Citations

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.

Background: Although there is some evidence that cannabinoid (CBD) products may provide a therapeutic effect for musculoskeletal pain, little is known about the usage patterns or their prevalence of use in orthopaedic sports medicine patients. Purpose: To report the prevalence and perceived self-efficacy of CBD products in patients evaluated in an orthopaedic sports medicine clinic. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Level of evidence, 2. Methods: The study population consisted of new patients who visited an orthopaedic surgery sports medicine clinic at a large academic center for consultation with a surgeon between August 2020 and March 2021. All patients were asked to complete a survey that assessed perceived pain and effectiveness of CBD products and other nonsurgical treatment modalities using the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (range, 0-100) and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS). Descriptive factors were collected via chart review. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the data. Results: Overall, 823 patients completed the survey (45.4% female; mean age, 51 years [range, 18-87 years]; mean body mass index, 28.9 [range, 17.2-58.4]). Body areas involved included 285 shoulders, 44 elbows, 76 hips, 276 knees, 58 ankles, and 77 other. Of these patients, 19% (152/823) endorsed the use of CBD products before their initial evaluation. The mean NRS for pain was significantly different between non-CBD users and CBD users (5.6 vs 6.1; P = .029). CBD users were significantly more likely to have tried other nonoperative modalities compared with nonusers, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (79.6% vs 69.8%; P = .032), bracing (44.7% vs 34.6%; P = .024), steroid injections (38.8% vs 21.6%; P < .001), and physical therapy (54% vs 36.1%; P < .001). In addition, 30.9% of CBD utilizers reported marijuana use compared with 2.8% of non-CBD users ( P < .001) for management of their pain. Conclusion: In the current study, 19% of patients had used CBD products to manage joint-related issues. Sports medicine providers should be aware of this high incidence of usage and the potential interactions CBD products may have with other treatment modalities. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of CBD as a therapeutic agent and the specific interactions it has with other drugs and other forms of treatment.

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 use the National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance Program (NCAA‐ISP) from the 2009‐2010 through the 2014‐2015 seasons to report lumbar spine injury rates, characteristics, and time lost from sport in soccer players. Methods Characteristics of lumbar spine injuries by season, competition/practice, and time lost from sport were determined using the NCAA‐ISP database. Rates of injury were calculated as the number of injuries divided by the number of athlete exposures (AEs). AEs are any athlete participation in a competition or practice. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated to compare rates between event types and time of season. Injury proportion ratios (IPRs) were used to evaluate differences in injury rates between men and women. Results The NCAA‐ISP estimated 4,464 LSIs over 5 years. The rate of LSI in men was 2.1/10,000 AEs and 3.0/10,000 AEs in women. Women were 1.43 times more likely to suffer an LSI compared to men. Women were 2.15 times as likely to suffer an LSI in competition compared to in practice while men were 1.10 times as likely. Women were 2.15 times as likely to be injured in the preseason compared to the regular season, while men were 3.76 times as likely. Non‐contact injuries were the most common cause of lumbar spine injuries (LSIs) in men (35%); however, contact injuries were more common in women (33%). Most athletes both male (57%) and female (59%) returned to play within 24 hours. Conclusion This study provides information on the characteristics of LSIs in NCAA soccer. The overall injury rate to the lumbar spine is relatively low. Injury rates are highest in the preseason and in competition. Women suffer from more recurrent LSI’s than men, and men acquired more injuries through non‐contact mechanisms. More than one‐half of athletes returned to sport within 24 hours.

Background: The success of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is influenced by effective rehabilitation. Previously published, comprehensive systematic reviews evaluating rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction have studied Level-I and II evidence published through 2012. Interval studies continue to evaluate the efficacy of various rehabilitative modalities. Methods: A total of 824 articles from 2012 to 2020 were identified using multiple search engines. Fifty Level-I or II studies met inclusion criteria and were evaluated using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) criteria and National Institutes of Health (NIH) Study Quality Assessment Tools. Results: Accelerated rehabilitation can be effective for patients with semitendinosus-gracilis grafts. Blood flow restriction (BFR) training with high-intensity exercise is not effective for ACL reconstruction recovery. Postoperative bracing does not offer any advantages or improve limb asymmetry. Cryotherapy is an effective analgesic when used perioperatively. The early introduction of open kinetic chain exercises may improve ACL reconstruction outcomes, and high-intensity plyometric exercise is not effective. Estimated pre-injury capacity (EPIC) levels may be more accurate than the Limb Symmetry Index (LSI) when using functional test results to predict reinjury rates, and hip external rotation strength may be the most accurate predictor of the hop test performance. Nerve blocks can provide postoperative analgesia with minimal complication risk. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation is effective when used independently and in combination with rehabilitative exercises. Psychological readiness should be evaluated both objectively and subjectively before allowing patients to safely return to sport. Electromyography biofeedback may help to regain muscular function, and whole-body vibration therapy can improve postural control. Supervised rehabilitation is more effective than unsupervised rehabilitation. Conclusions: Various rehabilitative modalities following ACL reconstruction are effective in improving surgical outcomes and return-to-sport rates. Further evidence and improved study design are needed to further validate modalities including accelerated rehabilitation, BFR training, functional testing, and return-to-sport criteria. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Purpose To systematically review the literature to examine current understanding of the meniscofemoral ligaments (MFLs), their function, their importance in clinical management, and known anatomical variants. Methods A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Studies were included if they reported on the biomechanical, radiographic, or arthroscopic evaluation of human MFLs, or if they reported on an anatomical variant. These were then categorized as cadaveric, radiographic, or clinical. Biomechanical, radiographic, patient‐reported, and functional outcomes data were recorded. Results Forty‐seven studies were included in the qualitative analysis, and 26 of them were included in the quantitative analysis. Of these, there were 15 cadaveric, 3 arthroscopic, and 9 radiographic studies that reported on the prevalence of MFLs. Overall, when looking at all modalities, the presence of either the anterior or posterior MFL (aMFL, pMFL) has been noted to be 70.8%, with it being the aMFL 17.4% and the pMFL 40.6%. The presence of both ligaments occurs in approximately 17.6% of individuals. Eleven reported on mean MFL length and thickness. When evaluating mean length in both men and women, the aMFL has been reported between 21.6 and 28.3 mm and the pMFL length in this population is between 23.4 and 31.2 mm. Five reported on cross‐sectional area. Nine additional papers report anatomical variants. Conclusions This review shows that there continues to be a variable incidence of MFLs reported in the literature, but our understanding of their function continues to broaden. A growing number of anatomic and biomechanical studies have demonstrated the importance of the MFLs in supporting knee stability. Specifically, the MFLs serve an important role in protecting the lateral meniscus and augmenting the function of the posterior cruciate ligament. Clinical Relevance Our findings will aid the clinician in both identifying and treating pathologies of the meniscofemoral ligaments.

Background: Recent literature has suggested that capsular closure following hip arthroscopy restores native hip-joint kinematics and may lead to better patient-reported outcomes, especially in high-level athletes 1–4 . Description: Capsular closure of the hip occurs following standard hip arthroscopy, which typically includes labral repair and osteoplasty of the femoral neck and/or acetabulum accessed through an interportal capsulotomy. Viewing through an anterolateral portal with use of a 70° scope, a suture-passing device loaded with a #2 FiberWire (Arthrex) is passed down into the mid-anterior portal. The suture is then passed through the anterior aspect of the proximal leaflet of the capsulotomy. The suture-passing device is then passed through the distal leaflet, and the previously passed suture is grasped and brought out of the cannula. The capsular bites are typically made 1 cm from the edge of the capsule. This process is repeated 1.5 cm posteriorly to the initially placed suture. Typical capsular closure takes 2 to 3 sutures for complete closure. Once the sutures are passed, they are tied with use of half-hitches and excess suture is cut. Alternatives: Alternatives include capsular plication, which is more frequently performed in the setting of capsular laxity preoperatively or connective-tissue disorders 5,6 . Additionally, there is evidence suggesting that leaving the capsulotomy unrepaired may lead to similar results in select populations 7 . Rationale: This procedure is performed largely secondary to the restoration of native anatomy and kinematics of the hip joint 3,8 . Arthroscopy of the hip requires a capsulotomy in order to access the joint, unlike other, more superficial joints such as the shoulder. Capsular closure is often technically challenging and adds length to the procedure. However, recent literature has shown improved patient-reported outcomes with routine capsular closure specifically among high-level athletes 9,10 . Expected Outcomes: Routine capsular closure has been associated with good mid-term patient-reported outcomes 10 . Patients who undergo hip arthroscopy and routine capsular closure can expect to meet the minimal clinically important difference and the patient acceptable symptomatic state for the modified Harris hip score and the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living component. Patients who participate in high-level sports activities may experience a quicker return to play and more normal kinematics with routine capsular closure. Important Tips: Clear off the capsule immediately following the capsulotomy. Utilize an over-the-top view to better visualize the capsule. Place the sutures from anterior to posterior.

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.

AbstractWhile much detail is known about each anatomic structure of the knee and its contributory effect on biomechanics, our understanding is still evolving. In particular, the function of the meniscofemoral ligaments and their anatomical variants have yet to be fully described. In this report, a never‐before‐described anatomical meniscofemoral ligament variant intra‐substance to the PCL is presented. Arthroscopists should be aware of the novel variant as a growing number of studies have demonstrated the biomechanical importance of the meniscofemoral ligaments in protecting the lateral meniscus and supporting the function of the PCL.Level of Evidence: IV.