Citations

Background: Bibliometric citation analyses have been widely used in medicine to help researchers gain foundational knowledge about a topic and identify subtopics of popular interest for further investigations. There is a lack of similar research in collegiate athletics. Purpose: To identify the 100 most-cited research publications related to collegiate athletics. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: The Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database was used to generate a list of articles relating to collegiate athletics on January 24, 2022. Articles were filtered by the total number of citations, and the 100 most-cited articles were selected. For each article, we identified and analyzed the following: author name, publication year, country of origin, journal name, article type, main research topic area, competitive level, sex of study population, and level of evidence. Results: Of the top 100 most-cited articles, 63 were related to medicine. In total, 96% of articles were published in the United States, and 80% were published in the year 2000 or later. Of the top 100 articles, 85 were observational; only 5 were experimental. The sport most represented was soccer, followed by football, baseball, and basketball. Of the top 100 articles, 21 were published in a single journal, the American Journal of Sports Medicine. Ten authors published ≥5 of the top 100 most-cited studies. Conclusion: The majority of top 100 articles were published in the United States after 1999 and primarily focused on medicine-related topics. Soccer was studied by more articles than football, baseball, and basketball. An author’s prestige may have influenced the likelihood of citation. The top 100 most-cited studies provide researchers, medical students, residents, and fellows with a foundational list of the most important and influential academic contributions to the literature on collegiate athletics.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of scribe use on physicians, nurses, and patients in an orthopaedic sports medicine clinic. Methods Surveys containing validated outcome measures relating to physician well‐being and workplace satisfaction, among other variables, were used to assess the influence of medical scribes on clinic function. These surveys were collected for 8 months from all patients, nurses, and orthopaedic surgeons working in one orthopaedic sports medicine clinic. Time during a half‐day clinic (i.e., 20 or more patients) was documented by surgeons after the last patient was seen. Results The average time spent per half day of clinic was 104 minutes on nonscribe days and 25 minutes on scribe days. Additionally, the time spent documenting encounters per half day of clinic was 87 minutes on average without scribes and 26 minutes on average with scribes. The average surgeon single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) score was 48.1 without scribes, and 89.3 with scribes. The overall assessment of the clinic by nurses was 73.4 out of 100 on average without scribes and 87.7 out of 100 on average with scribes. Patients did not report a significant change in rating of overall experience (4.7/5.0 with scribes and 4.8/5.0 without scribes, ( P = .27) or wait time between scheduled appointment time and surgeon arrival (15.1 minutes with scribes and 18.1 minutes without scribes; P = .12). Conclusions We found the use of scribes in a high‐volume orthopaedic sports medicine clinic to have a favorable impact on physicians, nurses, and trainees. The use of a scribe also significantly reduced the time required by surgeons for documentation during clinic and at the end of each clinic day. Patients also reported no significant difference in patient clinic experience scores. Clinical Relevance Orthopaedic surgeons spend a substantial amount of time on paperwork. The results of this study could provide information on whether the use of a scribe helps to reduce administrative burden on orthopedic surgeons.

Abstract Background Orthopaedic surgery has the lowest proportion of women surgeons in practice of any specialty in the United States. Preliminary studies suggest that patients who are treated by physicians of the same race, ethnicity, cultural background, or gender feel more comfortable with their care and may have better outcomes. Therefore, understanding the discrepancies in the diversity of the orthopaedic surgeon workforce is crucial to addressing system-wide healthcare inequities. Questions/purposes (1) Does a difference exist in gender representation among practicing orthopaedic surgeons across geographic distributions and years in practice? (2) Does a difference exist in gender representation among practicing orthopaedic surgeons with regard to rural-urban setting, group practice size, and years in practice? Methods Orthopaedic surgeons serving Medicare patients in 2017 were identified in the Medicare Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File and Physician Compare national databases. This dataset encompasses more than 64% of practicing orthopaedic surgeons, providing a low proportion of missing data compared with other survey techniques. Group practice size, location, and Rural-urban Commuting Area scores were compared across physician gender and years in practice. Linear and logistic regressions modeled gender and outcomes relationships adjusted by years in practice. Least-square means estimates for outcomes were calculated by gender at the median years in practice (19 years) via regression models. Results According to the combined Medicare databases used, 5% (1019 of 19,221) of orthopaedic surgeons serving Medicare patients were women; this proportion increased with decreasing years in practice (R2 0.97; p < 0.001). Compared by region, the West region demonstrated the highest proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons overall (7% [259 of 3811]). The Midwest and South regions were below the national mean for proportions of women orthopaedic surgeons, both overall (5% [305 of 6666] and 5% [209 of 4146], respectively) and in the first 5 years of practice (9% [54 of 574] and 9% [74 of 817], respectively). Women worked in larger group practices than men (median [interquartile range] 118 physicians [20 to 636] versus median 56 [12 to 338]; p < 0.001, respectively). Both genders were more likely to practice in an urban setting, and when controlling for years in practice, there was no difference between men and women orthopaedic surgeons practicing in rural or urban settings (respectively, R2 = 0.0004 and 0.07; p = 0.89 and 0.09). Conclusion Among orthopaedic surgeons, there is only one woman for every 20 men caring for Medicare patients in the United States. Although gender representation is increasing longitudinally for women, it trails behind other surgical subspecialties substantially. Longitudinal mentoring programs, among other evidenced initiatives, should focus on the more pronounced underrepresentation identified in Midwestern/Southern regions and smaller group practices. Gender-based equity, inclusion, and diversity efforts should focus on recruitment strategies, and further research is needed to study how inclusion and diversity efforts among orthopaedic surgeons improves patient-centered care. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: The growing focus on subjective patient experiences has created an increase in popularity for physician rating websites. The purpose of this study was to characterize extremely negative reviews of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. Methods: Pediatric orthopaedic surgeons were randomly selected using the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America comprehensive list of surgeons. A search was then performed on Healthgrades.com, Vitals.com, and Yelp.com for 1-star reviews. Reviews were classified into clinical and nonclinical categories. Statistical analyses were performed regarding the frequency of reviews and complaints for each respective category. Results: Of the 279 one-star reviews categorized, 248 reviews (88.9% of reviews) included nonclinical complaints, and 182 reviews (65.2% of reviews) included clinical complaints. Nonsurgical patients were associated with 255 reviews, and the remaining 24 were related to surgical patients. Of the 430 comments within reviews, 248 referenced nonclinical aspects of care, and 182 referenced clinical care. Clinical factors most frequently noted included clinical disagreement (37%), unclear treatment plan (25%), complication (17%), misdiagnosis (15%), uncontrolled pain (13%), and delay in care (8%). The most addressed nonclinical factors included physician bedside manner (68%), time spent with provider (21%), wait time (18%), unprofessional staff (17%), scheduling issues (9%), cost (8%), and billing (8%). Compared with surgical reviews, nonsurgical reviews were more likely to contain nonclinical complaints (rate ratio: 1.5; P<0.05) and less likely to contain clinical complaints (rate ratio: 0.7; P<0.05). The most common complaint by surgical patients was complications (91.7%). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the factors associated with negative reviews of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. The majority of reviews of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons were left by nonsurgical patients and were related to nonclinical aspects of care. We also found surgeon-dependent factors such as poor physician bedside manner, unclear treatment plan, or parents’ disagreement with treatment plan were the most common reasons for negative reviews. Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess the price variation of various Medicare severity diagnosis‐related group codes for orthopaedic upper extremity procedures for the top 20 orthopaedic hospitals using chargemaster price listings from each hospital. Methods The top 20 orthopaedic hospitals in the United States were determined by querying the U.S. News and World Report ’s 2020 orthopaedic hospital ranking. This report ranks orthopaedic hospitals according to 4 major domains: outcomes, structure, process/expert opinion, and patient experience. Chargemaster data for the top 20 orthopaedic hospitals was compiled from their websites. Five DRG codes that represented orthopaedic upper extremity procedures were selected, and the pricing information for each was extracted from hospital chargemasters. The median income and cost‐of‐living index were also compiled for the county that each hospital is located in so that pricing data could be compared to economic measures through regression analysis. Results Of the top 20 orthopaedic hospitals, 18 had publicly available pricing information in DRG format on their websites. The DRG code with the highest pricing variability was Hand Injury Procedures (DRG 906; range, $12,832‐$253,633). The procedure with the least pricing variability was Hand or Wrist Procedures (DRG 514; range, $24,533‐$128,403). Additionally, only the cost of living index was a statistically significant predictor of procedure pricing with a weak correlation. Conclusion Hospital chargemaster listings are lacking in 2 major areas: true price transparency and standardization/consistency between hospitals. Chargemaster data are often difficult to find, confusing to patients, and inaccurate. Additionally, the price range for a single DRG code can also vary substantially depending on the hospital. It is possible that hospitals located in areas with high costs of living and median incomes would charge higher prices, but these factors were not found to support this hypothesis.

Purpose To identify the 50 most highly cited research publications in the sport of basketball. Methods Using the Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database and the search term “basketball”, we identified 2,704 articles. These articles were filtered by the total number of citations and the top 50 most cited articles with a central focus on basketball were selected for this analysis. For each article, we further identified and analyzed author name, publication year, country of origin, journal name, article type, main research topic area, competitive level, gender of study population, and the level of evidence. Results Medicine‐related topics, particularly those involving knee injuries, are more common than nonmedical topics (coaching, sports psychology etc.) among the highest cited articles. Articles originated from 13 different countries, with 48% originating in the United States. Only four authors had more than one article included in the top 50 most cited articles. Conclusion A majority of the top 50 research articles were from English‐speaking countries, published after 2000, primarily focused on medicine‐related topics, and were Level III evidence. Publications examining knee injuries were the most highly cited and appear to be of high interest to current investigators. The prestige of an author’s name appeared to be less influential to the number of citations. Clinical Relevance The top 50 most cited articles list will provide researchers, medical students, residents, and fellows with a foundational list of the most important and influential academic contributions to the basketball literature.

Background: Decreases in Medicare reimbursement have been noted among many medical specialties. An in-depth analysis of the subspecialty of orthopaedic sports medicine is needed to determine changes in Medicare reimbursement in this field. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to elucidate the trends in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for orthopaedic sports medicine procedures between 2000 and 2020. It was hypothesized that Medicare reimbursement decreased substantially during the study period. Study Design: Economic decision and analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-up Tool was used to extract Medicare reimbursement information between 2000 and 2020 for 67 procedures related to orthopaedic sports medicine. These values were adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index. The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) was calculated to measure the annual rate of change, and descriptive analyses were performed using the Student t test. Results: Between 2000 and 2020, inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for the 67 included procedures decreased by an average of 33% (CAGR = –2.2%; R 2 = 0.78). Reimbursement decreased for procedures related to the shoulder and elbow by 34% (CAGR = –2.3%; R 2 = 0.80), for hip-related procedures by 23% (CAGR = –1.4%; R 2 = 0.77), for knee-related procedures by 31% (CAGR = –2.0%; R 2 = 0.81), and for procedures relating to the foot and ankle by 38% (CAGR = –2.5%; R 2 = 0.79). Conclusion: Study findings indicated that inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement decreased substantially between 2000 and 2020 for orthopaedic sports medicine procedures, ranging from a 23% decrease for hip-related procedures to a 38% decrease for foot and ankle–related procedures. The results of this study could be used to provide further context for health care policy decisions and help ensure sustainable financial environments for orthopaedic sports medicine surgeon.

Purpose To examine and analyze Medicare reimbursement rates from 2000 to 2020 for orthopaedic foot and ankle procedures. Methods The 20 most used orthopaedic foot and ankle surgical procedures were gathered from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services website using the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use File 2017. The reimbursement data for each code were gathered from The Physician Fee Schedule Look‐Up Tool from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The reimbursement values were adjusted for inflation to 2020 U.S. dollars using the consumer price index. Results The average inflation‐adjusted reimbursement for included procedures decreased by 30% from 2000 to 2020. The greatest mean decreases were observed for “correction of hallux valgus” (–47%) and “partial excision of foot bone” (–41%). The procedures with the smallest mean decreases were observed in “treatment of “Amputation of toe” (–19%) and “closed treatment of metatarsal fracture” (–7%). Conclusions From 2000 to 2020, Inflation‐adjusted Medicare reimbursement for foot and ankle surgery decreased by 30%. Level of Evidence IV; economic analysis.

Purpose To analyze recent trends in orthopaedic surgery consolidation and quantify these changes temporally and geographically from 2012 to 2020. Methods We performed a retrospective cross‐sectional analysis of orthopaedic surgeon practice size in the United States using 2012 and 2020 data obtained from the Physician Compare database. Results Although we observed an increase from 21,216 unique orthopaedic surgeons in 2012 to 21,553 in 2020 (1.6% increase), the number of practices experienced a large decrease from 7,299 practices in 2012 to 5,829 in 2020 (20.1% decrease). The proportion of orthopaedic surgeons working in solo practices decreased from 13.2% (2,790) in 2012 to 7.4% (1,595) in 2020, and the proportion of orthopaedic surgeons working in groups sized 2 to 24 decreased from 35.3% (7,482) in 2012 to 22.2% (4,775) in 2020. In contrast, groups sized 25 to 99 have grown from 20.7% (4,387) of all orthopaedic surgeons to 23.4% (5,048) in 2020. Groups sized 100 to 499 have increased from 16.9% (3,593) in 2012 to 24.1% (5,190) in 2020, whereas groups sized 500 or greater have grown from 14% (2,964) in 2012 to 22.9% (4,945) in 2020. The number of unique group practices showed a significant decrease in the number of solo groups, which comprised 43.8% (3,200) of the total number of individual practices in 2012, decreasing to 32% (1,886) in 2020. All other groups increased in number and proportionally from 2012 to 2020. Conclusions This study shows that over the period from 2012 to 2020, there has been a substantial trend of orthopaedic surgeons shifting to increasing practice sizes, potentially indicating that more orthopaedic surgeons are working for large health care organizations rather than small independent practices. Clinical Relevance The impact of these changes should be examined to determine large‐scale effects on patient care, payment models, access, and outcomes, along with physician compensation, lifestyle, and satisfaction.