Fletcher, Nicholas D

Study Design Prospective Cohort Study. Objective The present study aims to determine if the racial representation of patients enrolled in a large prospective scoliosis registry is reflective of the general United States population. Further, we studied whether there was an association between race, pre-operative parameters, outcomes and loss to follow-up. Methods Prospectively collected data for patients who underwent spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) was reviewed, including self-reported race/ethnicity. The U.S. pediatric population and U.S. patients enrolled in the prospective registry were compared. The data obtained was analyzed for variations between races, for pre-operative variables and follow-up. Results Of the 2210 included patients in the registry 66% of patients reported as White, while 52% of the 2018 U.S. pediatric population reported as White. 15% of the registry reported as Hispanic/Latino compared to 22% of the U.S. pediatric population, 13% Black compared to 14% of the U.S. pediatric population, and 4% Asian compared to 5% of the U.S. pediatric population. Asian and White patients had statistically significant higher 2-year follow-up in all but one of six enrollment sites ( P < 0.001). Native American, Other, and Hispanic/Latino patients had the highest BMIs. Native American and Black patients had the highest pre-op thoracic Cobb angles. Pre-op ages of Black, Hispanic, and Native American patients were statistically lower ( P < 0.01). Conclusion This study demonstrates the association between race and patient follow-up and pre-operative factors in patients who underwent surgery for AIS. Black, Native American, and Hispanic populations were underrepresented both at pre-op and follow-up when compared to their relative proportion in the U.S. pediatric population.

Background: Severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) can be treated with instrumented fusion, but the number of anchors needed for optimal correction is controversial. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized study that included patients undergoing spinal fusion for single thoracic curves between 45° and 65°, the most common form of operatively treated AIS. Of the 211 patients randomized, 108 were assigned to a high-density screw pattern and 103, to a low-density screw pattern. Surgeons were instructed to use ≥1.8 implants per spinal level fused for patients in the high-implant-density group or ≤1.4 implants per spinal level fused for patients in the low-implant-density group. The primary outcome measure was the percent correction of the coronal curve at the 2-year follow-up. The power analysis for this trial required 174 patients to show equivalence, defined as a 95% confidence interval (CI) within a ±10% correction margin with a probability of 90%. Results: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean percent correction of the coronal curve was equivalent between the high-density and low-density groups at the 2-year follow-up (67.6% versus 65.7%; difference, −1.9% [95% CI: −6.1%, 2.2%]). In the per-protocol cohorts, the mean percent correction of the coronal curve was also equivalent between the 2 groups at the 2-year follow-up (65.0% versus 66.1%; difference, 1.1% [95% CI: −3.0%, 5.2%]). A total of 6 patients in the low-density group and 5 patients in the high-density group required reoperation (p = 1.0). Conclusions: In the setting of spinal fusion for primary thoracic AIS curves between 45° and 65°, the percent coronal curve correction obtained with use of a low-implant-density construct and that obtained with use of a high-implant-density construct were equivalent. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Prior “best practice guidelines” (BPG) have identified strategies to reduce the risk of acute deep surgical site infection (SSI), but there still exists large variability in practice. Further, there is still no consensus on which patients are “high risk” for SSI and how SSI should be diagnosed or treated in pediatric spine surgery. We sought to develop an updated, consensus-based BPG informed by available literature and expert opinion on defining high-SSI risk in pediatric spine surgery and on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of SSI in this high-risk population. Materials and Methods: After a systematic review of the literature, an expert panel of 21 pediatric spine surgeons was selected from the Harms Study Group based on extensive experience in the field of pediatric spine surgery. Using the Delphi process and iterative survey rounds, the expert panel was surveyed for current practices, presented with the systematic review, given the opportunity to voice opinions through a live discussion session and asked to vote regarding preferences privately. Two survey rounds were conducted electronically, after which a live conference was held to present and discuss results. A final electronic survey was then conducted for final voting. Agreement ≥70% was considered consensus. Items near consensus were revised if feasible to achieve consensus in subsequent surveys. Results: Consensus was reached for 17 items for defining high-SSI risk, 17 items for preventing, 6 for diagnosing, and 9 for treating SSI in this high-risk population. After final voting, all 21 experts agreed to the publication and implementation of these items in their practice. Conclusions: We present a set of updated consensus-based BPGs for defining high-risk and preventing, diagnosing, and treating SSI in high-risk pediatric spine surgery. We believe that this BPG can limit variability in practice and decrease the incidence of SSI in pediatric spine surgery. Level of Evidence: Not applicable.

Introduction: A dramatic increase in the number of pediatric orthopaedic fellows being trained has led to concerns that there may be an oversupply of pediatric orthopaedists. The purpose of this study was to determine whether this perception is accurate and whether the practice expectations of recent pediatric fellowship graduates are being met by surveying recent pediatric fellowship graduates about their early practice experiences. Methods: A 36-question survey approved by the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) leadership was electronically distributed to 120 recent graduates of pediatric orthopaedic fellowships; 81 responses were ultimately obtained (67.5% response rate). Results: Almost all (91%) of the respondents were very or extremely satisfied with their fellowship experience. Half of the respondents had at least 1 job offer before they entered their fellowships. After completion of fellowships, 35% received 1 job offer and 62.5% received ≥2 job offers; only 2.5% did not receive a job offer. Most reported a practice consisting almost entirely of pediatric orthopaedics, and 93.5% thought this was in line with their expectations; 87% indicated satisfaction with their current volume of pediatric orthopaedics, and 85% with the complexity of their pediatric orthopaedic cases. Despite the high employment percentages and satisfaction with practice profiles, nearly a third (28%) of respondents replied that too many pediatric orthopaedists are being trained. Conclusions: Positive messages from this survey include the satisfaction of graduates with their fellowship training, the high percentage of graduates who readily found employment, and the satisfaction of graduates with their current practice environments; this indicates that the pediatric orthopaedic job environment is not completely saturated and there are continued opportunities for graduating pediatric fellows despite the increased number of fellows being trained. Although not determined by this study, it may be that the stable demand for pediatric orthopaedic services is being driven by the expansion of the scope of practice as well as subspecialization within the practice of pediatric orthopaedics.