Ladd, Amy L.

Background: There is growing evidence that social determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with disparities in access to care and hand and upper extremity health. Quality measures represent an opportunity to evaluate disparities in access and outcomes that can inform improvement interventions. We performed a systematic review of evidence regarding health disparities within hand surgery and aimed to develop suitable quality measures that are clinically important, feasible, usable, and scientifically acceptable. Methods: We performed a systematic review including common hand surgery terms to identify health disparities in hand surgery related to SDOH. Candidate quality measures were constructed based upon evidence from the systematic review. A consortium of 11 US-based hand and upper extremity surgeons completed a modified RAND/UCLA Delphi Appropriateness process to evaluate the importance, feasibility, usability, and scientific acceptability of the candidate quality measures. Panelists rated each measure on a scale of 1 ( definitely not important/feasible/usable/scientifically acceptable ) to 9 ( definitely important/feasible/usable/scientifically acceptable ) in 2 voting rounds separated by a face-to-face discussion. Agreement among panelists and validity were assessed using predetermined criteria. Results: Fourteen candidate quality measures addressing health disparities were identified based on evidence from the systematic review, including time to surgery and emergency department use after hand surgery based on insurance type, clinical outcomes based on social deprivation, among others. All 14 measures were accepted. Conclusions: Fourteen candidate quality measures were identified and accepted based upon consensus to address health disparities in hand surgery, although future investigation will be needed to evaluate their effectiveness.

Background: Polydactyly surgery rates and trends are poorly characterized. The purpose of this study was to characterize national pediatric polydactyly management by examining operative and procedural trends over time, evaluating timing of treatment, identifying factors associated with interventions, and comparing costs and complications. Methods: We used the PearlDiver national administrative claims database to identify pediatric patients aged 18 and under with a diagnosis of polydactyly (2010-2023). We analyzed patients who received procedures coded as surgical correction or suture ligation, then characterized rates and factors associated with each intervention, and investigated postoperative complication rates. Results: Of 42 543 polydactyly patients, 3880 patients (9.1%) underwent surgery, and 5612 patients (13.2%) underwent procedures coded as suture ligation. Over the past decade, the incidence of polydactyly diagnosis and surgery has decreased, while rates of procedures coded as suture ligation have not changed significantly. In 2010, 12.0% of patients underwent surgery, compared to 7.3% in 2020. Patients of ages 1 to 2 years comprised the greatest proportion of the population who underwent surgical operations at 1729 patients (36.0%), and patients of ages 0 to 1 year comprised the greatest proportion of the population who underwent suture ligations at 3327 patients (51.0%) ( P < .001). Younger age at diagnosis and higher comorbidity index were associated with a greater likelihood of surgery, while greater mean family income was associated with a lower likelihood. Among treatment categories, surgery was associated with greater 1-year and total payer-reimbursed costs ( P < .05). Conclusions: We observed a declining incidence of pediatric polydactyly and polydactyly surgery. These findings may inform future guideline development and discourse for pediatric hand care.

Background: Quality measures are now commonplace and are increasingly tied to financial incentives. We reviewed the existing quality measures that address the upper limb and tested the null hypothesis that structure (capacity to deliver care), process (appropriate care), and outcome (the result of care) measures are equally represented. Methods: We systematically reviewed MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines, the National Quality Forum, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the Physician Quality Reporting System for quality measures addressing upper limb surgery. Measures were characterized as structure, process, or outcome measures and were categorized according to their developer and their National Strategy for Quality Improvement in Health Care (National Quality Strategy) priority as articulated by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Results: We identified 134 quality measures addressing the upper limb: 131 (98%) process and three (2%) outcome measures. The majority of the process measures address the National Quality Strategy priority of effective clinical care (90%), with the remainder addressing communication and care coordination (5%), person and caregiver-centered experience and outcomes (4%), and community/population health (1%). Conclusions: Our review identified opportunities to develop more measures in the structure and outcome domains as well as measures addressing patient and family engagement, public health, safety, care coordination, and efficient use of resources. The most common existing measures—process measures addressing care—might not be the best measures of upper limb surgery quality given the relative lack of evidence for their use in care improvement.