Training the New Generations of Orthopaedic Surgery Residents: Understanding Generational Differences to Maximize Educational Benefit.

ABSTRACT: Most of the current orthopaedic residents are considered Millennials (born between 1981 and 1996) and are often trained by attending surgeons who are from Generation X (born between 1965 and 1980) or the Baby Boomer generation (born between 1946 and 1964). The Generation X orthopaedic surgeons were largely trained by Baby Boomers who were very demanding of their trainees and expected excellence. The Baby Boomers had been inspired, mentored, and trained by the Greatest Generation (born between 1901 and 1927). Baby Boomers took nothing for granted and nothing was given to them on a silver platter. Generation X was trained under these premises and was expected to abide by similar values. Regarding the next generation of residents, current faculty hope to instill the same qualities that had been instilled in them during their training. This value transference sometimes presents a challenge because of the differences in attitudes and perspectives that may exist between Millennial residents and their predecessors regarding work-life balance, teaching styles, the regulation of duty hours, and feedback assessments. These differences require an evolution in the methods of surgical education to optimize the educational benefit and ensure good will and rapport between the generations. Trainees and faculty alike have a responsibility to understand each other's differences and come together to ensure that knowledge, experience, values, and skill sets are effectively passed on to a new generation of orthopaedic surgeons.

Expanding Role of Technology in Rehabilitation After Lower-Extremity Joint Replacement: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of telehealth programs in the administration of rehabilitation and the monitoring of postoperative progress after joint replacement is not well studied. The purpose of the present study was to systematically review the currently available evidence on the use of smart-device technology and telehealth programs to guide and monitor postoperative rehabilitation following total joint arthroplasty and to assess their impact on outcomes following surgery. METHODS: A literature search of the MEDLINE database was performed using keywords "mobile," "app," "telehealth," "virtual," "arthroplasty," "outcomes," "joint replacement," "web based," "telemedicine," "TKA," "THA," "activity tracker," "fitness tracker," "monitor," "rehab," "online," and "stepcounter" in all possible combinations. All English studies with a level of evidence of I to III that were published from January 1, 2010, to December 19, 2020 were considered for inclusion. Quantitative and qualitative analysis was performed on the data collected. RESULTS: A total of 28 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and reviewed. With regard to objective functional outcome measures, such as strength, range of motion, or results of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, the virtual physical therapy group had equivalent or slightly superior outcomes compared with in-person physical therapy. There was similar improvement overall in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient satisfaction between virtual and in-person physical therapy. Virtual physical therapy resulted in cost savings ranging from $206 to $4,100 per patient compared with in-person physical therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Telerehabilitation following lower-extremity joint replacement is less expensive compared with in-person physical therapy, with equivalent outcomes and patient satisfaction. Telerehabilitation and electronic health adjuncts can be used to substitute for traditional rehabilitation and augment postoperative care following total joint arthroplasty, respectively. Telerehabilitation that provides outcomes equivalent to in-person physical therapy not only increases convenience for patients but also decreases the cost burden on the health-care system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparison of Postoperative Occupational Therapy and Narcotic Use in Two Carpometacarpal Arthroplasty Approaches.

BACKGROUND: The authors sought to determine whether differences exist in (1) the number of postoperative occupational therapy visits and (2) narcotic use in two carpometacarpal arthroplasty groups. METHODS: A retrospective study comparing patients undergoing abductor pollicis longus (APL) suspensionplasty (154 patients) or flexor carpi radialis ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (FCR LRTI) techniques (40 patients) between January 1, 2012, and August 1, 2018, was performed. Data included demographics, procedure performed, complications, number of postoperative occupational therapy visits, and postoperative morphine equivalent dosage used. Statistical testing used the chi-square test for proportions and the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for nonnormal data. The significance level was 0.05. RESULTS: The APL suspensionplasty and FCR LRTI groups had similar ages (58.1 ± 7.8 years versus 58.1 ± 7.7 years), sex ratios (73 percent female versus 75 percent female), and preoperative narcotic user proportions (1 percent versus 3 percent). Complication rates following the procedures were similar (21 percent and 18 percent, respectively). The number of postoperative occupational therapy visits following APL suspensionplasty (median, 0; interquartile range, 0 to 4) and FCR LRTI (median, 0; interquartile range, 0 to 4) were not significantly different (p = 0.961). There was less use of narcotics following APL suspensionplasty (median, 375 morphine equivalent dosage; interquartile range, 241.9 to 525 morphine equivalent dosage) compared with FCR LRTI (median, 462.5 morphine equivalent dosage; interquartile range, 375 to 768.8 morphine equivalent dosage), and this difference was significant (p = 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: The APL suspensionplasty technique had less narcotic use and similar complication rates and occupational therapy visits compared to FCR LRTI. Prospective studies comparing postoperative pain control and function with these two carpometacarpal arthroplasty techniques may be beneficial. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

A Review of State Guidelines for Elective Orthopaedic Procedures During the COVID-19 Outbreak.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in widespread cancellation of elective orthopaedic procedures. The guidance coming from multiple sources frequently has been difficult to assimilate as well as dynamic, with constantly changing standards. We seek to communicate the current guidelines published by each state, to discuss the impact of these guidelines on orthopaedic surgery, and to provide the general framework used to determine which procedures have been postponed at our institution. METHODS: An internet search was used to identify published state guidelines regarding the cancellation of elective procedures, with a publication cutoff of March 24, 2020, 5:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time. Data collected included the number of states providing guidance to cancel elective procedures and which states provided specific guidance in determining which procedures should continue being performed as well as to orthopaedic-specific guidance. RESULTS: Thirty states published guidance regarding the discontinuation of elective procedures, and 16 states provided a definition of "elective" procedures or specific guidance for determining which procedures should continue to be performed. Only 5 states provided guidelines specifically mentioning orthopaedic surgery; of those, 4 states explicitly allowed for trauma-related procedures and 4 states provided guidance against performing arthroplasty. Ten states provided guidelines allowing for the continuation of oncological procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Few states have published guidelines specific to orthopaedic surgery during the COVID-19 outbreak, leaving hospital systems and surgeons with the responsibility of balancing the benefits of surgery with the risks to public health.

Epidemiology of mental health conditions in incoming division I collegiate athletes.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to examine the epidemiology of mental health conditions in incoming American Division I collegiate athletes. METHODS: Pre-participation physical questionnaires from 1118 incoming student athletes at a Division I Institution were collected retrospectively from 2011-2017. Data collected included lifetime history of any mental health condition, musculoskeletal injuries, concussions, and post-concussion depression. History of any mental health condition was evaluated by gender and sport played. It was also evaluated in comparison to musculoskeletal injuries and concussions. RESULTS: The lifetime prevalence of any mental health condition was 14.0% for all athletes, 14.2% for male athletes, and 13.6% for female athletes. Individual sports reported a greater prevalence (17.2%) than did team sports (11.8%) (p = 0.010). The prevalence was also higher in contact sports (16.4%) than in non-contact sports (12.5%), although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.072). There was a significant association between mental health condition and all four major groups of injuries examined: upper extremity (p = 0.043), lower extremity (p = 0.007), axial skeletal (p < 0.001), and concussions (p = 0.039). Post-concussion depression occurred in 2.0% of all athletes reporting a concussion. CONCLUSION: The lifetime prevalence of mental health conditions in this population (14.0%) is far less than estimates in the general population. This observation may be due to a combination of factors including exercise/athletic participation mitigating depressive symptoms, competitive selection, and underreporting. History of a mental health condition may be associated with injury, although causation cannot be determined.

Lifetime prevalence of injuries in incoming division I collegiate football players.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to determine the lifetime prevalence of past injuries in incoming first year football players in a Division 1 college football team. METHODS: Pre-participation questionnaires from 605 first-year football players over 20 years (1996-2015) were examined to determine the prevalence of concussions, stingers, fractures, and musculoskeletal surgeries sustained before playing at the collegiate level. Players were grouped by position: wide receiver and defensive back (WR/DB), offensive and defensive linemen (OL/DL), all other positions (OP), and unknown (UKN). Prevalence of injuries by year and position was compared using Pearson's χ2 Test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The reported lifetime prevalence is as follows: concussion (21%), stinger (23%), musculoskeletal surgery (23%), and fracture (44%). There were no significant differences in lifetime prevalence of concussions (p = 0.49), stingers (p = 0.31), fractures (p = 0.60), or musculoskeletal surgeries (p = 0.97) based on position. There were also no significant differences in the lifetime prevalence of concussions (p = 0.14), musculoskeletal surgeries (p = 0.50), or fractures (p = 0.59) based on year. However, there was a significant difference in the lifetime prevalence of stingers based on year (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was an expectation to observe an increase in injury prevalence by entering year, but this was not seen. A decrease in stingers was actually observed, but there was no significant difference among any other injury recorded. These results do not support the perception that football injuries are on the rise. Under reporting is a significant concern as players may fear disqualification or that they are evaluated by the coaching staff based on their medical history. More research is needed to confirm lifetime injury prevalence and evaluate differences over time among football players.