An Assessment of Sleep Disturbance in Patients before and after Carpal Tunnel Release

Background: Night time numbness is a key characteristic of CTS and relief of night time symptoms is one of the outcomes most important to patients. This study tested the hypothesis that there is no difference between sleep quality and night symptoms before and after carpal tunnel release (CTR). Methods: Forty-four, English-speaking adult patients requesting open CTR for electrodiagnostically confirmed carpal tunnel syndrome completed questionnaires before and after surgery. Average age was 59, 24 patients were men and 20 were women. Patient with a primary or secondary sleep disorder were excluded. Before surgery, patients completed the Pittsburg Sleep Quality index (PSQI). At an average of 3 months after surgery, participants completed PSQI questionnaires. Onset of sleep quality improvement was specifically addressed. Differences between preoperative and postoperative sleep quality were evaluated using the paired t-test. Spearman correlations were used to assess the relationship between continuous variables. Results: Of the 44 patients, 32 (72%) were classified as poor sleepers (PSQI \u3e 5.5) prior to surgery. At 3 months follow up, there was a significant improvement PSQI global scores (7.8 ± 5.1 vs 4 ± 3.5, p \u3c 0.001) as well as subdivisions. Daytime dysfunction (0.2 ± 0.4, p \u3c 0.001) and medication use (1.0 ± 1.2 vs 0.9 ± 1.2, p \u3c 0.045) secondary to sleep disturbance and was improved as well. In all patients, onset of improvement was within 24 hours of surgery. Conclusions: CTR is associated with improvement in sleep quality at 3 months follow-up. CTR improves daytime dysfunction related to the sleep disturbance. The onset of sleep improvement is 24 hours after surgery in most cases

Intraoperative Tilted Posteroanterior View for the Measurement of Distal Radius Articular Step-Off.

The purpose of this study is to more accurately determine distal radius articular step-off in the posteroanterior (PA) view. A cadaveric forearm was osteotomized with varying amounts of articular displacement. A second osteotomy was made through the distal radius metaphysis to create four positions of tilt in the lateral plane (5° and 15° dorsal tilt; 5° and 15° volar tilt). Using fluoroscopy, the beam was positioned in the lateral plane from 25° volar to 20° dorsal, separated by 5° increments, obtaining modified PA images of the distal radius in its various configurations. The images were randomly evaluated for step-off by three hand surgeons in a blinded fashion. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the accuracy between estimated and actual step-off and was demonstrated to be greater when the PA view was parallel to the distal radius tilt in the lateral plane, for all four configurations of distal radius tilt. Data pertaining to the distal radius with 0 mm of step-off did not demonstrate the PA view, parallel to the distal radius tilt, to be superior than the PA views not parallel to the tilt; reaffirming that with anatomic reduction, any fluoroscopic image exhibits good alignment. This study confirms that the most accurate method of accessing PA step-off is to first determine the tilt of the radius on a lateral film and then align the beam in the PA plane to match this tilt

Do surgeons treat their patients like they would treat themselves?

Background There is substantial unexplained geographical and surgeon-to-surgeon variation in rates of surgery.Onewould expect surgeons to treat patients and themselves similarly based on best evidence and accounting for patient preferences. Questions/purposes (1) Are surgeons more likely to recommend surgery when choosing for a patient than for themselves? (2) Are surgeons less confident in deciding for patients than for themselves? Methods Two hundred fifty-four (32%) of 790 Science of Variation Group (SOVG) members reviewed 21 fictional upper extremity cases (eg, distal radius fracture, De Quervain tendinopathy) for which surgery is optional answering two questions: (1) What treatment would you choose/recommend: operative or nonoperative? (2) On a scale from 0 to 10, how confident are you about this decision? Confidence is the degree that one believes that his or her decision is the right one (ie, most appropriate). Participants were orthopaedic, trauma, and plastic surgeons, all with an interest in treating upper extremity conditions. Half of the participants were randomized to choose for themselves if they had this injury or illness. The other half was randomized to make treatment recommendations for a patient of their age and gender. For the choice of operative or nonoperative, the overall recommendation for treatment was expressed as a surgery score per surgeon by dividing the number of cases they would operate on by the total number of cases (n = 21), where 100% is when every surgeon recommended surgery for every case. For confidence, we calculated the mean confidence for all 21 cases per surgeon; overall score ranges from 0 to 10 with a higher score indicating more confidence in the decision for treatment. Results Surgeons were more likely to recommend surgery for a patient (44.2% ± 14.0%) than they were to choose surgery for themselves (38.5% ± 15.4%) with a mean difference of 6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1%-9.4%; p = 0.002). Surgeons were more confident in deciding for themselves than they were for a patient of similar age and gender (self: 7.9 ± 1.0, patient: 7.5 ± 1.2, mean difference: 0.35 [CI, 0.075-0.62], p = 0.012). Conclusions Surgeons are slightly more likely to recommend surgery for a patient than they are to choose surgery for themselves and they choose for themselves with a little more confidence. Different perspectives, preferences, circumstantial information, and cognitive biases might explain the observed differences. This emphasizes the importance of (1) understanding patients' preferences and their considerations for treatment; (2) being aware that surgeons and patients might weigh various factors differently; (3) giving patients more autonomy by letting them balance risks and benefits themselves (ie, shared decisionmaking); and (4) assessing how dispassionate evidencebased decision aids help inform the patient and influences their decisional conflict

Interpretation of Post-operative Distal Humerus Radiographs After Internal Fixation: Prediction of Later Loss of Fixation

Purpose Stable fixation of distal humerus fracture fragments is necessary for adequate healing and maintenance of reduction. The purpose of this study was to measure the reliability and accuracy of interpretation of postoperative radiographs to predict which implants will loosen or break after operative treatment of bicolumnar distal humerus fractures. We also addressed agreement among surgeons regarding which fracture fixation will loosen or break and the influence of years in independent practice, location of practice, and so forth. Methods A total of 232 orthopedic residents and surgeons from around the world evaluated 24 anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of distal humerus fractures on a Web-based platform to predict which implants would loosen or break. Agreement among observers was measured using the multi-rater kappa measure. Results The sensitivity of prediction of failure of fixation of distal humerus fracture on radiographs was 63%, specificity was 53%, positive predictive value was 36%, the negative predictive value was 78%, and accuracy was 56%. There was fair interobserver agreement (κ = 0.27) regarding predictions of failure of fixation of distal humerus fracture on radiographs. Interobserver variability did not change when assessed for the various subgroups. Conclusions When experienced and skilled surgeons perform fixation of type C distal humerus fracture, the immediate postoperative radiograph is not predictive of fixation failure. Reoperation based on the probability of failure might not be advisable. Type of study/level of evidence Diagnostic III

Scapula fractures: interobserver reliability of classification and treatment

OBJECTIVES:There is substantial variation in the classification and the management of scapula fractures. The first purpose of this study was to analyze the interobserver reliability of the OTA/AO and the New International Classification of scapula fractures. The second purpose was to assess the proportion of agreement among orthopaedic surgeons on operative or nonoperative treatment. DESIGN:: Web-based reliability study SETTING:: Independent orthopaedic surgeons from several countries were invited to classify scapular fractures in an online survey. PARTICIPANTS:One-hundred and three orthopaedic surgeons evaluated 35 movies of 3DCT-reconstruction of selected scapular fractures, representing a full spectrum of fracture patterns. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:Fleiss' kappa (κ) was used to assess the reliability of agreement between the surgeons. RESULTS:: The overall agreement on the OTA/AO Classification was moderate for the types (A, B, and C, κ = 0.54) with a 71% proportion of rater agreement (PA) as well as for the nine groups (A1 to C3, κ = 0.47) with a 57% PA. For the New International Classification, the agreement about the intra-articular extension of the fracture (Fossa (F), κ = 0.79) was substantial, the agreement about a fractured body (Body (B), κ = 0.57) or process was moderate (Process (P), κ = 0.53), however PAs were more than 81%. The agreement on the treatment recommendation was moderate (κ = 0.57) with a 73% PA. CONCLUSIONS:The New International Classification was more reliable. Body and process fractures generated more disagreement than intra-articular fractures and need further clear definitions