Abstract
Purpose:
To examine the feasibility of surgical outcome measures for a children's orthopaedic surgeon when compared with other specialties.
Methods & Results:
Details of procedure codes for 2726 inpatient episodes were used to examine the distribution of procedures and the breadth of diagnoses dealt with by a variety of orthopaedic sub-specialists. The author's practice included 199 surgical cases and was compared with two arthroplasty surgeons (n=971); a spinal surgeon (n=256); a foot and ankle surgeon (n=341) and an upper limb surgeon (n=393).
Arthroplasty surgeons can report 50% of their outcomes as primary knee or hip replacements the index procedure for the author is metalwork removal (14.5%). My upper limb colleague could be judged on 25% of his cases (carpal tunnel decompression) and my spinal surgical colleague on 20% of his cases (primary posterior decompression of spinal cord). Only my foot and ankle colleague compared in terms of diversity with 9% of his cases consisting of first metatarsal osteotomy and the next 9% consisting of 1st MTPJ arthrodesis.
The proportion of multiple procedures also varies between sub-specialists with 66% of my cases being multiple compared with 38% for the arthroplasty surgeons and 42% for the upper limb surgeons. Foot and ankle has a high rate of multiple procedures (62%) and the spinal surgeons code different procedures at each level in the spine giving the high rates of multiple procedures.
Conclusion:
Outcome measures in children's orthopaedics seem problematic owing to the diverse nature of the practice and the confusion resulting from multiple procedures contributing to the outcome in 60% of cases. Either we are treated like physicians who do not have surgical outcomes to report or some goal based measure is adopted.
Level of evidence: III
