The Prevalence of Unanticipated Hamate Hook Abnormalities in Computed Tomography Scans: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: It is possible that some hamate hook fractures are not diagnosed or treated, thereby affecting the study of their natural history. Study of the prevalence of incidental hamate hook fractures, nonunions, and other abnormalities on computed tomography (CT) ordered for another reason could document a subset of undiagnosed and untreated hamate hook fractures which might change our understanding about the natural history. METHODS: Reports of 2489 hand, wrist, and forearm CT scans for hamate hook abnormalities were searched. We excluded 19 patients with anticipated hamate fractures and 1 patient that had a hamate hook excision. Twenty-eight patients had an unanticipated hamate hook abnormality. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the prevalence of incidental hamate hook abnormalities by sex but not by age. Among the 28 unexpected hamate hook abnormalities, there were 16 fractures of the base (12 acute, 1 nonunion, and 3 of uncertain age), 5 acute oblique fractures, and 7 tip abnormalities/ossicles. The patient with an incidental nonunion had a CT scan for wrist pain and was diagnosed with gout. All fractures involved a direct blow to the hand (distal radius or scaphoid fracture, or crush injury). The 7 patients with a hamate tip abnormality had a CT scan for a distal radius or metacarpal fracture, crush injury or wrist pain. Five acute fractures were treated operatively with excision and the other 23 fractures were treated nonoperatively. CONCLUSION: Hamate fractures can be diagnosed incidental to other hand and wrist problems on CT.

Patient Complaints Emphasize Non-Technical Aspects of Care at a Tertiary Referral Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Patient concerns represent opportunities for improvement in orthopaedic care. This study's objective is to identify the nature and prevalence of unsolicited patient complaints regarding orthopaedic care at a tertiary referral hospital. The primary null hypothesis that there are no demographic factors associated with complaint types was tested. Secondarily we determined if the overall complaint number and types differed by year. METHODS: Complaints to the hospital ombudsperson by orthopaedic patients between January 1997 and June 2013 were reviewed. All 1118 complaints were categorized: access and availability, humaneness and disrespect, communication, expectations of care and treatment, distrust, billing and research. RESULTS: Patients between 40 and 60 years of age filed the most complaints in all categories except distrust (more common in patients over age 80) and research. Women were slightly more likely to address access and availability, humaneness, disrespect, and billing compared to men. The overall number of complaints peaked in 1999. The most common issue was access and availability followed by communication, and humaneness/disrespect. CONCLUSION: Half of concerns voiced by patients addressed interpersonal issues. The largest category was related to access and availability. Quality improvement efforts can address technology to improve access and availability as well as empathy and communication strategies.

The Correlation Between a Numerical Rating Scale of Patient Satisfaction With Current Management of an Upper Extremity Disorder and a General Measure of Satisfaction With the Medical Visit.

Background: Patient satisfaction is used as an indicator of quality of care, but the measures currently available are lengthy and cumbersome and may not be feasible in orthopedic surgical practices. We set out to assess the relationship between the Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale (MISS-21) and a numerical rating scale (NRS) of patient satisfaction with current management of an orthopedic upper extremity condition. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 86 patients from the practices of 2 hand surgeons were included during an initial or follow-up visit. Questionnaires assessing demographics, upper extremity specific disability, pain during rest and activity, satisfaction with the medical visits (MISS-21), and satisfaction with current management of an orthopedic upper extremity condition (NRS satisfaction) were completed. Results: Eighty-six patients completed all questionnaires. A small correlation of .21 (P = .050) was found between the MISS-21 and the NRS satisfaction. In bivariate analysis, NRS pain at rest and during activity had small correlations with the MISS-21 (-.29, P = .05 and -.23, P = .034) and with NRS satisfaction (-.27, P = .011 and -0.27, P = 0.012). Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) had a small correlation with NRS satisfaction (-0.023, P ≤ 0.001), but did not correlate with MISS-21. Conclusions: Although there is small overlap about the 2 satisfaction measures, a complex patient satisfaction questionnaire consisting of multiple facets of patient satisfaction like MISS-21 is not replaceable by 1 simple NRS patient satisfaction question.

Assessment of Decisional Conflict about the Treatment of Trigger Finger, Comparing Patients and Physicians.

BACKGROUND: As an early step in the development of a decision aid for idiopathic trigger finger (TF) we were interested in the level of decisional conflict experienced by patients and hand surgeons. This study tested the null hypothesis that there is no difference in decisional conflict between patients with one or more idiopathic trigger fingers and hand surgeons. Secondary analyses address the differences between patients and surgeons regarding the influence of the DCS-subcategories on the level of decisional conflict, as well as the influence of patient and physician demographics, the level of self-efficacy, and satisfaction with care on decisional conflict. METHODS: One hundred and five hand surgeon-members of the Science of Variation Group (SOVG) and 84 patients with idiopathic TF completed the survey regarding the Decisional Conflict Scale. Patients also filled out the Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) and the Patient Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9). RESULTS: On average, patients had decisional conflict comparable to physicians, but by specific category patients felt less informed and supported than physicians. The only factors associated with greater decisional conflict was the relationship between the patient and doctor. CONCLUSIONS: There is a low, but measurable level of decisional conflict among patients and surgeons regarding idiopathic trigger finger. Studies testing the ability of decision aids to reduce decisional conflict and improve patient empowerment and satisfaction with care are merited.

Factors associated with pain intensity and physical limitations after lateral ankle sprains.

BACKGROUND: Swelling, tenderness, and ecchymosis don't correlate with time to functional recovery in patients with a lateral ankle sprain. It is established that psychosocial factors such as symptoms of depression and low pain self-efficacy correlate with pain intensity and magnitude of limitations in patients with musculoskeletal disorders. OBJECTIVE: We studied the correlation between pain self-efficacy or symptoms of depression and (1) ankle specific limitations and (2) pain intensity in patients with a lateral ankle sprain. Further we explored the correlation between estimation of sprain severity (grade) and (3) pain intensity or magnitude of ankle specific limitations. DESIGN: Eighty-four patients with a lateral ankle sprain prospectively completed the Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire, the Olerud Molander Ankle Score, Ordinal scale of Pain and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 at enrollment and the Olerud Molander Ankle Score and the Ordinal scale of Pain three weeks after the injury. Factors associated with higher ankle specific limitations and symptoms were investigated in bivariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: When accounting for confounding factors, greater self-efficacy (p=0.01) and older age (p<0.01) were significantly associated with greater ankle specific symptoms and limitations three weeks after the injury and explained 22% of the variability in ankle specific limitations and symptoms. There was no correlation between the grade of the sprain and pain intensity or ankle specific limitations or symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial factors (adaptiveness in response to pain in particular) explain more of the variation in symptoms and limitations after ankle sprain than the degree of pathophysiology. The influence of adaptive illness descriptions and recovery strategies based on methods for improving self-efficacy (i.e. cognitive behavioral therapy) might enhance and speed recovery from ankle injuries and merit additional investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2 prospective cohort study.

Discrete Pathophysiology is Uncommon in Patients with Nonspecific Arm Pain.

BACKGROUND: Nonspecific symptoms are common in all areas of medicine. Patients and caregivers can be frustrated when an illness cannot be reduced to a discrete pathophysiological process that corresponds with the symptoms. We therefore asked the following questions: 1) Which demographic factors and psychological comorbidities are associated with change from an initial diagnosis of nonspecific arm pain to eventual identification of discrete pathophysiology that corresponds with symptoms? 2) What is the percentage of patients eventually diagnosed with discrete pathophysiology, what are those pathologies, and do they account for the symptoms? METHODS: We evaluated 634 patients with an isolated diagnosis of nonspecific upper extremity pain to see if discrete pathophysiology was diagnosed on subsequent visits to the same hand surgeon, a different hand surgeon, or any physician within our health system for the same pain. RESULTS: There were too few patients with discrete pathophysiology at follow-up to address the primary study question. Definite discrete pathophysiology that corresponded with the symptoms was identified in subsequent evaluations by the index surgeon in one patient (0.16% of all patients) and cured with surgery (nodular fasciitis). Subsequent doctors identified possible discrete pathophysiology in one patient and speculative pathophysiology in four patients and the index surgeon identified possible discrete pathophysiology in four patients, but the five discrete diagnoses accounted for only a fraction of the symptoms. CONCLUSION: Nonspecific diagnoses are not harmful. Prospective randomized research is merited to determine if nonspecific, descriptive diagnoses are better for patients than specific diagnoses that imply pathophysiology in the absence of discrete verifiable pathophysiology.

Progression of Heterotopic Ossification around the Elbow after Trauma.

BACKGROUND: This study addresses the null hypothesis that there is no expansion of heterotopic ossification (HO) in the elbow beyond what can be seen early on. METHODS: The area of HO was measured on lateral radiographs of 38 consecutive patients that had operative treatment of HO between 2000 and 2013. Measurements from radiographs obtained between 3 to 7 weeks were compared to measurements from radiographs made 3 months or more after injury. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the average area of HO on the first (median 2.8 square centimeters, Q1: 1.5, Q3: 5.1) and later radiographs (median of 2.8 square centimeters, Q1: 1.4, Q3: 5.0) (P = 0.99). CONCLUSION: According to our results the area of HO does not expand beyond what can be seen early in the disease process.

Is Social Support Associated With Upper Extremity Disability?

BACKGROUND: Pain intensity and disability correlate with psychosocial factors such as depression and pain interference (the degree to which pain interferes with activities of daily living) as much or more than pathophysiology in upper extremity illness. However, other factors like emotional support (perception of being cared for and valued as a person), instrumental support (perception of availability of tangible assistance when needed), positive psychosocial impact (perception and focus on the positive side of a difficult situation, sometimes characterized as posttraumatic growth, benefit-finding, or meaning making), also might be associated with disability in patients with upper extremity orthopaedic illness. This is the first published study, to our knowledge, addressing the potential association of emotional support, instrumental support, and positive psychosocial illness impact with disability in patients with upper extremity illness. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked: (1) Is there a correlation between the QuickDASH and the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)) emotional support Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT)? (2) Is there a correlation between the QuickDASH and PROMIS(®) instrumental support CAT? (3) Is there a correlation between the QuickDASH and PROMIS(®) positive psychosocial illness impact CAT? (4) Among the PROMIS(®) measures of depression, emotional support, instrumental support, positive illness impact, and pain interference, which accounts for the most variance in QuickDASH scores? METHODS: One hundred ninety-three patients with upper extremity illness (55% women; average age, 51 ± 18 years) of 213 approached (91% recruitment rate) completed the QuickDASH, and five different PROMIS(®) CATs: pain interference (the degree to which pain interferes with accomplishing one's goals), depression, emotional support, psychosocial illness impact, and instrumental support. We recruited patients from the practice of three surgeons in hand service of the department of orthopaedic surgery at a major urban university hospital. RESULTS: Pearson Product Moment Correlations showed that emotional support (r = -0.18; p = 0.014) and instrumental support (r = -0.19; p = 0.008) were weakly and inversely associated with the QuickDASH), while positive psychosocial illness impact was moderately and inversely associated with the QuickDASH (r = -0.36; p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, pain interference, but not the social support measures, was the only psychosocial factor associated with the QuickDASH and alone explained 66% of variance. CONCLUSIONS: Emotional support, instrumental support and positive psychosocial illness impact are all individually associated with disability to a small degree, but pain interference (the degree to which pain interferes with accomplishing one's goals) has the strongest influence on magnitude of disability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1, prognostic study.

Factors Associated With Met Expectations in Patients With Hand and Upper Extremity Disorders: A Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: The degree to which patients' expectations are met during an office visit consistently correlates with patients' satisfaction, whereas the relationship between previsit expectations and satisfaction varies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this pilot study was to preliminarily assess the relationship of psychosocial factors, pain intensity, and magnitude of disability to previsit expectations, met expectations, and satisfaction with medical care in patients with hand and upper extremity conditions in a surgical outpatient clinic. METHODS: A cohort of 85 outpatients with upper extremity illnesses indicated their previsit expectations (Patients Intention Questionnaire), degree to which these expectations were met (Expectations Met Questionnaire), level of depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-2), confidence about the ability to achieve one's goals in spite of pain (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire), pain intensity (Numerical Rating Scale for pain), disability (Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand, short version; QuickDASH), and satisfaction with the medical visit (Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale). RESULTS: Higher previsit expectations were associated with more depressive symptoms, lower pain self-efficacy, higher pain intensity, and fewer years of education. Patients in the low and moderate met expectations categories had significantly more symptoms of depression, fewer years of education, and more pain compared to those in the high-met expectations category. Fewer years of education and higher pain intensity predicted higher previsit expectations and explained 19% of variance. CONCLUSION: Psychosocial factors affect both previsit expectations and met expectations during an outpatient visit to a hand surgeon. Met expectations, but not previsit expectations, affect satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level II.

Quantitative three-dimensional computed tomography analysis of glenoid fracture patterns according to the AO/OTA classification.

HYPOTHESIS/BACKGROUND: This study measures the characteristics of glenoid fractures to determine if the AO Foundation and Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification captures the most common fracture patterns. The primary null hypothesis was that surface area and degree of fragmentation do not differ among the different fracture types. Secondarily, we tested if there was a relationship between high- vs. low-energy trauma and fracture classification. METHODS: Three-dimensional models were created for a consecutive series of 53 fractures. The fracture classifications, the number of fragments, and the fragmented articular surface area were related to the type of injury. The difference of articular surface size and number of fragments among classification groups was analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: There is a significant difference in fractured articular surface area among classification groups. Compared with transverse and multifragmented fractures, both anterior and posterior fractures involved significantly less of the articular surface area. High-energy trauma is associated with transverse and multifragmented fractures in 93% of the cases. It is associated with a greater number of fracture fragments and fracture of a larger percentage of the glenoid surface area, with a mean fractured surface of 60% for high-energy fractures and 25% for low-energy injuries. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Quantitative 3-dimensional CT analysis confirms that the current AO/OTA classification adequately characterizes and discriminates glenoid fracture patterns. The classification groups are related to the fragmented articular surface area and the number of fragments. Also, the mechanism of injury is related to the classification group, which supports the clinical relevance of the classification.

Internet self-diagnosis in hand surgery.

BACKGROUND: Some Internet sites have programs that attempt to help patients find their diagnosis based on symptoms. This study tested the null hypothesis that there are no factors associated with correspondence between online diagnosis and the hand surgeon's diagnosis in an outpatient hand and upper extremity surgeons' office. METHODS: Eighty-six outpatients were prospectively enrolled and used WebMD® symptom checker to guess their diagnosis. We collected demographic information, hours spent on the Internet per week, and the following questionnaires: Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and Center of Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale (C-ESD). RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of online diagnoses matched the final diagnosis of the hand surgeon. Factors associated with an online diagnosis corresponding to the hand surgeon's diagnosis included sex (women) and patients who studied their symptoms online prior to the visit. The best multivariable model included sex, more years of education, and prior use of the Internet to research their medical condition and explained 15 % of the variation in correspondence of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of online diagnoses for hand and upper extremity conditions do not correspond with the diagnosis of the treating hand surgeon. Psychological factors do not influence the correspondence of online diagnosis with the hand surgeon's diagnosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level II.

Quantitative 3-dimensional CT analyses of fractures of the middle phalanx base.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative 3-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) analyses can provide a more detailed understanding of fracture morphology. For fracture-dislocation of the proximal interphalangeal joint, the extent of fragmentation of the volar lip of the middle phalanx-a factor that might influence treatment-is not always apparent from radiographs. We hypothesized that there is no correlation between number of fracture fragments and the percentage of articular surface area involved in intra-articular fractures of the base of the middle phalanx using quantitative 3DCT analyses. METHODS: We used 13 computed tomography scans with a slice thickness of 1.25 mm or less to create 3-dimensional models of 15 intra-articular fractures of the base of the middle phalanx in 13 patients. We resized 3-dimensional models of a non-fractured middle phalanx of the same hand to fit the fractured middle phalanx in order to approximate the size and shape of the fractured middle phalanx in its pre-injury state. We created a heatmap to demonstrate the location of the fractured articular surface. RESULTS: With the number of scans available, we did not find a significant correlation between the percentage of articular surface area involved and the number of fracture fragments. The median percentage of articular surface area involved was 46 % (range, 21-90 %). The heatmap demonstrated that the radio-volar side of the articular surface seems to be more involved than the ulnar-volar side in intra-articular fractures of the base of the middle phalanx. CONCLUSION: Quantitative 3DCT analysis of fracture fragments provides useful information that could facilitate surgery and analysis of complex fractures of the base of the middle phalanx. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, Basic Science Study, Anatomic Study, Imaging.

Do Upper Extremity Trauma Patients Have Different Preferences for Shared Decision-making Than Patients With Nontraumatic Conditions?

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making is a combination of expertise, available scientific evidence, and the preferences of the patient and surgeon. Some surgeons contend that patients are less capable of participating in decisions about traumatic conditions than nontraumatic conditions. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do patients with nontraumatic conditions have different preferences for shared decision-making when compared with those who sustained acute trauma? (2) Do disability, symptoms of depression, and self-efficacy correlate with preference for shared decision-making? METHODS: In this prospective, comparative trial, we evaluated a total of 133 patients presenting to the outpatient practices of two university-based hand surgeons with traumatic or nontraumatic hand and upper extremity illnesses or conditions. Each patient completed questionnaires measuring their preferred role in healthcare decision-making (Control Preferences Scale [CPS]), symptoms of depression (Patients' Health Questionnaire), and pain self-efficacy (confidence that one can achieve one's goals despite pain; measured using the Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire). Patients also completed a short version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire and an ordinal rating of pain intensity. RESULTS: There was no difference in decision-making preferences between patients with traumatic (CPS: 3 ± 2) and nontraumatic conditions (CPS: 3 ± 1 mean difference = 0.2 [95% confidence interval, -0.4 to 0.7], p = 0.78) with most patients (95 versus 38) preferring shared decision-making. More educated patients preferred a more active role in decision-making (beta = -0.1, r = 0.08, p = 0.001); however, differences in levels of disability, pain and function, depression, and pain-related self-efficacy were not associated with differences in patients' preferences in terms of shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who sustained trauma have on average the same preference for shared decision-making compared with patients who sustained no trauma. Now that we know the findings of this study, clinicians might be motivated to share their expertise about the treatment options, potential outcomes, benefits, and harms with the patient and to discuss their preference as well in a semiacute setting, resulting in a shared decision.

Shared Decision-Making in Surgery.

Medical treatment of patients always entails the risk of undesired complications or side effects. This is particularly poignant in surgery as both the disease to be treated and the surgical intervention to be performed can be life threatening. Hence, it is essential to inform a surgical patient in detail about the expectations desired, but also the possible undesired outcomes and complications, especially when new surgical techniques are introduced. Apart from communication about available evidence regarding treatment options, the patient's preference needs to be invoked to make sure the surgeon's advice matches the patient's preference. Shared decision-making (SDM) invokes the bidirectional communication between physicians and patients required to involve the patient's preference in the eventual treatment choice. SDM is considered as an essential part of evidence-based medicine as it helps determine whether the available evidence on the possible benefits and harms of treatment options match the patient's characteristics and preferences. This paper will exemplify what SDM is, why it is important, and how it can be performed in surgical practice. Several tools to facilitate SDM are presented.

Does verbal and nonverbal communication of pain correlate with disability?

BACKGROUND: Illness (symptoms and disability) consistently correlates more with coping strategies and symptoms of depression than with pathophysiology or impairment. OBJECTIVE: This study tested the primary null hypothesis that there is no correlation between verbal and nonverbal communication of pain (pain behavior) and upper extremity-specific disability in patients with hand and upper extremity illness. METHODS: A total of 139 new and followed up adult patients completed the QuickDASH, an ordinal rating of pain, and 4 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Computer Adaptive Testing instruments: (1) PROMIS pain behavior, (2) PROMIS pain interference (measuring the degree to which pain interferes with achieving ones physical goals), (3) PROMIS physical function, and (4) PROMIS depression. RESULTS: Factors associated with a higher QuickDASH score in bivariate analysis included a higher PROMIS pain behavior score, not working, being separated/divorced or widowed, having sought treatment before, having other pain conditions, a higher PROMIS pain interference score, a higher PROMIS depression score, and lower education level. The final multivariable model of factors associated with QuickDASH included PROMIS pain interference, having other pain conditions, and being separated/divorced or widowed, and it explained 64% of the variability. CONCLUSION: PROMIS pain behavior (verbal and nonverbal communication of pain) correlates with upper extremity disability, but PROMIS pain interference (the degree to which pain interferes with activity) is a more important factor. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, cross-sectional study.

Opioid Use, Satisfaction, and Pain Intensity After Orthopedic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients in other countries use fewer opioids than patients in the United States with satisfactory pain relief. OBJECTIVE: This study tested the null hypothesis that opioid intake after orthopedic surgery does not influence satisfaction with pain management. METHODS: A total of 232 orthopedic surgical inpatients completed measures of pain self-efficacy and symptoms of depression at enrollment and commonly used measures of pain intensity, satisfaction with pain relief, and satisfaction with hospital staff attention to pain approximately 14 days after surgery. Inpatient opioid intake per 24-hour period was quantified. RESULTS: At a phone evaluation approximately 2 weeks after discharge from the hospital, patients who were always satisfied with their pain relief in hospital and always satisfied with staff attention to pain used significantly less opioids on day 1 compared with patients who were not always satisfied. There were no differences in satisfaction by type of surgery. The final multivariable model for not always satisfied with pain relief included greater opioid use on day 1 (odds ratio = 1.2), and preadmission diagnosis of depression (odds ratio = 2.6). Greater opioid use on day 1 was the only factor associated with less than always satisfied with the staff attention to pain relief (odds ratio = 1.3). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who take more opioids report less satisfaction with pain relief and greater pain intensity. Evidence-based interventions to increase self-efficacy merit additional study for the management of postoperative pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, Level 1.

Do 360-degree feedback survey results relate to patient satisfaction measures?

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that feedback from 360-degree surveys-combined with coaching-can improve physician team performance and quality of patient care. The Physicians Universal Leadership-Teamwork Skills Education (PULSE) 360 is one such survey tool that is used to assess work colleagues' and coworkers' perceptions of a physician's leadership, teamwork, and clinical practice style. The Clinician & Group-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and System (CG-CAHPS), developed by the US Department of Health and Human Services to serve as the benchmark for quality health care, is a survey tool for patients to provide feedback that is based on their recent experiences with staff and clinicians and soon will be tied to Medicare-based compensation of participating physicians. Prior research has indicated that patients and coworkers often agree in their assessment of physicians' behavioral patterns. The goal of the current study was to determine whether 360-degree, also called multisource, feedback provided by coworkers could predict patient satisfaction/experience ratings. A significant relationship between these two forms of feedback could enable physicians to take a more proactive approach to reinforce their strengths and identify any improvement opportunities in their patient interactions by reviewing feedback from team members. An automated 360-degree software process may be a faster, simpler, and less resource-intensive approach than telephoning and interviewing patients for survey responses, and it potentially could facilitate a more rapid credentialing or quality improvement process leading to greater fiscal and professional development gains for physicians. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Our primary research question was to determine if PULSE 360 coworkers' ratings correlate with CG-CAHPS patients' ratings of overall satisfaction, recommendation of the physician, surgeon respect, and clarity of the surgeon's explanation. Our secondary research questions were to determine whether CG-CAHPS scores correlate with additional composite scores from the Quality PULSE 360 (eg, insight impact score, focus concerns score, leadership-teamwork index score, etc). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed existing quality improvement data from CG-CAHPS patient surveys as well as from a department quality improvement initiative using 360-degree survey feedback questionnaires (Quality PULSE 360 with coworkers). Bivariate analyses were conducted to identify significant relationships for inclusion of research variables in multivariate linear analyses (eg, stepwise regression to determine the best fitting predictive model for CG-CAHPS ratings). In all higher order analyses, CG-CAHPS ratings were treated as the dependent variables, whereas PULSE 360 scores served as independent variables. This approach led to the identification of the most predictive linear model for each CG-CAHPS' performance rating (eg, [1] overall satisfaction; [2] recommendation of the physician; [3] surgeon respect; and [4] clarity of the surgeon's explanation) regressed on all PULSE scores with which there was a significant bivariate relationship. Backward stepwise regression was then used to remove unnecessary predictors from the linear model based on changes in the variance explained by the model with or without inclusion of the predictor. RESULTS: The Quality PULSE 360 insight impact score correlated with patient satisfaction (0.50, p = 0.01), patient recommendation (0.58, p = 0.002), patient rating of surgeon respect (0.74, p < 0.001), and patient impression of clarity of the physician explanation (0.69, p < 0.001). Additionally, leadership-teamwork index also correlated with patient rating of surgeon respect (0.46, p = 0.019) and patient impression of clarity of the surgeon's explanation (0.39, p = 0.05). Multivariate analyses supported retention of insight impact as a predictor of patient overall satisfaction, patient recommendation of the surgeon, and patient rating of surgeon respect. Both insight impact and leadership-teamwork index were retained as predictors of patient impression of explanation. Several other PULSE 360 variables were correlated with CG-CAHPS ratings, but none were retained in the linear models post stepwise regression. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between Quality PULSE 360 feedback scores and measures of patient satisfaction reaffirm that feedback from work team members may provide helpful information into how patients may be perceiving their physicians' behavior and vice versa. Furthermore, the findings provide tentative support for the use of team-based feedback to improve the quality of relationships with both coworkers and patients. The 360-degree survey process may offer an effective tool for physicians to obtain feedback about behavior that could directly impact practice reimbursement and reputation or potentially be used for bonuses to incentivize better team professionalism and patient satisfaction, ie, "pay-for-professionalism." Further research is needed to expand on this line of inquiry, determine which interventions can improve 360-degree and patient satisfaction scores, and explain the shared variance in physician performance that is captured in the perceptions of patients and coworkers.

Do previsit expectations correlate with satisfaction of new patients presenting for evaluation with an orthopaedic surgical practice?

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is associated with increased compliance, improved treatment outcomes, and decreased risk of litigation. Factors such as patient understanding and psychological well-being are recognized influences on satisfaction. Less is known about the relationship between previsit expectations and satisfaction. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Are there correlations among previsit expectations, met expectations, and patient satisfaction? (2) What are the categories of expectations, and which one(s) correlate with satisfaction? METHODS: Eighty-six new patients presenting to a hand surgery practice of a tertiary referral hospital with 70% direct primary care referrals, mostly with elective concerns, indicated their previsit expectations (Patient Intention Questionnaire [PIQ]). Immediately after the visit, the same patients rated the degree to which their previsit expectations were met (Expectation Met Questionnaire [EMQ]) and their satisfaction level (Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale). These tools have been used in primary care office settings and claim good psychometric properties, and although they have not been strictly validated for responsiveness and other test parameters, they have good face validity. We then conducted a multivariable backward linear regression to determine whether (1) scores on the PIQ; and (2) scores on the EMQ are associated with satisfaction. RESULTS: Satisfaction correlated with met expectations (r=0.36; p<0.001) but not with previsit expectations (r=-0.01, p=0.94). We identified five primary categories of previsit expectations that accounted for 50% of the variance in PIQ: (1) "Information and Explanation"; (2) "Emotional and Understanding"; (3) "Emotional Problems"; (4) "Diagnostics"; and (5) "Comforting". The only category of met expectations that correlated with satisfaction was Information and Explanation (r=0.43; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients seeing a hand surgeon, met expectations correlate with satisfaction. In particular, patients with met expectations regarding information and explanation were more satisfied with their visit. Efforts to determine the most effective methods for conveying unexpected information warrant investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study.

Patients with greater symptom intensity and more disability are more likely to be surprised by a hand surgeon's advice.

BACKGROUND: A clash between a patient's assumptions and a doctor's advice can feel adversarial which might influence satisfaction ratings and compliance with treatment recommendations. A better understanding of sources of patients' bewilderment might lead to improved strategies for conveying counterintuitive information that improve patient comfort and wellbeing. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study addressed the following questions: (1) Are magnitude of disability, pain intensity, symptoms of depression, or health anxiety associated with a higher level of surprise when a patient is presented with diagnostic information and/or therapeutic recommendations? (2) Does the surgeon accurately perceive the patient's bewilderment? (3) Does the surgeon's perception of patient bewilderment correlate with diagnosis or a patient's magnitude of disability, pain intensity, symptoms of depression, or health anxiety? PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we invited new patients who met prespecified criteria during a 3-month period in one hand-surgery practice to enroll; of 93 patients invited, 84 (90%) agreed to participate. Patients reported demographics and completed the short versions of the DASH questionnaire (QuickDASH), the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, and the Short Health Anxiety Inventory; rated their pain intensity; and rated the degree to which the information given by the surgeon was unexpected or surprising on an 11-point ordinal scale. The surgeon also rated his impression of the patient's surprise on an 11-point ordinal scale. RESULTS: Only greater symptom intensity and magnitude of disability (QuickDASH) correlated with greater unexpected information when rated by the patient (ß = 0.058; p < 0.001). There was a correlation between patient surprise and the surgeon's perception of the patient's surprise (r = 0.58; p < 0.001). Greater surgeon-perceived patient surprise correlated with nonspecific illness (p = 0.007; ß = 3.0). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with greater symptom intensity and magnitude of disability, and perhaps also patients with nonspecific diagnoses, are more likely to be surprised by a hand surgeon's advice. Future research might address the ability of previsit preparation (using decision aids or other alternative means of education) to ameliorate the discordance between patient assumptions and hand surgeon advice.

The factors influencing the decision making of operative treatment for proximal humeral fractures.

BACKGROUND: The factors influencing the decision making of operative treatment for fractures of the proximal humerus are debated. We hypothesized that there is no difference in treatment recommendations between surgeons shown radiographs alone and those shown radiographs and patient information. Secondarily, we addressed (1) factors associated with a recommendation for operative treatment, (2) factors associated with recommendation for arthroplasty, (3) concordance with the recommendations of the treating surgeons, and (4) factors affecting the inter-rater reliability of treatment recommendations. METHODS: A total of 238 surgeons of the Science of Variation Group rated 40 radiographs of patients with proximal humerus fractures. Participants were randomized to receive information about the patient and mechanism of injury. The response variables included the choice of treatment (operative vs nonoperative) and the percentage of matches with the actual treatment. RESULTS: Participants who received patient information recommended operative treatment less than those who received no information. The patient information that had the greatest influence on treatment recommendations included age (55%) and fracture mechanism (32%). The only other factor associated with a recommendation for operative treatment was region of practice. There was no significant difference between participants who were and were not provided with information regarding agreement with the actual treatment (operative vs nonoperative) provided by the treating surgeon. CONCLUSION: Patient information-older age in particular-is associated with a higher likelihood of recommending nonoperative treatment than radiographs alone. Clinical information did not improve agreement of the Science of Variation Group with the actual treatment or the generally poor interobserver agreement on treatment recommendations.