Dataset Information

Sex-Specific Analysis at Two Time Points in Three High-Impact Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Journals.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To determine how well the orthopaedic sports medicine literature reported sex-specific analysis (SSA) in 2011 and 2016.

Methods

The 3 highest-impact orthopaedic sports medicine subspecialty journals (American Journal of Sports Medicine; Arthroscopy; and Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy) were selected for review. Two independent investigators reviewed all journal issues published during 2 different calendar years (2011 and 2016). All randomized controlled, prospective and retrospective group, and case-control studies were included. Studies were stratified into those that involved SSA, where sex was a variable in a multifactorial statistical model, and those that only reported sex as a demographic characteristic or used sex-matched groups without further analysis.

Results

A total of 960 studies evaluating 3,400,569 patients met criteria and were included in this review. Although 44.4% of the overall study population was female, only 293 (30.5%) studies included patient sex as variable in a multifactorial statistical model. The proportion of studies that performed SSA did not differ between 2011 (29.6%) and 2016 (31.1%; P = .607), although publications from American Journal of Sports Medicine were likely to report SSA (P < .05). Of the 293 studies that reported SSA, 91 (31%) demonstrated a significant difference in outcomes. The most commonly reported differences were in outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament, medial patellofemoral ligament, and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; autograft preparation; postoperative use of opiates following arthroscopy; and recovery after sports-related concussions.

Conclusions

Although most sports medicine studies include approximately 50% female and 50% male patients, statistical analysis differentiating the 2 subsets is not routinely performed. Only 30.5% of all studies performed SSA, 31% of which reported a statistically significant difference in the data when comparing outcomes between male and female patients with the same treatment modalities.

Clinical relevance

The current study demonstrates that the orthopaedic sports medicine subspecialty literature is lacking in reporting SSA, and that there has been minimal improvement over a 5-year time period. In addition, this study highlights the high percentage of significant findings within the studies that performed SSA and underscores the differences in sex-specific injury patterns and treatment outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Gianakos AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7283966 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose The purpose of this study was to report demographic trends in terms of ethnicity/race and gender among the membership and leadership positions of the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) and the American Orthopaedic Society of Sports Medicine (AOSSM). Over the years both AANA and AOSSM will increase in diversity through their committee membership and leadership positions. Methods AANA and AOSSM membership and leadership were reviewed for the years 2010, 2015, and 2020. Race/ethnicity was divided into Caucasian, Asian, African American (AA), Hispanic/Latin/South American (HLSA), and Middle Eastern (ME). Gender was limited to male or female, based on name and photographic depiction. Results Diversity in AANA and AOSSM committee and leadership positions is summarized in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. In 2010, 166/191 (87%) AANA committee members were Caucasian, as compared with 125/186 (67%) in 2020. Asian committee members were similar in 2010 (13/191, 7%) and 2015 (13/216, 6%) but increased to 17/186 (10%) in 2020. HLSA committee members increased from 5/191 (3%) 2010 to 11/186 (6%) in 2020. AA committee membership increased from 2/191 (1%) in 2010 to 5/186 (3%) in 2020. The diversity of AANA Board of Director leadership positions increased, with Caucasian representation decreasing from 14/14 (100%) 2010 to 11/12 (92%) in 2020 and Asian representation increasing from 0% in 2010 to 1/12 (8%) in 2020, with HLSA, AA and ME remaining the same with 0/12 (0%). In AANA, men comprised 181/191 (95%) committee members in 2010 and 166/186 (89%) in 2020. The percentage of female committee members increased from 10/191 (5%) in 2010 to 20/186 (11%) in 2020. In 2010, 73/79 (92%) AOSSM committee members were Caucasian compared to 62/81 (77%) in 2020 with AA having the largest increase in committee members from 0% in 2010 to 6/81 (7%) in 2020 (Table 2). Within AOSSM, men comprised 73/79 (92%) committee members in 2010 and 70/81 (86%) in 2020. The percentage of female committee members in AOSSM increased from 6/79 (8%) in 2010 to 11/81 (14%) in 2020. Conclusion There has been a progressive trend toward increasing diversity in both committee membership and leadership positions in AANA and AOSSM from 2010 to 2020. Within AANA, there has been a decrease in the Caucasian representation from 87% in 2010 to 67% in 2020 and an increase in the female representation from 5% in 2010 to 11% in 2020. AOSSM demonstrated a similar trend, with Caucasian representation decreasing from 92% in 2010 to 77% in 2020, in addition to female percentage increasing from 8% in 2010 to 14% in 2020. Although there has been an increase in representation of minority and female orthopaedic surgeons within both societies, there is still room for more diversity and inclusion within committee membership and leadership. It is important to progress toward the understanding of the changes that need to be made and work to implement opening the field of orthopaedic sports medicine.

Project description:Over the last year, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread across the world as a global pandemic, bringing unprecedented changes to the healthcare landscape for patients and physicians. Medical trainees have been similarly affected, as medical schools throughout the United States have implemented remote learning-based curriculums and withdrawn third- and fourth-year students from in-hospital clerkships. Of particular importance is the impact of COVID-19 on current orthopaedic surgery residents applying to subspecialty fellowship programs. Because of the highly transmissible nature of the virus and current social distancing restrictions, orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship interviews are being held virtually during the 2020-2021 application cycle. This transition to videoconference interviewing may de-emphasize an applicant's unique personality or interpersonal interactions that are traditionally captured in a variety of settings during the interview day. In turn, this may lead to increased prioritization of various aspects of the application, such as the applicant's residency program, letters of recommendation, and research productivity. Matching to a sports medicine fellowship program is an inherently competitive process and the COVID-19 pandemic presents novel challenges to orthopaedic residents in their efforts to successfully match. The purpose of this review is to describe the changes made to the orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship interview process resulting from COVID-19 during the 2020-2021 application cycle and discuss how these changes may impact the future fellowship application process. This review discusses the changes made to the orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship interview process caused by COVID-19 during the 2020-2021 application cycle. This review also assesses how such changes may impact the future application process and proposes potential adaptations to the current virtual interview format if it should become the new standard moving forward.

Project description:ContextOver the past three decades, industry sponsored research expanded in the United States. Financial incentives can lead to potential conflicts of interest (COI) resulting in underreporting of negative study results.ObjectiveWe hypothesized that over the three decades, there would be an increase in: a) reporting of conflict of interest and source of funding; b) percentage of randomized control trials c) number of patients per study and d) industry funding.Data sources and study selectionOriginal articles published in three calendar years (1988, 1998, and 2008) in The Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of American Medical Association were collected.Data extractionStudies were reviewed and investigational design categorized as prospective and retrospective clinical trials. Prospective trials were categorized into randomized or non-randomized and single-center or multi-center trials. Retrospective trials were categorized as registries, meta-analyses and other studies, mostly comprising of case reports or series. Study outcomes were categorized as positive or negative depending on whether the pre-specified hypothesis was met. Financial disclosures were researched for financial relationships and profit status, and accordingly categorized as government, non-profit or industry sponsored. Studies were assessed for reporting COI.Results1,671 original articles were included in this analysis. Total number of published studies decreased by 17% from 1988 to 2008. Over 20 year period, the proportion of prospective randomized trials increased from 22 to 46% (p < 0.0001); whereas the proportion of prospective non-randomized trials decreased from 59% to 27% (p < 0.001). There was an increase in the percentage of prospective randomized multi-center trials from 11% to 41% (p < 0.001). Conversely, there was a reduction in non-randomized single-center trials from 47% to 10% (p < 0.001). Proportion of government funded studies remained constant, whereas industry funded studies more than doubled (17% to 40%; p < 0.0001). The number of studies with negative results more than doubled (10% to 22%; p<0.0001). While lack of funding disclosure decreased from 35% to 7%, COI reporting increased from 2% to 84% (p < 0.0001).ConclusionImproved reporting of COI, clarity in financial sponsorship, increased publication of negative results in the setting of larger and better designed clinical trials represents a positive step forward in the scientific publications, despite the higher percentage of industry funded studies.

Project description:BackgroundCannabidiol (CBD) is a known pain modulator that is garnering increased attention in the orthopaedic world. There may be a considerable knowledge gap among orthopaedic sports medicine providers and their perception of its therapeutic value.PurposeTo (1) examine the knowledge and beliefs of sports medicine orthopaedic providers with respect to CBD, (2) deliver an educational component, and (3) elucidate potential barriers to its widespread application.Study designCross-sectional study.MethodsA 3-component, 25-question online survey was distributed to members of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine and the Arthroscopy Association of North America between July and October 2022. The first 20 questions assessed baseline knowledge and opinions regarding CBD, followed by an educational component, and then 5 questions assessing whether the respondents' opinions had changed after learning more about CBD. Responses were compared according to age, practice setting, and state's cannabinoid legalization status using the chi-square test, and changes in opinions from before to after the educational component were compared using the paired t test.ResultsThere were 101 survey responses, for a response rate of approximately 1%. Most respondents believed that there is a role for CBD in postoperative pain management (76%), acute pain and inflammation after an injury (62%), and chronic pain (94%). Most respondents admitted that they were not knowledgeable about the mechanism of action (89%) or their state's laws (66%) concerning CBD. A minority (25%) believed that CBD has psychoactive properties. While most respondents (76%) did not believe that they would be stigmatized if they were to suggest CBD to a patient, only 48% had ever suggested CBD. Notably, 94% of respondents had encountered patients who reported trying CBD to treat pain. After reading the fact sheet, 51% of respondents stated that their opinion on CBD had changed, and 63% felt inclined to investigate the topic further.ConclusionMost survey respondents believed that CBD has a role in postoperative and chronic pain management. Although there was a relative familiarity with CBD, there was a knowledge gap, suggesting that increased attention, education, and research are necessary.