Mundell, Benjamin F.

Paediatric trigger finger is rare compared to adult trigger finger or paediatric trigger thumb, and the aetiology is unclear. Proposed causes include local trauma, anatomical anomalies and systemic conditions. The aim of the present study was to detail the anatomical causes of surgically treated paediatric trigger fingers and provide an operative algorithm based on the anatomical findings. A total of 76 trigger fingers in 38 patients were identified retrospectively at our institution between 1975 and 2022. In total, 41 fingers in 26 patients had anatomical variations. A nodular thickening on the tendon, similar to Notta’s nodule in trigger thumbs, was the most common anatomical cause. Abnormal decussation of the flexor digitorum superficialis tendon was the second most common variation. The recurrence rate was significantly lower after resection of one slip of the flexor digitorum superficialis tendon compared to other surgical techniques in these patients. We recommend that surgeons assess for possible anatomical variation during surgery for the trigger finger. Level of evidence: IV

AbstractObjectiveThis study sought to determine if single‐chamber operation and/or loss of rate response (RR) during elective replacement indicator (ERI) in patients with dual‐chamber pacemakers lead to increased symptom burden, healthcare utilization, and atrial fibrillation (AF).BackgroundDual‐chamber pacemakers often change from dual‐ to single‐chamber pacing mode and/or lose RR functionality at ERI to preserve battery. Single‐chamber pacing increases the incidence of heart failure, AF, and pacemaker syndrome suggesting these changes may be deleterious.MethodsA retrospective analysis of 700 patients was completed. Three comparisons were analyzed: Comparison 1: mode change and RR loss versus no change; Comparison 2: RR loss only versus no change; Comparison 3: mode change only versus no change (in patients with no RR programmed at baseline).ResultsIn Comparison 1, 121 (46%) patients with setting changes experienced symptoms (most often dyspnea and fatigue/exercise intolerance) versus 3 (4%) without setting changes (p < .0001). Similar results were noted in Comparisons 2 and 3 (p = .0016 and p = .0001, respectively). In Comparison 1, patients with setting change sought provider contact more than patients without setting changes (p = .0001). A significant difference was not noted in Comparison 2 or 3. Overall 14 (2%) patients were hospitalized, all of whom had setting changes.ConclusionsSetting changes at ERI including a change from dual‐ to single‐chamber pacing and/or loss of RR results in a significantly increased symptom burden and increased healthcare utilization.

OBJECTIVE Papers from 2002 to 2017 have highlighted consistent unique socioeconomic challenges and opportunities facing military neurosurgeons. Here, the authors focus on the reserve military neurosurgeon who carries the dual mission of both civilian and military responsibilities. METHODS Survey solicitation of current active duty and reserve military neurosurgeons was performed in conjunction with the AANS/CNS Joint Committee of Military Neurosurgeons and the Council of State Neurosurgical Societies. Demographic, qualitative, and quantitative data points were compared between reserve and active duty military neurosurgeons. Civilian neurosurgical provider data were taken from the 2016 NERVES (Neurosurgery Executives Resource Value and Education Society) Socio-Economic Survey. Economic modeling was done to forecast the impact of deployment or mobilization on the reserve neurosurgeon, neurosurgery practice, and the community. RESULTS Seventy-five percent (12/16) of current reserve neurosurgeons reported that they are satisfied with their military service. Reserve neurosurgeons make significant contributions to the military’s neurosurgical capabilities, with 75% (12/16) having been deployed during their career. No statistically significant demographic differences were found between those serving on active duty and those in the reserve service. However, those who served in the reserves were more likely to desire opportunities for improvement in the military workflow requirements compared with their active duty counterparts (p = 0.04); 92.9% (13/14) of current reserve neurosurgeons desired more flexible military drill programs specific to the needs of practicing physicians. The risk of reserve deployment is also borne by the practices, hospitals, and communities in which the neurosurgeon serves in civilian practice. This can result in fewer new patient encounters, decreased collections, decreased work relative value unit generation, increased operating costs per neurosurgeon, and intangible limitations on practice development. However, through modeling, the authors have illustrated that reserve physicians joining a larger group practice can significantly mitigate this risk. What remains astonishing is that 91.7% of those reserve neurosurgeons who were deployed noted the experience to be rewarding despite seeing a 20% reduction in income, on average, during the fiscal year of a 6-month deployment. CONCLUSIONS Reserve neurosurgeons are satisfied with their military service while making substantial contributions to the military’s neurosurgical capabilities, with the overwhelming majority of current military reservists having been deployed or mobilized during their reserve commitments. Through the authors’ modeling, the impact of deployment on the military neurosurgeon, neurosurgeon’s practice, and the local community can be significantly mitigated by a larger practice environment.

Background Low back pain (LBP) is common among individuals with transfemoral amputation (TFA) and has a negative impact on quality of life. Little is known about health care utilization for LBP in this population and whether utilization varies by amputation etiology. Objective To determine if individuals with TFA have an increased likelihood of seeking care or reporting symptoms of acute or chronic LBP during physician visits after amputation compared with matched individuals without amputation. Design Retrospective cohort. Setting Olmsted County, Minnesota (2010 population: 144 248). Participants All individuals with incident TFA (N = 96), knee disarticulation, and transfemoral amputation residing in Olmsted County between 1987 and 2014. Each was matched (1:10 ratio) with non‐TFA adults on age, sex, and duration of residency. Individuals were divided by etiology of amputation: dysvascular and trauma/cancer. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measurements Death and presentation for evaluation of LBP (LBP event) while residing in Olmsted County. LBP events were identified using validated International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD‐9) codes and corresponding Berkson, Hospital International Classification of Diseases Adapted (HICDA), and ICD‐10 diagnostic codes. Hurdle and competing‐risk Cox proportional hazard models were used. Results Having a TFA of either etiology did appear to correlate with increased frequency of LBP events, although this association was only statistically significant within the dysvascular TFA cohort (dysvascular TFA cohort: relative risk [RR] 1.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07‐3.03, median follow‐up 0.78 years; trauma/cancer TFA cohort: RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.58‐2.22, median follow‐up 7.95 years). In time to event analysis, dysvascular TFA had an increased risk of death and event. Obesity did not significantly correlate with increased frequency of LBP events or time to event for either cohort. At any given point in time, individuals with TFA of either etiology who had phantom limb pain were 90% more likely to have an LBP event (hazard ratio [HR] 1.91, 95% CI 1.11‐3.31). Conditional on not dying and no LBP event within the first 2.5 years, individuals with prosthesis had a decreased risk of LBP events in subsequent years. Conclusions Risk of LBP events appears to vary by TFA etiology. Obesity did not correlate significantly with increased frequency of LBP event or time to event. Phantom limb pain correlated with decreased time to LBP event after amputation. The association between prosthesis receipt and LBP events is ambiguous. Level of Evidence III.

OBJECTIVEFrom 1994 to 2006 outpatient spinal surgery increased 5-fold. The perceived cost savings with outcomes comparable to or better than those achieved with inpatient admission for the same procedures are desirable in an era where health expenditures are scrutinized. The increase in outpatient spine surgery is also driven by the proliferation of ambulatory surgery centers. In this study, the authors hypothesized that the total savings in outpatient spine surgery is largely driven by patient selection and biases toward healthier patients.METHODSA meta-analysis assessed patient selection factors and outcomes associated with outpatient spine procedures. Pooled odds ratios and mean differences were calculated using a Bayesian random-effects model. The authors extended this analysis in a novel way by using the results of the meta-analysis to examine cost data from an administrative database of academically affiliated hospitals. A Bayesian approach with priors informed by the meta-analysis was used to compare costs for inpatient and outpatient performance of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and lumbar laminectomy.RESULTSSixteen studies with a total of 370,195 patients met the inclusion criteria. Outpatient procedures were associated with younger patient age (mean difference [MD] −2.34, 95% credible interval [CrI] −4.39 to −0.34) and no diabetes diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% CrI 0.54–0.97). Outpatient procedures were associated with a lower likelihood of reoperation (OR 0.42, 95% CrI 0.16–0.80), 30-day readmission (OR 0.39, 95% CrI 0.16–0.74), and complications (OR 0.29, 95% CrI 0.15–0.50) and with lower overall costs (MD −$121,392.72, 95% CrI −$216,824.81 to −$23,632.92). Additional analysis of the national administrative data revealed more modest cost savings than those found in the meta-analysis for outpatient spine surgeries relative to inpatient spine surgeries. Estimated cost savings for both younger patients ($555 for those age 30–35 years [95% CrI −$733 to −$374]) and older patients ($7290 for those age 65–70 years [95% CrI −$7380 to −$7190]) were less than the overall cost savings found in the meta-analysis.CONCLUSIONSCompared to inpatient spine surgery, outpatient spine surgery was associated with better short-term outcomes and an initial reduction in direct costs. A selection bias for outpatient procedures toward younger, healthier patients may confound these results. The additional analysis of the national database suggests that cost savings in the outpatient setting may be less than previously reported and a result of outpatient procedures being offered more frequently to younger and healthier individuals.