Industry Payments to Foot and Ankle-Trained Orthopedic Surgeons: An Analysis of the Open Payments Database From 2014 to 2019.

Introduction The authors examined if the transparency in industry payments to foot and ankle-trained orthopedic surgeons resulted in the following changes to the (1) median general payments to surgeons, (2) trend in median payments to surgeons across all subcategory payments, and (3) trend in median payments to surgeons in 11 regions of the United States. Methods A retrospective review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and Open Payments Database (OPD) was performed to identify all industry payments made by drug and medical device companies to orthopedic surgeons (N = 3,835) between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and trend analyses in annual payments, number of payments to surgeons per year, payment subtypes, and regional distributions were analyzed. Results A total of 53,280 payments totaling $53,454,850.56 were made to orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons between 2014 and 2019. Mean and median payments were $1,003.28 and $60.19, respectively. Statistically significant differences in mean payment amounts were observed by year (p = 0.001) with a highly statistically significant, strong increase in the number of payments made over the six-year period (r = 0.97, p < 0.001). The greatest increases in median individual payments were observed for gifts (277.1%; r = 0.18, p = 0.05), education (250.6%; r = 0.17, p < 0.001), and royalties and licensing (72.1%; r = 0.05, p = 0.04). Statistically significant increasing trends in median payments over time were observed for the Northeast (p < 0.001) and South regions (p < 0.001). Discussion The results of this study demonstrate the increase in payments made across the six-year time period. The study demonstrates that there is a shift in the type of payments from speaker fees, entertainment, and lodging to education, gifts, honoraria, royalties, and consulting. Conclusion Since the OPD release, no significant decrease was identified in the financial relationship between foot and ankle surgeons and the industry; rather, an increase was observed. This increase in education, royalties, and consulting shows that more foot and ankle surgeons are getting involved in the industry, contrary to expectations. The partnership between industry and physicians can help to improve innovation and bring new ideas to the future of orthopedics.

Industry Payments to Orthopedic Surgeons Among All Subspecialties: An Analysis of the Open Payments Database From 2014 to 2019.

Introduction Since the passage of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in 2010, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) started the National Physician Payment Transparency Program and Open Payments Database (OPD), which allowed for public access to financial disclosures between physicians and industry. Although orthopedic surgeons receive the highest average payments when compared to other specialties, there has been limited data evaluating these payments among the different orthopedic subspecialties. The purpose of this study was to analyze all industry payments made across all subspecialties among orthopedic surgeons. Methods A retrospective review of the CMS OPD was performed to identify all industry payments made by drug and medical device companies to orthopedic surgeons (N = 28,475) between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. Descriptive statistics were calculated for the number, individual value, and total value of industry payments, stratified by payment type and orthopedic subspecialty. Results A total of 1,048,573 payments (approximately $1.6 billion) were made to orthopedic surgeons between 2014 and 2019. The average orthopedic surgeon received 6.14 payments per year (SD = 29.39), with a mean individual payment amount of $1,542.32. Royalties or licensing comprised the greatest proportion of open payments, followed by consulting fees. Adult reconstruction (M = $225,131.10) and spine (M = $197,404.74) received significantly greater total payments when compared to all other subspecialties (all p-values ≤ 0.001). Differences in total payments made to trauma (M = $73,789.65), sports medicine (M = $60,988.09), foot and ankle (M = $45,007.45), pediatric orthopaedics (M = $35,898.54), general orthopaedics (M = $28,405.81), and hand (M = $14,027.76) were all found to be statistically equivalent (all p--values > 0.20). Discussion Increased collaboration between physicians and industry has resulted in the rapid advancement of innovation that can have sizeable financial implications among orthopedic surgeons. There exists significant heterogeneity in open payments made to orthopedic surgeons when stratified by subspecialty. Adult reconstructive and spine surgeons were the most compensated whereas hand and general orthopaedic surgeons received the least.

Atypical Presentation of Metastatic Carcinoma Causing Patellar Destruction and Synovial Carcinomatosis: A Case Report.

Introduction: This case report describes the third documented example of primary esophageal carcinoma metastasizing to the patella and the first documented example of esophageal carcinoma metastasizing to synovium. Case Report: A 67-year-old man with a history of metastatic esophageal carcinoma presents with right knee pain and an aggressive, destructive lesion involving the superior patella. Biopsy revealed esophageal carcinoma. After ineffective radiation, he underwent resection of the tumor-filled bone and quadricep advancement. Two months later, a recurrent tumor involving the entire patella and significant knee synovitis was observed. He underwent a total patellectomy with a radical anterior synovectomy. Further assessment showed that the entire synovium was replaced with metastatic carcinoma. Conclusion: This report describes an atypical presentation of metastasis with patella and synovium involvement.

A Novel Patient Selection Tool Is Highly Efficacious at Identifying Candidates for Outpatient Surgery When Applied to a Nonselected Cohort of Patients in a Community Hospital.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of validated selection tools to assess which patients can safely and predictably undergo same-day or 23-hour discharge in a community hospital. The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of our patient selection too to identify patients who are candidates for outpatient total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in a community hospital. METHODS: A retrospective review of 223 consecutive (unselected) primary TJAs was performed. The patient selection tool was retrospectively applied to this cohort to determine eligibility for outpatient arthroplasty. Utilizing length of stay and discharge disposition, we identified the proportion of patients discharged home within 23 hours. RESULTS: We found that 179 (80.1%) patients met eligibility criteria for short-stay TJA. Of the 223 patients in this study, 215 (96.4%) patients were discharged home; 17 (7.9%) were on the day of surgery, and 190 (88.3%) within 23 hours. Of the 179 eligible patients for short-stay discharge, 155 (86.6%) patients were discharged home within 23 hours. Overall, the sensitivity of the patient selection tool was 79%, the specificity was 92%, the positive predictive value was 87% and the negative predictive value was 96%. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found that more than 80% of patients undergoing TJA in a community hospital are eligible for short-stay arthroplasty with this selection tool. We found that this selection tool is safe and effective at predicting short-stay discharge. Further studies are needed to better ascertain the direct effects of these specific demographic traits on their effects on short-stay protocols.

Exponential Growth in Female Residency Applicants in Orthopaedic Surgery Over the Past 15 Years.

Orthopaedic surgery is recognized as one of the most popular but least diverse medical subspecialties. Although significant efforts have been made in recent years to improve gender diversity, orthopaedic surgery continues to lag behind other surgical subspecialties. A recent study predicted that it would take 217 years for orthopaedic surgery to reach gender parity matching the 36.3% of practicing female physicians in the United States. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the annual percentages of female medical student applicants in orthopaedic surgery over the past 15 years and to determine when this gender parity percentage may be reached among residency applicants. Methods: The Electronic Residency Application Service was queried for orthopaedic residency applicant data from 2007 to 2022. The annual percentage of female applicants as well as the annual change in percentage of female applicants was recorded. A best-fit trendline was calculated and extrapolated to predict future rates of female applicants. Results: The percent of female applicants has increased from 11.8% in 2007 to 23.0% in 2022. Between 2007 and 2022, there were 9 years with annual increases in percentage of females applying into orthopaedic surgery with a statistically significant increase in 4 of those years (2008, 2014, 2019, and 2022). There were 6 years with annual decreases in percentage of females applying to orthopaedic surgery, none of which were statistically significant. The best-fit curve is exponential with a correlation coefficient of 0.8 (p < 0.001). This predicts reaching the predetermined gender parity percentage of 36.3% in 16 years. Conclusion: In the past 15 years, there has been a near-doubling in the percentage of female medical students applying to orthopaedic surgery residency. Although orthopaedic surgery remains the least gender-diverse field of medicine, these trends are encouraging and support the initiatives currently in place including early education and increased mentorship to help close the gender gap in orthopaedic surgery.

Comparison of Sports Medicine Questions on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination Between 2009 and 2012 and 2017 and 2020 Reveals an Increasing Number of References.

Purpose: To provide an updated analysis of the sports medicine section of the Orthopedic In-Training Examination (OITE). Methods: A cross-sectional review of OITE sports medicine questions from 2009 to 2012 and 2017-2020 was performed. Subtopics, taxonomy, references, and use of imaging modalities were recorded and changes between the time periods were analyzed. Results: The most tested sports medicine subtopics included ACL (12.6%), rotator cuff (10.5%), and throwing injuries to the shoulder (7.4%) in the early subset, while ACL (10%), rotator cuff (6.25%), shoulder instability (6.25%), and throwing injuries to the elbow (6.25%) were the most common in the later subset. The American Journal of Sports Medicine (28.3%) was the most cited journal referenced from 2009 to 2012, while The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (17.5%) was most referenced in questions from 2017 to 2020. The number of references per question increased from the early to the late subset (P < .001). There was a trend toward an increased taxonomy type one questions (P = .114), while type 2 questions had a decreased trend (P = .263) when comparing the new subset to the early group. Conclusion: When comparing sports medicine OITE questions from 2009 to 2012 and 2017 to 2020, there was an increase in the number of references per question. Subtopics, taxonomy, lag time, and use of imaging modalities did not show statistically significant changes. Clinical Relevance: This study provides a detailed analysis of the sports medicine section of the OITE, which can be used by residents and program directors to direct their preparation for the annual examination. The results of this study may help examining boards align their examinations and provide a benchmark for future studies.

Residency Match Rates in Orthopaedic Surgery Based on Sex, Under-Represented in Medicine Status, and Degree Type.

Orthopaedic surgery is well recognized as one of the most competitive and least diverse medical specialties. Despite efforts toward improving diversity, studies have shown that gender and racial/ethnic disparities continue to persist in orthopaedic graduate medical education. Therefore, we sought to identify the match rates of traditionally under-represented groups within orthopaedic surgery-female candidates, racial and ethnic minorities under-represented in medicine (URiM), and osteopathic physicians-compared with their application rates. Methods: A retrospective review of the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) application data from the 2017 to 2021 application cycles was performed, and the total number of applicants, sex, race/ethnicity, and degree type of all students applying for orthopaedic surgery were recorded. A separate database, the Orthopaedic Residency Information Network (ORIN), which is a database self-reported by residency programs to provide information to applicants, was also queried to identify the total number of residents, sex, race/ethnicity, and degree type of all current residents in June 2022, corresponding to those residents who matched in 2017 to 2021. Results: From the ERAS application data, a total of 7,903 applicants applied to orthopaedic surgery during the study period. A total of 1,448 applicants (18%) were female, 1,307 (18%) were URiM, and 1,022 (15%) were from an osteopathic medical school. Based on the ORIN database, 688 of 3,574 residents (19%) were female, 1,131 of 7,374 (19%) were URiM, and 1,022 of US medical school graduates (12%) had a DO degree. The application and match rates were not significantly different for female (p = 0.249) and URiM (0.187) applicants; however, there was a significant difference in the application and match rates (15% vs 12%; p = 0.035) for US medical graduates with a DO degree. Conclusion: In recent years, there has been a significant and necessary push to increase diversity in the field of orthopaedic surgery. From 2017 to 2021, match rates of female and URiM candidates are reflective of their application rates. Osteopathic applicants in orthopaedic surgery have a lower match rate than their allopathic counterparts. Level of Evidence: III.

Cross-Sectional Analysis of Foot and Ankle Questions on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination: A Guide for Resident Preparation.

Background: The Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) is a standardized examination administered annually to orthopaedic surgery residents. The examination is designed to evaluate resident knowledge and academic performance of residency programs. Methods: All OITE foot and ankle questions from 2009 through 2012 and 2017 through 2020 were analyzed. Subtopics, taxonomy, references, and use of imaging modalities were recorded. Results: There were a total of 167 foot and ankle (F&A)-related questions across 8 years of OITE examinations. Trauma remained the most commonly tested subtopic of F&A across both subsets, followed by rehabilitation, tendon disorders, and arthritis. We found an increase in questions related to arthritis (P = .05) and a decrease of questions related to the diabetic foot (P = .02). Taxonomy 3 questions constituted 49.5% of F&A questions from 2009 through 2012 compared with 44.7% of questions from 2017 to 2020 (P = .54). Radiography was the most commonly used imaging modality in both subsets. From 2009 to 2012, 63.6% of questions included a radiograph compared with 76.5% in 2017 through 2020 (P = .13). FAI (Foot & Ankle International), JAAOS (Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons), and JBJS (The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery) were the most commonly cited journals, making up more than 50% of total citations. Citations per question increased from 2.20 to 2.42 from 2009-2012 to 2017-2020 (P = .01). The average lag time in the early subset was 8.2 years and 8.9 years in the later subset. Conclusion: This study provides a detailed analysis of the F&A section of the OITE. Use of this analysis can provide residents with a guide on how to better prepare for the OITE examination. Level of Evidence: Level IV, cross-sectional review of Orthopaedic In-Training Examination questions.

Differences in Fourth-Year Orthopaedic Away Rotation Opportunities and Fees Among Osteopathic and Allopathic Medical Students 1 Year After the Implementation of the Single Accreditation System.

Fourth-year away rotations are well recognized as an important modifiable variable that has been shown to increase a student's opportunity to match into orthopaedic surgery. The purpose of this article was to determine whether allopathic (MD) and osteopathic (DO) medical students have equal opportunities for away rotations in terms of (1) eligibility and (2) fees associated with rotations after the single accreditation merger. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed during the 2021 application cycle (April to November) by reviewing all nonmilitary, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited orthopaedic surgery programs (n = 194). Each program's website, affiliated school of medicine's website, and visiting student applications service portal were searched. Eligibility criteria for an away rotation and associated fees were recorded. Results: Of the 194 programs, 18 (9.3%) of programs were found to have publicly published eligibility for away rotations that prohibited students based on applicant degree. Five (2.6%) programs/medical schools had fees that were larger for DO medical students compared with MD medical students ranging for $50 to $5,000. No programs/medical schools had larger fees for MD medical students compared with DO medical students. Conclusions: Although DO and MD degrees are equivalent degrees for licensing and credentialing and graduate medical education has transitioned to a single accrediting body, there remained discord in the opportunities for fourth-year away rotations between osteopathic and allopathic medical students. This study highlights the necessity for greater reform, consistency, and transparency among orthopaedic surgery residency programs and their affiliated institutions.

An updated analysis of shoulder and elbow questions on the Orthopedic In-Training Examination.

BACKGROUND: The Orthopedic In-Training Examination (OITE) is an annual examination for orthopedic surgery residents used to assess orthopedic knowledge across a national standard. Having an updated understanding of currently tested topics and resources is useful to help residents guide their education. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to analyze the shoulder and elbow domain of the OITE in an effort to provide current trends and commonly tested topics. METHODS: All OITE questions related to shoulder and elbow topics over the years 2009-2013 and 2017-2020 were analyzed. Subcategories, the number and types of references used, publication lag time, imaging modalities, taxonomic classification, and resident performance were recorded. RESULTS: Shoulder and elbow topics comprised 8.61% of all OITE questions from 2009-2013 and 2017-2020. The most commonly tested shoulder topics were rotator cuff arthropathy and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (13.6%), followed by hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty (12.9%), rotator cuff-related pathology (12.9%), anterior shoulder instability and/or dislocation (10.2%), and general anatomy (10.2%). The most commonly tested elbow topics were trauma (21%), ulnar collateral ligament injuries (12.12%), general anatomy (10%), and arthroplasty (10%). Decisions regarding management or appropriate next steps (taxonomy T3) comprised 39% of all question types. The incorporation of imaging modalities continues to be an important component of the OITE questions. The Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES), the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (JAAOS), the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS), and the American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM) comprised 65% of articles referenced in all questions over our analysis period. CONCLUSION: This study provides an updated analysis of trends within the shoulder and elbow domain of the OITE. Application of these data can aid residents in their preparation for the examination.

Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons' Financial Relationships With Industry: An Analysis of the Sunshine Act Reporting of Physician Open Payments From 2014 to 2019.

INTRODUCTION: Orthopaedic trauma surgeons have an intricate relationship with the medical device industry. In the past decade, legislation has created transparency of monetary exchanges between physicians and industry. In 2013, the Physician Payments Sunshine Act was passed and ultimately led to the creation of the Open Payments Database. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in industry payments to orthopaedic trauma surgeons. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Open Payments Database was conducted for general industry payments to orthopaedic trauma surgeons from 2014 to 2019. Total payments and subtype payments were analyzed for yearly trends. All payments were converted to 2019 US dollars to adjust for inflation. Descriptive statistics included analysis of payments, number of surgeons, types of payments, top contributing companies, and regional comparisons. Trends were assessed through the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. Statistical significance was defined at P < 0.05. RESULTS: From 2014 to 2019, 45,312 individual payments were given to orthopaedic trauma surgeons (N = 3208) accounting for a total of $41,376,397.85 (USD), with a mean of $919.54 per payment. Increased trends were noted for median annual payments, number of payments, and number of surgeons receiving payments. Compared with 2014 ($460.91), median payments were increased by 90.9% in 2016 ($879.85), 102.6% in 2018 ($933.81), and 178.6% in 2019 ($1284.06). Payment subtypes that demonstrated increasing median payments included consulting fees (P = 0.028); education (P < 0.001); entertainment, food, and beverage (P < 0.001); and travel (P = 0.019). Decreases in median payments were seen in royalties (P = 0.044) and grant funding (P < 0.001). Regional comparisons demonstrated increasing trends in median payments in the midwest (P = 0.011), south (P < 0.001), and west (P = 0.003), but not in the northeast (P = 0.081). DISCUSSION: In our study, we found that industry payments to orthopaedic trauma surgeons were increasing markedly between 2014 and 2019, particularly among consulting fees, education, entertainment, food and beverage, and travel.

Epidemiology and Clinical Outcomes of Foot and Ankle Trauma During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the New York Metropolitan Area.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel respiratory virus that has rapidly changed the practice of medicine. The authors sought to evaluate the clinical presentation and clinical outcomes of patients presenting with foot and ankle (F&A) trauma to the emergency department during the first wave of the pandemic. The authors retrospectively studied all patients who presented to an emergency department within their multicenter institution during the first wave of the pandemic in their region from March 1 to June 30, 2020, with F&A trauma. They compared this cohort with a matched control group of patients who presented the prior year. Demographics, perioperative factors, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) polymerase chain reaction testing/positivity rates, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day mortalities were collected and analyzed. During the pandemic, the authors saw a 62.0% decrease in the total number of patients presenting with F&A trauma. Patients who presented during the pandemic were significantly older and a greater proportion were male. There was a greater proportion of ankle fractures, fewer ankle sprains, and more open fractures presenting during the pandemic. A greater proportion of patients presenting to the emergency department were admitted (18.2% vs 12.5%). The 30-day readmission (n=13 [5.8%] vs n=38 [9.3%]) and mortality (n=4 [1.8%] vs n=3 [0.7%]) rates for admitted patients were similar (P=.114 and P=.232, respectively). The authors found that 9.6% of patients who presented had a positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test result and that these patients had 20% mortality and readmission rates. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(5):313-319.].

Industry Payments to Adult Reconstruction-Trained Orthopedic Surgeons: An Analysis of the Open Payments Database From 2014 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: In recent time, there has been an increased push toward transparency in industry funding toward physicians. The Physician Payments Sunshine Act called for the creation of the Open Payments Database managed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. To our knowledge, there have been no studies evaluating the trends in payments among adult reconstruction fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons. The purpose of this study is to investigate trends in all payments to adult reconstruction-trained orthopedic surgeons from 2014 to 2019. Secondary outcomes included evaluating trends in yearly subpayment categories, regional variations, as well as characterizing the top 5 industry companies. METHODS: A review of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments Database was performed to identify all payments to adult reconstruction-trained orthopedic surgeons. A total of 94,265 payments were made to 4911 surgeons accounting for a total of $258,865,231.20 during the study period. Our primary outcome was to assess the trend in median payment per year to individual surgeons. Secondary outcomes included evaluating payment trends with respect to subtype, location as defined by United States Census regions, as well as specifics concerning the top 5 companies. RESULTS: Over the study period, there was a nonsignificant increasing trend in median payment per surgeon (r = 0.49, P = .096). However, there was also a significantly increasing trend in the number of payments per year (r = 0.83, P = .014), as well as the number of surgeons receiving payments (r = 0.88, P = .019). With respect to subcategory payments, there were significantly increasing trends in the median payment per surgeon for education (1054%, r = 0.942, P < .001) and entertainment/food and beverage expenses (20.2%, r = 0.49, P = .020), as well as a significantly decreasing trend for median honoraria payments per surgeon (20.2%, r = -0.04, P = .005). No significant regional trends were identified. Of the top 5 companies, one demonstrated a significantly decreasing trend in median payment per surgeon (21.6%, r = -0.109, P < .001), whereas the others remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found a nonsignificant increasing trend in payments to adult reconstruction-trained surgeons as well as an increasing number of surgeons receiving payments. There were increasing trends in median payment per surgeon for education and entertainment expenses, but a decreasing trend for honoraria payments. No significant regional trends were identified. The majority of the top 5 companies had nonsignificant trends in their payments. Further studies are needed to characterize the disclosure of payments and the impact of industry payments on clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Delay in Treatment of a Bimalleolar Ankle Fracture during Coronavirus Disease-19 COVID-19 Pandemic Leading to Amputation.

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARs-CoV-2), also known as coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), is a novel respiratory disease which has fundamentally disrupted societal norms. Common responses to the pandemic have called for "social distancing" and national lockdowns. There is little evidence as to how public perception surrounding exposure to the virus may impact patient care. Here, we present a case of a patient who deferred medical treatment due to concerns regarding exposure to the virus. CASE REPORT: A 99-year-old female who presented to an emergency department of a community hospital on Long Island, New York, during the COVID-19 pandemic complaining of right ankle pain after a fall three 3 weeks ago. Fear of contracting COVID-19, led to initial avoidance of medical evaluation. On presentation, the patient presented with a Gustillo-Anderson Grade III A, bimalleolar ankle fracture with associated gangrene. After evaluation and a thorough discussion with the patient and her family, the patient underwent guillotine amputation. CONCLUSION: Public perception surrounding COVID-19 has created a sense of fear that can impact patient behaviors, such as prevent them from seeking medical care when necessary. As physicians, we need to make patients feel safe and increase availability to patient care during this time to prevent similar issues as demonstrated in this case.

Review of Industry Payments to General Orthopaedic Surgeons Reported by the Open Payments Database: 2014 to 2019.

INTRODUCTION: The Physician Payments Sunshine Act was placed into law in 2010 in an effort to create transparency between physicians and industry. Along with many other specialties, orthopaedic surgeons have long worked intimately with medical industry companies. This study aimed to evaluate trends in industry payments to general orthopaedic surgeons from 2014 to 2019. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services' Open Payments Database was done to identify all industry payments to all general orthopaedic surgeons (ie, not subspecialty affiliated) from 2014 to 2019. The researchers analyzed total payments and subtype payments for yearly trends, and a regional analysis was done. The primary outcome was the overall trend in total median payments, which was assessed through the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. Descriptive statistics include medians with interquartile ranges. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2019, a total of 1,330,543 payments totaling $1.79 billion dollars was paid to 108,041 general orthopaedic surgeons. During this time, the number of surgeons receiving payments increased with a significant uptrend in median payments per surgeon (P < 0.001; Table 1). The top 25% percentile of general orthopaedic surgeons received >95% of payments, whereas the bottom 25% received <0.1%. The general payment types all saw significant increases (P < 0.001) between 2014 and 2019, with the exception of "Ownership or Investment Interests" (P = 0.657) and "Royalty or License" (P = 0.517). Significant regional uptrends in median industry payments were also seen in the Midwest, Northeast, South, and West (P < 0.001). Four of the top five orthopaedic industry companies made payment increases between 2014 and 2019. CONCLUSION: Industry payments to general orthopaedic surgeons between 2014 and 2019 have increased with a considerable disparity in payments among the top-paid orthopaedic surgeons.

The Influence of the Sunshine Act on Industry Payments to United States Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Surgeons.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study is to investigate trends in overall payments to orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons reported by the Open Payments Database (OPD) over the 6 full years of available data (2014-2019). METHODS: A retrospective review of industry payments to United States sports medicine trained orthopaedic surgeons from 2014 to 2019 was performed using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services OPD. Total payments and subtype payments were analyzed for yearly trends. Regional analysis was also performed. The primary outcome was the overall trend in total median payments (defined as the median total payments per surgeon per year), which was assessed via the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. Descriptive statistics include medians with interquartile ranges. P values < .05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: From 2014 to 2019, there were a total of 1,941,772 payments to 12,816 sports medicine orthopaedic surgeons. The median payments to surgeons demonstrated a significant upward trend (P < .001). The total number of payments (r = 0.002; P = .99) did not significantly correlate with changing year. The top 5 compensated surgeons received 45.8% of all industry contributions with a median total payment of $9,210,974.06 (interquartile range: 25,029,951.46). The majority of industry contributions in the top 5 earners were attributed to royalties and licenses (98.7%). Across the study period, 89.4% of the total orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons received a yearly total payment less than $10,000, which made up 8.3% of the total industry payment sum. Those receiving a yearly total payment greater than $500,000 accounted for 0.3% of surgeons but received 53.4% of the sum payments. We found a yearly increasing trend in payments in all regions including the Midwest, South, Northeast, and West (P < .001, P < .001, P < .001, and P = .006). CONCLUSION: Despite the transparency of reporting mandated by the Sunshine Act, orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons have continued to maintain industry relationships with a notable disparity in distribution. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Our analysis suggests continued relationships among sports medicine surgeons and industry. Future research is needed to determine how this impacts medical practice in the United States.

Use of a Modified Rep Model in Primary Joint Arthroplasty: Lessons Learned.

Orthopedic implant device sales representatives ("reps") can provide intraoperative guidance based on their product knowledge, as part of their many responsibilities. However, for experienced high-volume arthroplasty surgeons, a representative may not be required in the room for most primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures. The goal of this study was to describe the authors' experience with a modified rep model for primary TKA. Between January and December 2017, a total of 100 unilateral primary TKAs were performed with a modified rep model and compared with 100 primary TKAs that were performed before this protocol. The authors adopted 2 additional initiatives to institute this protocol safely: (1) improved education of operating room staff and allocation of responsibilities; and (2) reengineering of the existing surgical trays. No perioperative complications, including readmission, periprosthetic fracture, or infection, occurred in either group. In addition, no difference was found in mean length of stay between the modified rep and conventional cohorts (2.2 and 2.4 days, respectively; P=.49). Mean operating room time was less with the modified rep cohort (102.1 vs 117.8 minutes; P<.001), as was total instrument turnover time in the operating room (13.9 vs 29.7 minutes; P<.0001) and in central sterilization (59.4 vs 126.8 minutes; P<.001). No errors occurred with implant accuracy or trays, and there was no need to change the type of implant with the modified rep model, compared with 6% of trays requiring additional sterilization with the conventional model. The negotiated implant cost with the modified rep model was approximately $2000 less than that for the conventional group. This study found that the modified rep model for primary TKA is safe and has the potential for substantial cost savings. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):e538-e542.].

Total Hip Arthroplasty for Developmental Dysplasia of Hip vs Osteoarthritis: A Propensity Matched Pair Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to use the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA) for DDH and primary OA via a propensity-matched pair analysis and the valuation of THA between both groups. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients who underwent THA between 2008 and 2016 were identified from National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database via the current procedural terminology (CPT) code. Patients were further identified and stratified based on International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-9/International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 diagnosis codes for primary OA (n = 115,166) and DDH (n = 603), which included codes for congenital hip dislocation, hip dysplasia, or juvenile osteochondrosis. Demographic variables were used to create 557 propensity-matched pairs. RESULTS: The DDH group was associated with a significantly longer operative time (120.3 vs 95.9 min), higher postoperative transfusion rate (12% vs 6.6%), and longer hospital length of stay (2.8 vs 2.5 days) compared with the primary OA group (P < .001, P < .001, and P = .002, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences found between the two groups with respect to inpatient complications, discharge disposition (P = .123), readmissions (P = .615), or reoperations (P = .404). CONCLUSIONS: Health policy makers should be cognizant of the higher complexity of THA for DDH when determining whether DDH and primary OA should be in the same bundle. Owing to the limitations of our data set, all the observed associations are likely an underestimate of the true risk posed to patients with severe DDH, as these patients were unable to be stratified in the present analysis.

Biomechanical Assessment of a Novel Posterior Soft Tissue Repair Technique in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Instability is one of the most common complications after total hip arthroplasty (THA), particularly when using the posterior approach. Repair of the posterior capsule has proven to significantly decrease the incidence of posterior hip dislocation. The purpose of the present study is to evaluate if a racking hitch knot utilizing a 2mm braided polyblend suture provides a stronger repair of the posterior soft tissues when compared to a traditional repair utilizing a non-absorbable suture after a posterior approach to the hip. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten cadaveric hips from donors, who were at a mean age of 80 ± 9 years old at the time of death, were evaluated after posterior soft tissue repair utilizing two different techniques. Five specimens were repaired utilizing a racking hitch knot with a 2mm braided polyblend suture (FiberTape®, Arthrex GmbH, Naples, Florida) and five other specimens were repaired with a traditional repair using a no. 2 non-absorable suture (FiberWire®, Arthrex GmbH, Naples, Florida). Cadaveric specimens were matched based upon age, sex, and laterality. Biomechanical tensile testing using the Instron E10000 Mechanical Testing System and the mechanisms of failure (MOF) were assessed. RESULTS: The ultimate load to failure was three times higher using braided polyblend sutures (390.00 ± 129.08 N) compared to non-absorbable sutures (122.81 ± 82.41 N) after posterior soft tissue repair (p<0.01). In the braided polyblend suture cohort, the mechanism of failure most commonly occurred as the braided suture pulled through the posterior soft tissues. However, in the non-absorbable suture repair, failure took place at the suture knot. CONCLUSION: The use of our posterior capsular repair utilizing a braided polyblend suture and racking hitch knot provides for a stronger repair of the posterior soft tissues when compared to non-absorbable suture repair following a posterior approach to the hip joint.