Readability Analysis of Patient Education Material on Rotator Cuff Injuries From the Top 25 Ranking Orthopaedic Institutions.

INTRODUCTION: Rotator cuff injuries (RCIs) are incredibly common in the US adult population. Forty-three percent of adults have basic or below-basic literacy levels; nonetheless, patient educational materials (PEMs) are frequently composed at levels exceeding these reading capabilities. This study investigates the readability of PEMs on RCIs published by leading US orthopaedic institutions. METHODS: The top 25 orthopaedic institutions on the 2022 U.S. News & World Report Best Hospitals Specialty Ranking were selected. Readability scores of PEMs related to RCI were calculated using the www.readabilityformulas.com website. RESULTS: Among the 25 analyzed PEM texts, all exceeded the sixth-grade reading level. Only four of 168 scores (2.4%) were below the eighth-grade level. DISCUSSION: This study indicates that PEMs on rotator cuff injuries from top orthopedic institutions are too complex for many Americans, with readability levels ranging from 8.5 to 16th grade, well above the CDC-recommended eighth-grade level. The research highlights a widespread issue with high reading levels across healthcare information and underscores the need for healthcare providers to adopt patient-centered communication strategies to improve comprehension and accessibility. CONCLUSION: PEMs on rotator cuff injuries from leading orthopedic institutions often have a reading level beyond that of many Americans, exceeding guidelines from the NIH and CDC that recommend PEMs be written at an eighth-grade reading level. To increase accessibility, enhance healthcare literacy, and improve patient outcomes, institutions should simplify these materials to meet recommended readability standards.

A comprehensive exploration of artificial intelligence in orthopaedics within lower-middle-income countries: a narrative review.

Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) in orthopaedic within lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) promises landmark improvement in patient care. Delving into specific use cases-fracture detection, spine imaging, bone tumour classification, and joint surgery optimisation-the review illuminates the areas where AI can significantly enhance orthopaedic practices. AI could play a pivotal role in improving diagnoses, enabling early detection, and ultimately enhancing patient outcomes- crucial in regions with constrained healthcare services. Challenges to the integration of AI include financial constraints, shortage of skilled professionals, data limitations, and cultural and ethical considerations. Emphasising AI's collaborative role, it can act as a complementary tool working in tandem with physicians, aiming to address gaps in healthcare access and education. We need continued research and a conscientious approach, envisioning AI as a catalyst for equitable, efficient, and accessible orthopaedic healthcare for patients in LMICs.

DORIS study: domestic violence in orthopaedics, a prospective cohort study at a Swedish hospital on the annual prevalence of domestic violence in orthopaedic emergency care.

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence (DV) is a major problem which despite many efforts persists globally. Victims of DV can present with various injuries, whereof musculoskeletal presentation is common. OBJECTIVES: The DORIS study (Domestic violence in ORthopaedIcS) aimed to establish the annual prevalence of DV at an orthopaedic emergency department (ED) in Sweden. DESIGN: Female adult patients with orthopaedic injuries seeking treatment at a tertiary orthopaedic centre between September 2021 and 2022 were screened during their ED visit. SETTING: This is a single-centre study at a tertiary hospital in Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: Adult female patients seeking care for acute orthopaedic injuries were eligible for the study. During the study period, 4192 female patients were provided with study forms and 1366 responded (32.5%). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was to establish the annual prevalence of injuries due to DV and second, to establish the rate of current experience of any type of DV. RESULTS: One in 14 had experience of current DV (n=100, 7.5%) and 1 in 65 (n=21, 1.5%) had an injury due to DV. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of DV found in the current study is comparable to international findings and adds to the growing body of evidence that it needs to be considered in clinical practice. It is important to raise awareness of DV, and frame strategies, as healthcare staff have a unique position to identify and offer intervention to DV victims.

[Considerable regional differences in patient injuries after primary hip and knee arthroplasty and between orthopedic departments depending on surgical volume]. / Regional skillnad i incidensen av skador efter ledprotesoperation.

Hip and knee arthroplasties are mostly successful procedures; however, patient injuries may occur and should be reported to Löf, the Swedish patient insurance. This study investigated the incidence of patient injuries after primary total hip and knee arthroplasty in the Swedish regions, differences in incidence depending on annual surgical volume, and types of approved injuries. Approved patient injuries were related to the total number of hip and knee arthroplasties registered in the Swedish Arthroplasty Register 2012-2021. The national incidence was 11.4 and 8.1 per 1,000 hip and knee arthroplasties respectively and varied in the regions from 30.4 to 4.9 and 15.4 to 5.4 per 1,000 hip and knee arthroplasties respectively. Orthopedic departments with higher annual volumes of performed arthroplasties had a lower proportion of patient injuries. Infection was the most common patient injury, followed by nerve lesions and mechanical complications. The differences may be due to underreporting and varying quality of care in the regions. A centralization of hip and knee arthroplasties may be beneficial.

Telehealth Visits have Lower Non-attendance than Traditional Orthopaedic Clinic Visits.

The use of telemedicine has rapidly expanded in the wake of the COVID pandemic, but its effect on patient attendance remains unknown for different clinicians. This study compared traditional in-clinic visits with telehealth visits by retrospectively reviewing all scheduled orthopaedic clinic visits. Results demonstrated lower rates of cancellations in patients scheduled for telehealth visits as compared to in-clinic visits, during the initial COVID pandemic. In general, physicians can expect a lower cancellation rate than non-physician practitioners.

Controversies in orthopaedic oncology.

Chondrosarcoma is the second most common surgically treated primary bone sarcoma. Despite a large number of scientific papers in the literature, there is still significant controversy about diagnostics, treatment of the primary tumour, subtypes, and complications. Therefore, consensus on its day-to-day treatment decisions is needed. In January 2024, the Birmingham Orthopaedic Oncology Meeting (BOOM) attempted to gain global consensus from 300 delegates from over 50 countries. The meeting focused on these critical areas and aimed to generate consensus statements based on evidence amalgamation and expert opinion from diverse geographical regions. In parallel, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in oncological reconstructions poses unique challenges due to factors such as adjuvant treatments, large exposures, and the complexity of surgery. The meeting debated two-stage revisions, antibiotic prophylaxis, managing acute PJI in patients undergoing chemotherapy, and defining the best strategies for wound management and allograft reconstruction. The objectives of the meeting extended beyond resolving immediate controversies. It sought to foster global collaboration among specialists attending the meeting, and to encourage future research projects to address unsolved dilemmas. By highlighting areas of disagreement and promoting collaborative research endeavours, this initiative aims to enhance treatment standards and potentially improve outcomes for patients globally. This paper sets out some of the controversies and questions that were debated in the meeting.

Pregnancy and infertility in orthopedics: A review of the current state.

BACKGROUND: Orthopedic surgery continues to have one of the lowest rates of female trainees among all medical specialties in the United States. Barriers to pursuing a surgical residency include the challenges of family planning and work-life balance during training. METHODS: A systematic literature search of articles published between June 2012 and December 2022 in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was performed in January 2023 according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis). Studies were included if they evaluated pregnancy and peripartum experience and/or outcomes amongst orthopedic surgeons or trainees. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included. Up to 67.3% of female orthopedic surgeons and trainees and 38.7% of their male counterparts delayed childbearing during residency. The most reported reasons for this delay included career choice as an orthopedic surgeon, residency training, and reputational concerns among faculty or co-residents. Infertility ranged from 17.0% to 30.4% in female orthopedic surgeons and up to 31.2% suffered obstetric complications. Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) resulted in 12.4%-56.3% of successful pregnancies. Maternity and paternity leaves ranged from 1 to 11 weeks for trainees with more negative attitudes associated with maternal leave. CONCLUSIONS: Female orthopedic trainees and attending delay childbearing, experience higher rates of obstetric complications, and more stigma associated with pregnancy compared to their male colleagues. Program and institutional policies regarding maternity and paternity leave are variable across programs, and therefore, attention should be directed toward standardizing policies.

Digital vs Conventional OSCE in Orthopedic Surgery: A Feasibility Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: Remote OSCEs (Objective Structured Clinical Examination) are an alternative evaluation method during pandemic periods but they have never been evaluated in orthopedic surgery. We aimed to evaluate whether remote OSCEs would be feasible, and efficient for assessment of undergraduate medical students. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed. Thirty-four students were randomly assigned into 2 equal groups, either the conventional OSCE group or the digital OSCE group. Three types of skills were assessed: technical procedure, clinical examination, and radiographic analysis. Students were graded and they filled in a satisfaction questionnaire for both types of OSCEs. RESULTS: The mean score, out of 20, was 14.3 ± 2.5 (range 9.3-19) for the digital sessions, versus 14.4 ± 2.3 (range 10-18.6) for conventional sessions (p = 0.81). Bland Altman Plot showed that 88% of students scored within agreement. The average global feedback was different for item repeatability, relevance, and OSCEs preference (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0001, and p < 0.0001 respectively). However, they did not report differences for the item concerning the organization (p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: The results of this comparative study between digital and conventional OSCEs showed comparable distance learning scores between the 2 groups, whatever the skill assessed. However, the student's evaluation showed some reticence to conduct again OSCEs remotely.

[Artificial intelligence and the extinction of the orthopedist]. / La inteligencia artificial y la extinción del ortopedista.

No Abstract available.

[Predatory journals in Orthopedics and Traumatology]. / Revistas depredadoras en Ortopedia y Traumatología.

Predatory journals are distinguished from legitimate journals by their lack of adequate reviews and editorial processes, compromising the quality of published content. These journals do not conduct peer reviews or detect plagiarism, and accept manuscripts without requiring substantial modifications. Their near 100% acceptance rate is driven by profit motives, regardless of the content they publish. While they boast a prestigious editorial board composed of renowned researchers, in most cases, it is a facade aimed at impressing and attracting investigators. Furthermore, these journals lack appropriate ethical practices and are non-transparent in their editorial processes. Predatory journals have impacted multiple disciplines, including Orthopedics and Traumatology, and their presence remains unknown to many researchers, making them unwitting victims. Their strategy involves soliciting articles via email from authors who have published in legitimate journals, promising quick, easy, and inexpensive publication. The implications and negative consequences of predatory journals on the scientific community and researchers are numerous. The purpose of this work is to provide general information about these journals, specifically in the field of Orthopedics and Traumatology, offering guidelines to identify and avoid them, so that authors can make informed decisions when publishing their manuscripts and avoid falling into the hands of predatory journals or publishers.

Las revistas depredadoras se diferencian de las revistas legítimas por su falta de adecuadas revisiones y procesos editoriales, lo que compromete la calidad del contenido publicado. Estas revistas no llevan a cabo revisiones por pares ni realizan acciones que detecten y prevengan el plagio y aceptan manuscritos sin exigir modificaciones sustanciales. Su tasa de aceptación cercana al 100% se debe a su enfoque lucrativo, sin importarles el contenido que publican. Aunque presumen tener un comité editorial compuesto por investigadores destacados, en la mayoría de los casos es una simulación destinada a impresionar y atraer a los investigadores. Además, estas revistas carecen de prácticas éticas adecuadas y no son transparentes en sus procesos editoriales. Las revistas depredadoras han afectado a múltiples disciplinas, incluida la Ortopedia y Traumatología y su presencia es aún desconocida para muchos investigadores, lo que los convierte en víctimas sin saberlo. Su estrategia consiste en solicitar artículos por correo electrónico a autores que han publicado en revistas legítimas, prometiendo una publicación rápida, sencilla y económica. Las implicaciones y consecuencias negativas de las revistas depredadoras en la comunidad científica y los investigadores son numerosas. El propósito de este trabajo es proporcionar información general sobre estas revistas y específicamente en el campo de la Ortopedia y Traumatología, brindando pautas para identificarlas y evitarlas, para que los autores puedan tomar decisiones informadas al publicar sus manuscritos y evitar caer en manos de revistas o editoriales depredadoras.

Protecting Orthopaedic Implants from Infection: Antimicrobial Peptide Mel4 Is Non-Toxic to Bone Cells and Reduces Bacterial Colonisation When Bound to Plasma Ion-Implanted 3D-Printed PAEK Polymers.

Even with the best infection control protocols in place, the risk of a hospital-acquired infection of the surface of an implanted device remains significant. A bacterial biofilm can form and has the potential to escape the host immune system and develop resistance to conventional antibiotics, ultimately causing the implant to fail, seriously impacting patient well-being. Here, we demonstrate a 4 log reduction in the infection rate by the common pathogen S. aureus of 3D-printed polyaryl ether ketone (PAEK) polymeric surfaces by covalently binding the antimicrobial peptide Mel4 to the surface using plasma immersion ion implantation (PIII) treatment. The surfaces with added texture created by 3D-printed processes such as fused deposition-modelled polyether ether ketone (PEEK) and selective laser-sintered polyether ketone (PEK) can be equally well protected as conventionally manufactured materials. Unbound Mel4 in solution at relevant concentrations is non-cytotoxic to osteoblastic cell line Saos-2. Mel4 in combination with PIII aids Saos-2 cells to attach to the surface, increasing the adhesion by 88% compared to untreated materials without Mel4. A reduction in mineralisation on the Mel4-containing surfaces relative to surfaces without peptide was found, attributed to the acellular portion of mineral deposition.

ChatGPT-4 generates orthopedic discharge documents faster than humans maintaining comparable quality: a pilot study of 6 cases.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Large language models like ChatGPT-4 have emerged. They hold the potential to reduce the administrative burden by generating everyday clinical documents, thus allowing the physician to spend more time with the patient. We aimed to assess both the quality and efficiency of discharge documents generated by ChatGPT-4 in comparison with those produced by physicians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To emulate real-world situations, the health records of 6 fictional orthopedic cases were created. Discharge documents for each case were generated by a junior attending orthopedic surgeon and an advanced orthopedic resident. ChatGPT-4 was then prompted to generate the discharge documents using the same health record information. The quality assessment was performed by an expert panel (n = 15) blinded to the source of the documents. As secondary outcome, the time required to generate the documents was compared, logging the duration of the creation of the discharge documents by the physician and by ChatGPT-4. RESULTS: Overall, both ChatGPT-4 and physician-generated notes were comparable in quality. Notably, ChatGPT-4 generated discharge documents 10 times faster than the traditional method. 4 events of hallucinations were found in the ChatGPT-4-generated content, compared with 6 events in the human/physician produced notes. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT-4 creates orthopedic discharge notes faster than physicians, with comparable quality. This shows it has great potential for making these documents more efficient in orthopedic care. ChatGPT-4 has the potential to significantly reduce the administrative burden on healthcare professionals.

Opioid utilization after orthopaedic trauma hospitalization among Medicaid-insured adults.

Opioids are vital to pain management and sedation after trauma-related hospitalization. However, there are many confounding clinical, social, and environmental factors that exacerbate pain, post-injury care needs, and receipt of opioid prescriptions following orthopaedic trauma. This retrospective study sought to characterize differences in opioid prescribing and dosing in a national Medicaid eligible sample from 2010-2018. The study population included adults, discharged after orthopaedic trauma hospitalization, and receiving an opioid prescription within 30 days of discharge. Patients were identified using the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9; ICD-10) codes for inpatient diagnosis and procedure. Filled opioid prescriptions were identified from National Drug Codes and converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Opioid receipt and dosage (e.g., morphine milligram equivalents [MME]) were examined as the main outcomes using regressions and analyzed by year, sex, race/ethnicity, residence rurality-urbanicity, and geographic region. The study population consisted of 86,091 injured Medicaid-enrolled adults; 35.3% received an opioid prescription within 30 days of discharge. Male patients (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.07-1.18) and those between 31-50 years of age (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08-1.22) were found to have increased odds ratio of receiving an opioid within 30 days of discharge, compared to female and younger patients, respectively. Patients with disabilities (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.71-0.80), prolonged hospitalizations, and both Black (OR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83-0.92) and Hispanic patients (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.66-0.77), relative to white patients, had lower odds ratio of receiving an opioid prescription following trauma. Additionally, Black and Hispanic patients received lower prescription doses compared to white patients. Individuals hospitalized in the Southeastern United States and those between the ages of 51-65 age group were found to be prescribed lower average daily MME. There were significant variations in opioid prescribing practices by race, sex, and region. National guidelines for use of opioids and other pain management interventions in adults after trauma hospitalization may help limit practice variation and reduce implicit bias and potential harms in outpatient opioid usage.