Werner, Brian C.

Purpose The primary aims of this work were to (1) describe normal range of motion (ROM) profiles for elite pitchers, (2) describe the characteristics of shoulder and elbow injuries in professional pitchers over a 6‐year period in one Major League Baseball organization, and (3) identify ROM measures that were independently associated with a future shoulder or elbow injury. Methods Over 6 seasons (2010‐2015), a preseason assessment was performed on all pitchers invited to Major League Baseball Spring Training for a single organization. ROM measures included shoulder flexion, horizontal adduction, external rotation (ER), internal rotation, as well as elbow flexion and extension, were measured for both the dominant and nondominant arm, and total range of motion and deficits were calculated. All noncontact shoulder and elbow injuries were identified. Using multivariate binomial logistic regression analysis to control for age, height, weight, and all other ROM measures, the factors associated with an increased risk of subsequent shoulder or elbow injury were identified. Results A total of 53 shoulder (n = 25) and elbow (n = 28) injuries occurred during 132 pitcher seasons (n = 81 pitchers). The most significant categorical risk factor associated with increased elbow injury rates was the presence of a shoulder flexion deficit >5° (odds ratio [OR] 2.83; P = .042). For continuous variables, the risk of elbow injury increased by 7% for each degree of increased shoulder ER deficit (OR 1.07; P = .030) and 9% for each degree of decreased shoulder flexion (OR 1.09; P = .017). None of the measures significantly correlated with shoulder injuries. Conclusions Preseason shoulder ER and flexion deficits are independent risk factors for the development of elbow injuries during the upcoming season. Although prior work has supported the importance of reducing glenohumeral internal rotation deficits in pitchers, this study demonstrates that deficits in shoulder ER and flexion are more significant predictors of subsequent elbow injury. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Purpose To evaluate the association of preoperative intra‐articular hip injection with surgical site infection after hip arthroscopy. Methods A large administrative database was used to identify all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy from 2007 to 2015 within a single private insurer and from 2005 to 2012 within Medicare in the United States. Those that received an ipsilateral preoperative intra‐articular hip injection were identified. The patients were then divided into the following groups based on the interval between preoperative injection and ipsilateral hip arthroscopy: (1) <3 months, (2) 3 to 6 months, and (3) 6 to 12 months. These groups were compared to a control group composed of patients with no history or a remote history (>12 months) of preoperative hip injection. Patients developing a surgical site infection within 6 months following hip arthroscopy were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and Current Procedural Terminology codes associated with infection. Groups were compared using a multivariate logistic regression analysis to control for age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol usage, and multiple medical comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, hemodialysis use, inflammatory arthritis, and peripheral vascular disease. Results In total, 19% of privately insured and 6% of Medicare patients received a hip injection within 12 months of hip arthroscopy. The overall infection rate in privately insured and Medicare patients was 1.19% and 1.10%, respectively. Preoperative hip injection within 3 months of surgery was associated with a significantly higher risk of postoperative infection versus controls (2.16%, odds ratio [OR] 6.1, P < .001, for privately insured group; 2.80%, OR 1.99, P = .037, for Medicare group). In contrast, preoperative hip injection given after more than 3 months of surgery was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection versus controls. Conclusions Risk of infection after hip arthroscopy increased when preoperative intra‐articular hip injections were given within 3 months of surgery. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Purpose To use a national database to determine (1) the incidence of joint infection after elbow arthroscopy, (2) identify independent patient‐related risk factors for infection, and (3) determine the influence of concomitant intra‐articular corticosteroid injection on infection risk. Methods The 100% Medicare Standard Analytic Files were queried to identify patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy from 2005 to 2012. Postoperative elbow infections occurring within 6 months of surgery were identified using both International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision codes for postoperative infection and Current Procedural Terminology codes for the surgical treatment of a postoperative infection. Patients were excluded if their initial arthroscopic procedure was performed for infection. A multivariate binomial logistic regression analysis was then used to evaluate patient‐related risk factors for postoperative infection. Results Of the 2,704 elbow arthroscopy cases identified, 42 (1.55%) developed a postoperative infection. The annual incidence of infections did not increase significantly over the course of the study ( P = .374). A number of patient demographics and medical comorbidities significantly increased the risk of infection. The most notable factors included age ≥ 65 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.38, P = .006), body mass index > 40 (OR 1.97, P = .024), tobacco usage (OR 1.80, P = .046), alcohol usage (OR 4.01, P < .001), diabetes mellitus (OR 2.10, P = .015), inflammatory arthritis (OR 2.81, P < .001), hypercoagulable disorder (OR 2.51, P = .015), and intra‐articular corticosteroid injection at the time of arthroscopy (OR 2.79, P = .006). Conclusions The annual number of elbow arthroscopies performed in the United States has increased steadily; however, the postoperative infection rate remained consistently low at 1.55%. There are a number of patient‐specific risk factors that increase this risk with OR ranging from 1.97 to 4.01. Similarly, patients who receive an intra‐articular corticosteroid injection at the time of surgery are nearly 3 times (OR 2.79) more likely to develop a postoperative infection. Level of Evidence Level III, case‐control study.