Ring, David

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.

Introduction: Evidence suggests that the distal radioulnar joint injury associated with an operatively treated displaced fracture of the distal radius does not benefit from specific treatment after the radius is realigned. To better understand variation in treatment of the distal radioulnar joint we performed a scenario-based experiment presenting radiographs of displaced distal radial fractures accompanied by clinical scenarios with randomized aspects. Methods: In a survey-based experiment, participants of the Science of Variation Group viewed a random subset of five of 10 sets of radiographs showing displaced fractures of the distal radius before and after anterior plate fixation. Each was accompanied by a clinical scenario with trauma energy level, age and gender randomized. Participants indicated their preferred distal radioulnar joint treatment: none, cast immobilization, operative reattachment of ligaments or ulnar styloid fixation, or distal radioulnar joint pinning. Factors associated with any treatment and with reattachment were sought in multivariable regression. Results: Surgeons recommended distal radioulnar joint treatment in 67% (404 of 607) of the scenarios, most commonly cast immobilization in 41% (247 of 607). Recommendation for any distal radioulnar joint treatment was associated with younger patient age, and for reattachment specifically, was associated with younger patient age, high-energy trauma and fracture of the base of the ulnar styloid. Conclusions: The observation of frequent recommendation for distal radioulnar joint treatment, relatively more so for younger patients with higher energy injuries, and some tendency to repair an aligned ulnar styloid base fracture may diverge from existing evidence.

Background: Early surgical intervention in nerve palsies with a high probability of nerve integrity and natural recovery risks unnecessary surgery. Understanding the variables influencing surgeons to offer surgery might provide insight into variations in surgeon beliefs and guide treatment recommendations. Methods: Sixty-nine surgeons of the Science of Variation Group participated in a survey consisting of 6 traumatic and 3 nontraumatic nerve palsy scenarios. Participants were asked what their preferred treatment was and how likely they were to offer surgery on a scale from 0 to 10. Participants were randomized to choose for themselves (n = 31) or for a patient of their age and sex (n = 38). Results: There was no difference in the overall likelihood of offering surgery or in the types of treatment offered to patients compared with oneself. Surgery was least recommended for idiopathic palsies and most for ulnar (β = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.10 to 1.7; P = 0.027) or radial (β = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.12 to 1.7; P = 0.025) nerve palsy following closed distal radius or humerus fractures. Longer symptom duration increased the likelihood of offering surgery. Conclusions: Surgeons were moderately likely to recommend surgery for nerve palsies, with no variation in opinions regardless of whether they were deciding for themselves or for patients. For specific nerve palsies with a documented benign natural history, this likely represents overtreatment. Future studies can assess whether balancing awareness of a benign natural history with the pressure to act and the sense that recovery is “taking too long” might limit the offer of unnecessary surgery.

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.