Faculty Bibliography

There has been a substantial shift in the assessment of outcomes in medicine, including orthopaedic surgery. The quality movement is redefining the delivery of health care. The effect of these changes on orthopaedic surgery and orthopaedic surgeons has been significant and will become increasingly important. Orthopaedic surgeons must become active participants in the quality movement by understanding the basic principles of the movement and how they apply to patient care. A clear understanding of the different agencies (governmental and private) that are leading these initiatives is also essential. Ultimately, active participation in the quality movement will enhance the care provided to patients with musculoskeletal disorders.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff repairs (RCRs) have become increasingly common. Several studies have shown variation in the indications for this procedure. We chose to track the incidence of RCRs in New York State (NYS) from 1995 to 2009. We hypothesized that after the introduction of the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 29827 for arthroscopic RCR, there would be a significant increase in the rate of RCRs performed in NYS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The NYS Department of Health's Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database was queried for reported RCRs between the years 1995 and 2009. Using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification procedural code 83.63 and CPT codes 23410, 23412, 23420, and 29827, we collected and analyzed data on RCR procedures. RESULTS: A total of 168,780 RCRs were performed in NYS from 1995 to 2009. In 1995, the population incidence of RCRs was 23.5 per 100,000. In comparison, in 2009, the population incidence was 83.1 per 100,000, an increase of 238% (P < .0001). The percentage of individuals aged between 45 and 65 years undergoing RCR increased from 53.0% to 64.2% during this same period. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a notable increase in the volume of RCRs performed in NYS. In addition, after the introduction of CPT code 29827 in 2003, the increase in the incidence of RCRs became significantly more pronounced.

BACKGROUND: Superior glenoid wear is a common challenge with reverse shoulder arthroplasty and, if left uncorrected, can result in superior glenoid tilt, which increases the risk of aseptic glenoid loosening. This study evaluates the impact of an E2 superior defect on reverse shoulder glenoid fixation in composite scapulae after correction of glenoid tilt by use of 2 different glenoid reaming techniques: eccentric reaming and off-axis reaming. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A superior glenoid defect was created in 14 composite scapulae. The superior defect was corrected by 2 different glenoid reaming techniques: (1) eccentric reaming with implantation of a standard glenoid baseplate and (2) off-axis reaming with implantation of a superior-augment glenoid baseplate. Each corrected superior-defect scapula was then cyclically loaded (along with a control group consisting of 7 non-worn scapulae) for 10,000 cycles at 750 N; glenoid baseplate displacement was measured for each group to quantify fixation before and after cyclic loading. RESULTS: Regardless of the glenoid reaming technique or the glenoid baseplate type, each standard and superior-augment glenoid baseplate remained well fixed in this superior-defect model scenario after cyclic loading. No differences in baseplate displacement were observed either before or after cyclic loading between groups. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that either glenoid reaming technique may be used to achieve fixation in the clinically challenging situation of superior wear with reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Numerous glenoid implant designs have been introduced into the global marketplace in recent years; however, little comparative biomechanical data exist to substantiate one design consideration over another. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study dynamically evaluated reverse shoulder glenoid baseplate fixation and compared the initial fixation associated with 2 reverse shoulder designs having an equivalent center of rotation in low-density and high-density bone substitute substrates. RESULTS: Significant differences in fixation were observed between implant designs, where the circular-porous reverse shoulder was associated with approximately twice the micromotion per equivalent test than the oblong-grit-blasted design. Additionally, 6 of the 7 circular-porous reverse shoulders failed catastrophically in the low-density bone model at an average of 2603 +/- 981 cycles. None of the oblong-grit-blasted designs failed in the low-or high-density bone models and none of the circular-porous designs failed in the high-density bone models after 10,000 cycles of loading. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that significant differences in initial fixation exist between reverse shoulder implants having an equivalent center of rotation and suggest that design parameters, other than the position of the center of rotation, significantly affect fixation in low-density and high-density polyurethane bone substitutes. Subtle changes in glenoid baseplate design can dramatically affect fixation, particularly in low-density bone substitutes that are intended to simulate the bone quality of the recipient population for reverse shoulders.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Osteoporotic fractures are an increasing problem in the world due to the ageing of the population. Different models of orthogeriatric co-management are currently in use worldwide. These models differ for instance by the health-care professional who has the responsibility for care in the acute and early rehabilitation phases. There is no international consensus regarding the best model of care and which outcome parameters should be used to evaluate these models. The goal of this project was to identify which outcome parameters and assessment tools should be used to measure and compare outcome changes that can be made by the implementation of orthogeriatric co-management models and to develop recommendations about how and when these outcome parameters should be measured. It was not the purpose of this study to describe items that might have an impact on the outcome but cannot be influenced such as age, co-morbidities and cognitive impairment at admission. METHODS: Based on a review of the literature on existing orthogeriatric co-management evaluation studies, 14 outcome parameters were evaluated and discussed in a 2-day meeting with panellists. These panellists were selected based on research and/or clinical expertise in hip fracture management and a common interest in measuring outcome in hip fracture care. RESULTS: We defined 12 objective and subjective outcome parameters and how they should be measured: mortality, length of stay, time to surgery, complications, re-admission rate, mobility, quality of life, pain, activities of daily living, medication use, place of residence and costs. We could not recommend an appropriate tool to measure patients' satisfaction and falls. We defined the time points at which these outcome parameters should be collected to be at admission and discharge, 30 days, 90 days and 1 year after admission. CONCLUSION: Twelve objective and patient-reported outcome parameters were selected to form a standard set for the measurement of influenceable outcome of patients treated in different models of orthogeriatric co-managed care.

Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) have been used extensively in medical schools and residency programs to evaluate various skills, including the six core competencies outlined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). Orthopaedic surgery residency programs will be required by the ACGME to assess residents on core competencies in the Milestone Project. Thus, it is important that evaluations be made in a consistent, objective manner. Orthopaedic residency programs can also use simulation models in the examination to accurately and objectively assess residents' skills as they progress through training. The use of these models will become essential as resident work hours are decreased and opportunities to observe skills become more limited. In addition to providing a method to assess competency, OSCEs are a valuable tool for residents to develop and practice important clinical skills. Here, we describe a method for developing a successful OSCE for use in orthopaedic surgical resident training.

BACKGROUND: Scapular notching is a well-documented complication of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The effect of scapular notching on glenoid fixation is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study dynamically evaluated reverse shoulder glenoid baseplate fixation and assessed the effect of scapular notching on fixation in composite scapulae. A cyclic test was conducted to simulate 55 degrees of humeral abduction in the scapular plane as a 750-N axial load was continuously applied to induce a variable shear and compressive load. Before and after cyclic loading, a displacement test was conducted to measure glenoid baseplate displacement in the directions of the applied static shear and compressive loads. RESULTS: For the scapulae without a scapular notch, glenoid baseplate displacement did not exceed the generally accepted 150-mum threshold for osseous integration before or after cyclic loading in any component tested. For the scapulae with a scapular notch, glenoid baseplate displacement exceeded 150 mum in 2 of the 7 samples before cyclic loading and in 3 of the 7 samples after cyclic loading. The average pre-cyclic glenoid baseplate displacement in the direction of the shear load was significantly greater in scapulae with a scapular notch than those without a scapular notch both before (P = .003) and after (P = .023) cyclic loading. CONCLUSIONS: Adequate glenoid baseplate fixation was achievable in most cases in scapulae with a severe scapular notch; however, the fact that this micromotion threshold was not met in all scapulae with a notch is concerning and implies that severe notching may play a role in initial glenoid baseplate stability.