Faculty Bibliography

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative in 2011. Through BPCI, organizations enlisted into payment agreements that include both performance and financial accountability for episodes of care. To succeed, BPCI requires quality maintenance and care delivery at lower costs. This necessitates physicians and hospitals to merge interests. Orthopaedic surgeons must assume leadership roles in cost containment, surgical safety, and quality assurance to deliver cost-effective care. Because most orthopaedic surgeons practice independently and are not employed by hospitals, models of physician-hospital alignment (e.g., physician-hospital organizations) or contracted gainsharing arrangements between practices and hospitals may be necessary for successful bundled pricing. Under BPCI, hospitals, surgeons, or third parties share rewards but assume risks for the bundle.For patients, cost savings must be associated with maintenance or improvement in quality metrics. However, the definition of quality can vary, as can the rewards for processes and outcomes. Risk stratification for potential complications should be considered in bundled pricing agreements to prevent the exclusion of patients with substantial comorbidities and higher care costs (e.g., hip fractures treated with prostheses). Bundled pricing depends on economies of scale for success; smaller institutions must be cautious, as 1 costly patient could substantially impact the finances of its entire program. CMS recommends a minimum of 100 to 200 cases yearly. We also suggest that participants utilize technologies to maximize efficiency and provide the best possible environment for implementation of bundled payments. Substantial investment in infrastructure is required to develop programs to improve coordination of care, manage quality data, and distribute payments. Smaller institutions may have difficulty devoting resources to these infrastructural changes, although changes may be implemented more thoroughly once initiated. Herein, we discuss our early total joint arthroplasty BPCI experience at our tertiary-care academic medical center.

Following a failed course of conservative management, arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) has become the gold standard treatment for patients presenting with symptomatic rotator cuff (RC) tears. Traditionally, the single-row repair technique was used. Although most patients enjoy good to excellent clinical outcomes, structural healing to bone remains problematic. As a result, orthopaedic surgeons have sought to improve outcomes with various technological and technical advancements. One such possible advancement is the double-row technique. We present a method for repairing an RC tear using double-row suture anchors in a transosseous equivalent suture bridge technique. The double-row technique is believed to more effectively re-create the anatomic footprint of the tendon, as well as increase tendon to bone surface area, and apposition for healing. However, it requires longer operating times and is costlier. This report highlights this technique for ARCR in an adult by using a double-row transosseous equivalent suture bridge.

INTRODUCTION: To date, no study has reported on the public's opinion of orthopaedic resident duty-hour requirements (DHR). METHODS: A survey was administered to people in orthopaedic waiting rooms and at three senior centers. Responses were analyzed to evaluate seven domains: knowledge of duty hours; opinions about duty hours; attitudes regarding shift work; patient safety concerns; and the effects of DHRs on continuity of care, on resident training, and on resident professionalism. RESULTS: Respondents felt that fatigue was unsafe and duty hours were beneficial in preventing resident physician fatigue. They supported the idea of residents working in shifts but did not support shifts for attending physicians. However, respondents wanted the same resident to provide continuity of care, even if that violated DHRs. They were supportive of increasing the length of residency to complete training. DHRs were not believed to affect professionalism. Half of the respondents believed that patient opinion should influence policy on this topic. DISCUSSION: Orthopaedic patients and those likely to require orthopaedic care have inconsistent opinions regarding DHRs, making it potentially difficult to incorporate their preferences into policy.

PURPOSE: To quantify the incidence of and identify the risk factors for subsequent shoulder procedures after isolated SLAP repair. METHODS: New York's Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was searched between 2003 and 2014 to identify individuals with the sole diagnosis of a SLAP lesion who underwent isolated arthroscopic SLAP repair. Patients were longitudinally followed up for a minimum of 3 years to analyze for subsequent ipsilateral shoulder procedures. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2014, 2,524 patients met our inclusion criteria. After 3 to 11 years of follow-up, 10.1% of patients (254 of 2,524) underwent repeat surgical intervention on the same shoulder as the initial SLAP repair. The mean time to repeat shoulder surgery was 2.3 +/- 2.1 years. Subsequent procedures included subacromial decompression (35%), debridement (26.7%). repeat SLAP repair (19.7%), and biceps tenodesis or tenotomy (13.0%). After isolated SLAP repair, patients aged 20 years or younger were more likely to undergo arthroscopic Bankart repair (odds ratio [OR], 2.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-6.21; P = .005), whereas age older than 30 years was an independent risk factor for subsequent acromioplasty (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4-3.7; P < .001) and distal clavicle resection (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5; P = .030). The need for a subsequent procedure was significantly associated with Workers' Compensation cases (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-3.2; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: We identified a 10.1% incidence of subsequent surgery after isolated SLAP repair, often related to an additional diagnosis, suggesting that clinicians should consider other potential causes of shoulder pain when considering surgery for patients with SLAP lesions. In addition, the number of isolated SLAP repairs performed has decreased over time, and management of failed SLAP repair has shifted toward biceps tenodesis or tenotomy over revision SLAP repair in more recent years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control study.

BACKGROUND: With this study, we sought to quantify perioperative changes in driving performance among patients who underwent anatomic or reverse shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Using a driving simulator, 30 patients (20 anatomic and 10 reverse total shoulder arthroplasties) were tested preoperatively and at 2 weeks (PO2), 6 weeks (PO6), and 12 weeks (PO12) postoperatively. The total number of collisions, centerline crossings, and off-road excursions (when the vehicle traversed the lateral road edge), and scores on a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) were recorded at each driving trial. RESULTS: The mean number of collisions increased from 5.9 preoperatively to 7.4 at PO2 and subsequently decreased to 5.6 at PO6 and 4.0 at PO12 (p = 0.0149). In addition, the number of centerline crossings decreased from 21.4 preoperatively to 16.3 at PO12 (p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis of the data demonstrated that increased VAS for pain scores, older age, and less driving experience had a negative impact on driving performance. CONCLUSIONS: Driving performance returned to preoperative levels at 6 weeks after shoulder arthroplasty. By 12 weeks postoperatively, patients demonstrated improved driving performance compared with preoperative performance. On the basis of our findings, clinicians can suggest a window of 6 to 12 weeks postoperatively for the gradual return to driving. However, for patients of older age, with less driving experience, or with greater pain, a return to driving at closer to 12 weeks postoperatively should be recommended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Infection in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty can result in significant pain, loss of function, and the need for additional surgery. As the use of shoulder arthroplasty increases, the medical and economic burdens of periprosthetic joint infection increase as well. The ideal management of infected shoulder prostheses has not been established. This report describes 9 patients from a single institution who had an infected shoulder arthroplasty that was definitively managed with a cement spacer. All patients had a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Of the 9 patients in this study, 6 were men. Mean age was 73+/-9 years. Of the study patients, 1 had diabetes, 2 presented with Parkinson's disease, and 5 had a history of tobacco use. Average body mass index was 27.9+/-7 kg/m(2). After mean follow-up of 4 years, none of the patients had clinical or radiographic evidence of infection. Functional outcomes, as measured by American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, were good or fair in 89% of patients, and the average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 57. A review of recent literature suggested that the current findings were similar to those in studies reporting 1- or 2-stage revision procedures. Although cement spacers are typically used as part of a 2-stage revision procedure, the current findings suggest that cement spacers can be used effectively to eradicate infection and allow for acceptable functional recovery and range of motion in patients who have severe medical comorbidities and cannot tolerate additional surgery. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(5):e924-e930.].

BACKGROUND: Large glenoid defects pose difficulties in shoulder arthroplasty. Structural grafts consisting of a humeral head autograft, iliac crest, and allograft have been described. Few series describe grafts used with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who had undergone primary or revision RTSA. We identified 44 patients (20 men and 24 women; mean age, 69 years) as having a bulk structural graft to the glenoid behind the baseplate. The grafts consisted of a humeral head autograft in 29, iliac crest autograft in 1, or femoral head allograft in 14. Range of motion data, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, simple shoulder test, shoulder pain and disability index, and Constant scores were obtained from preoperative and the latest follow-up visits. Radiographs were reviewed from the initial postoperative visit and the latest follow-up. The grafting cohort was compared with an age- and sex-matched cohort of RTSA patients without glenoid grafting. RESULTS: Improvements were seen in the functional outcome scores at the latest follow-up. No significant differences were found in the preoperative or postoperative data between allografts and autografts. Postoperative scores for the bone graft cohort were significantly lower than those in the cohort without grafting. Complete or partial incorporation was shown radiographically in 81% of grafts. Six baseplates were considered loose. Complications included 2 infections, 1 dislocation, 1 humeral loosening, and 2 instances of clinical aseptic baseplate loosening. Six patients showed mild scapular notching. CONCLUSIONS: The use of bulk structural grafts is a promising treatment option. Allografts may yield equally acceptable results compared with autografts.

BACKGROUND: In order to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with locked plating to hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of three- and four-part proximal humerus fractures, we compared two groups of patients treated during the same time period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-five patients who underwent repair of a three- or four-part proximal humerus fracture with locked plates (Group A) were identified in a prospective database and were compared to 29 patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty for similar injuries (Group B). Data was collected for both groups. Shoulder motion was measured and functional outcomes were obtained using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. RESULTS: The mean length of follow-up for the ORIF group was 16 months compared to 44 months for the hemiarthroplasty group. The average postoperative forward flexion for patients in Group A was 131.1 degrees and 110.4 degrees for Group B (p < 0.047). There were no differences in DASH scores at latest follow-up (p = 0.64). Two patients in Group A had radiographic signs of osteonecrosis but had elected for no further surgery. One patient in Group A and two patients in Group B underwent a conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty. There was no difference in the rate of secondary surgery (p = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that ORIF using locked plates leads to similar postoperative function compared to hemiarthroplasty. Patients who underwent ORIF did achieve greater forward shoulder flexion. Neither strategy leads to a higher reoperation rate.

The Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education requires that residency programs teach and assess trainees in six core competencies. Assessments are imperative to determine trainee competence and to ensure that excellent care is provided to all patients. A structured, direct observation program is feasible for assessing nontechnical core competencies and providing trainees with immediate constructive feedback. Direct observation of residents in the outpatient setting by trained faculty allows assessment of each core competency. Checklists are used to document residents' basic communication skills, clinical reasoning, physical examination methods, and medical record keeping. Faculty concerns regarding residents' professionalism, medical knowledge, fatigue, or ability to self-assess are tracked. Serial observations allow for the reinforcement and/or monitoring of skills and attitudes identified as needing improvement. Residents who require additional coaching are identified early in training. Progress in educational milestones is recorded, allowing an individualized educational program that ensures that future orthopaedic surgeons excel across all domains of medical and surgical competence.

The current study aimed to measure perioperative changes in driving performance following arthroscopic shoulder surgery using a validated driving simulator.21 patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery for rotator cuff or labral pathology were tested on a driving simulator preoperatively, and 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively. An additional 21 subjects were tested to establish driving data in a control cohort. The number of collisions, centerline crossings, and off-road excursions were recorded for each trial. VAS and SPADI scores were obtained at each visit.The mean number of collisions in the study group significantly increased from 2.05 preoperatively to 3.75 at 6 weeks (p<0.001), and significantly decreased to 1.95 at 12 weeks (p<0.001). Centerline crossings and off-road excursions did not significantly change from preoperative through 12 weeks, although centerline crossings were statistically different from the controls at each time point (p<0.001). Surgery on the dominant driving arm resulted in greater collisions at 6 weeks than surgery on the non-dominant driving arm (p<0.001).Preliminary data shows that driving performance is impaired for at least 6 weeks postoperatively, with a return to normal driving by 12 weeks. Driving is more profoundly affected in conditions that require avoiding a collision and when the dominant driving arm is involved.