Emerging evidence suggests preoperative opioid use may increase the risk of negative outcomes following orthopedic procedures. This systematic review evaluated the impact of preoperative opioid use in patients undergoing shoulder surgery with respect to preoperative clinical outcomes, postoperative complications, and postoperative dependence on opioids.

EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched from inception to April, 2021 for studies reporting preoperative opioid use and its effect on postoperative outcomes or opioid use. The search, data extraction and methodologic assessment were performed in duplicate for all included studies.

Twenty-one studies with a total of 257,301 patients were included in the final synthesis. Of which, 17 were level III evidence. Of those, 51.5% of the patients reported pre-operative opioid use. Fourteen studies (66.7%) reported a higher likelihood of opioid use at follow-up among those used opioids preoperatively compared to preoperative opioid-naïve patients. Eight studies (38.1%) showed lower functional measurements and range of motion in opioid group compared to the non-opioid group post-operatively.

Preoperative opioid use in patients undergoing shoulder surgeries is associated with lower functional scores and post-operative range of motion. Most concerning is preoperative opioid use may predict increased post-operative opioid requirements and potential for misuse in patients.

While surgeon-industry relationships in orthopaedics have a critical role in advancing techniques and patient outcomes, they also present the potential for conflict of interest (COI) and increased risk of bias in surgical education. Consequently, robust processes of disclosure and mitigation of potential COI have been adopted across educational institutions, professional societies, and specialty journals. The past years have seen marked growth in the use of online video-based surgical education platforms that are commonly used by both trainees and practicing surgeons. However, it is unclear to what extent the same COI disclosure and mitigation principles are adhered to on these platforms. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to evaluate the frequency and adequacy of potential COI disclosure on orthopaedic online video-based educational platforms.

We retrospectively reviewed videos from a single, publicly-accessible online peer-to-peer orthopaedic educational video platform (VuMedi) that is used as an educational resource by a large number of orthopaedic trainees across North America. The 25 highest-viewed videos were identified for each of 6 subspecialty areas (hip reconstruction, knee reconstruction, shoulder/elbow, foot and ankle, spine and sports). A standardized case report form was developed based on the COI disclosure guidelines of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS) and the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. Two reviewers watched and assessed each video for presentation of any identifiable commercial products or brand names, disclosure of funding source for video, and presenter's potential conflict of interest. Additionally, presenter disclosures were cross-referenced against commercial relationships reported in the AAOS disclosure database to determine adequacy of disclosure. Any discrepancies between reviewers were resolved by consensus wherever possible, or with adjudication by a third reviewer when necessary.

Out of 150 reviewed videos, only 37 (25%) included a disclosure statement of any kind. Sixty-nine (46%) videos involved the presentation of a readily identifiable commercial orthopaedic device, implant or brand. Despite this, only 13 of these (19%) included a disclosure of any kind, and only 8 were considered adequate when compared to the presenter's disclosures in the AAOS database. In contrast, 83% of the presenters of the videos included in this study reported one or more commercial relationships in the AAOS disclosure database.

Videos of presentations given at conferences and/or academic meetings had significantly greater rates of disclosure as compared to those that were not (41% vs 14%; p=0.004). Similarly, disclosures associated with conference/meeting presentations had significantly greater rates of adequacy (21% vs 7%; p=0.018). Even so, less than half of the educational videos originating from a conference or meeting included a disclosure of any kind, and only about half of these were deemed adequate. No differences were seen in the rate of disclosures between orthopaedic subspecialties (p=0.791).

Online orthopaedic educational videos commonly involve presentation of specific, identifiable commercial products and brands, and the large majority of presenters have existing financial relationships with potential for conflict of interest. Despite this, the overall rate of disclosure of potential conflict of interest in these educational videos is low, and many of these disclosures are incomplete or inadequate. Further work is needed to better understand the impact of this low rate of disclosure on orthopaedic education both in-training and in practice.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with glenoid bone grafting has become a common option for the management of significant glenoid bone loss and deformity associated with glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Despite the increasing utilization of this technique, our understanding of the rates of bone graft union, complications and outcomes are limited. The objectives of this systematic review are to determine 1) the overall rate of bone graft union, 2) the rate of union stratified by graft type and technique, 3) the reoperation and complication rates, and 4) functional outcomes, including range of motion (ROM) and functional outcome scores following RSA with glenoid bone grafting.

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases was completed for studies reporting outcomes following RSA with glenoid bone grafting. Inclusion criteria included clinical studies with greater than 10 patients, and minimum follow up of one year. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers and quality assessment was performed using the MINORs criteria. Pooled and frequency-weighted means and standard deviations were calculated where applicable.

Overall, 15 studies were included, including nine retrospective case series (level IV), four retrospective cohort studies (level III), one prospective cohort study (level II) and one randomized control trial (level I). The entire cohort consisted of 555 patients with a mean age of 71.9±2.1 years and 70 percent female. The mean follow-up was 33.8±9.4 months. Across all procedures, 84.9% (N=471) were primary arthroplasties, and 15.1% (N=84) were revisions. The overall graft union rate was 89.2%, but was higher at 96.1% among studies that used autograft bone (9 studies, N=308). When stratified by technique, bone graft for the purposes of lateralization resulted in a 100% union rate (4 studies, N=139), while eccentric bone grafts used in asymmetric bone loss resulted in a lower union rate of 84.9% (10 studies, N=345). The overall revision rate was 6.5%, and was lowest following primary cases at 1.8% (11 studies, N=393). The pooled mean scapular notching rate was 20.1% (12 studies, N=497). Excluding notching, the pooled mean complication rate was 21.5% for all cases and 13% for primary cases (11 studies, N=393). When reported, there was significant improvement in post-operative ROM in all planes. There was also improvement in functional outcome scores, whereby the frequency-weighted mean Constant score increased from 25.9 to 67.2 (8 studies, N=319), ASES score increased from 34.7 to 75.2 (4 studies, N=142), and SST score increased from 2.1 to 7.6 (5 studies, N=196) at final follow up.

This review demonstrates that glenoid bone grafting with RSA results in good mid-term clinical and radiographic outcomes. Union rate appears to depend highly on graft type and technique, whereby the highest union rates were seen following the use of autograft bone for the purposes of lateralization. Interestingly, the union rate of autograft bone for the purposes of augmentation in eccentric bone loss is considerably lower and its impact on the long-term survivorship of the implant remains unknown.

The purpose of this study was to validate a dry model for the assessment of performance of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) and labral repair (LR). We hypothesised that the combination of a checklist and a previously validated global rating scale (GRS) would be a valid and reliable means of assessing RCR and LR when performed by residents in a dry model.

An arthroscopic RCR and LR was performed on a dry model by residents, fellows, and sports medicine staff. Any prior RCR and LR exposure was noted. Participants were given a detailed surgical manuscript and technique video before the study began. Evaluation of residents was performed by staff surgeons with task-specific checklists created using a modified Delphi procedure, and the Arthroscopic Surgical Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET). The hand movements and arthroscopic view of the procedures were recorded. Both videos were scored by a fellow blinded to the year of training of each participant.

A total of 35 residents, six fellows and five staff surgeons performed both arthroscopic RCR and LR on a dry model model (48 total). The internal reliability (Cronbach's Alpha) of the test using the total ASSET score was high (>0.8)). One-way analysis of variance for the total ASSET score and the total checklist score demonstrated a difference between participants based upon year of training (p<0.05). Post hoc analysis also demonstrated a significant difference in global ratings and checklist scores between junior residents (PGY1–3) and senior residents (PGY4&5), senior residents and fellows, and fellows and staff. A good correlation was seen between the total ASSET score and prior exposure to RCR and LR. The inter-rater reliability (ICC) between the examiner ratings and the blinded assessor ratings for the total ASSET score was good (0.8).

The results of this study provide evidence that the performance of a RCR and LR in a dry model is a valid and reliable method of assessing a resident's ability to perform these procedures, prior to performance in the operating room.