Insurance coverage varied but often required additional procedures to allocate the adequate number of visits for the studied orthopedic pathologies. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of practicing physical therapists in Alabama perceive insufficient insurance coverage for physical therapy visits for most orthopedic diagnoses. This study has implications for healthcare decision making and patient-centered rehabilitation goals. Physicians and physical therapists can use this information to optimize treatment decisions and rehabilitation goals. Patients will benefit from improved physical and economic well-being. This study has the potential to drive further research and influence national insurance policies to better serve patients' needs.

One in Three Chance of Finding A Plastic Surgeon on Major Hospital Websites.

There is an increasing trend of nonplastic surgeons performing breast surgery. Within, we evaluate the representation of plastic surgeons listed for breast reconstruction on major hospital system websites within the United States. Methods: The website search engines for the top 20 US medical centers according to the US News and World Report's Hospital Rankings from 2020 to 2021 were queried for search terms pertaining to breast reconstruction. Information collected for search results included gender, if they were a physician, medical specialty, medical school and residency attended, and each individual's position within the search results. Results: Across 80 distinct search attempts, 27 searches (34%) produced no results. The search term "breast reconstruction" yielded the most plastic surgeon search results, with plastic surgeons composing 39% of all search results. The search term "mastectomy" generated the least number of plastic surgeon results, with a 16% representation of plastic surgeons. Nearly two-thirds of physicians identified were nonplastic surgeons (67%). Other surgeons represented 47% of search results and obstetricians/gynecologists, 2%. Nonsurgeons represented 18% of queries. On average, plastic surgeons appeared higher on search lists than nonplastic surgeons, 13th to 39th, respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Plastic surgeons composed only a third of physicians identified, and a third of searches produced no results. Patients interested in breast reconstruction may encounter difficulty finding an appropriate plastic surgeon. Inadequate search engines on hospital websites introduce inefficiencies for the entire health care systems and may negatively impact hospital and physician bottom line.

Bioactive Knee Sleeve for Osteoarthritis: A Small Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal ailments worldwide. Numerous conservative therapies exist, but evidence for such treatments remains conflicting. Recently, there has been growing interest surrounding bioactive sleeves for managing knee arthritis; however, the literature on their efficacy for relieving pain and improving function in the setting of knee OA is limited. As such, we sought to investigate the effect of a bioactive sleeve on patient-reported outcome measures in a small cohort of patients with OA. METHODS: Patients with knee OA were given a bioactive sleeve (Reparel, Chico, CA) and asked to refrain from lifestyle modifications and intraarticular corticosteroid injections. Lysholm Knee Score, Oxford Knee Score, Knee Injury and OA Outcome Score (KOOS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Visual Analog Scale score were obtained at baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months. OA severity was evaluated using the Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) classification system. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare baseline patient-reported outcomes with 2-week, 6-week, and 3-month time points. Bivariate correlation was used to evaluate the relation between patient-reported outcome measures and KL classification. RESULTS: The cohort was composed of 14 participants-4 males and 10 females-with a mean age of 62.2 ± 13.2 years and a body mass index of 33.7 ± 5.8. The average KL grade was 2.9 (range 2-4). KOOS pain, symptoms, activities of daily living, and quality of life increased significantly at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months. KOOS sport and recreation significantly increased at 3 months. The Oxford Knee Score was significantly greater at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months. The Lysholm Knee Score was significantly greater at 6 weeks and 3 months. The Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation attained significant improvement at 3 months, and the Visual Analog Scale improvement was significant at 2 weeks. No statistically significant difference was attained with University of California at Los Angeles activity score. Outcome scores did not correlate with KL classification. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that a bioactive sleeve may improve patient-reported pain, symptoms, and function in the setting of knee OA. Further research is needed to better understand the role of bioactive sleeves for patients with knee arthritis.