No abstract

Background: Orthopaedics continues to remain the medical specialty with the lowest sex diversity in the United States. Orthopaedic residency programs are highly motivated to attract the best female candidates in an effort to improve their program diversity, but no studies currently exist that examine the factors of highest importance to female applicants for orthopaedic residency selection. Methods: A two-part survey was sent to female orthopaedic residents by e-mails available in the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery directory, residency program coordinators, Doximity, and institutional websites. The survey included 17 characteristics of residency programs that participants were asked to score for importance and then asked to rank their top five most influential factors when selecting an orthopaedic surgery residency. Results: The most important factors included camaraderie among residents, happiness of current residents, variety/number of cases, fellowship placement, and early surgical/clinical experience, respectively. The least important factors included sex diversity of faculty and residents, number of female residents, concurrent fellows, number of female faculty geographic location near spouse, and finally, attitudes toward maternity leave. Discussion: These data support the notion that efforts by orthopaedic residency programs to improve desirability for female applicants should focus on highlighting some of the more universal, nonsex-related factors such as the happiness and camaraderie among residents and the anticipated clinical experiences. This is opposed to showcasing features, such as maternity leave and number of current female faculty or residents, which would seemingly appeal to female applicants.

Introduction:There are no universal guidelines that dictate the indications for the use of intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) in spine surgery resulting in its variable use. The choice to use IONM has been both cited in malpractice lawsuits and insurance claims, but no data exist regarding surgeons' rationale for making this choice. The goal of this study was to assess (1) the use of certain IONM modalities during common spine surgeries, (2) surgeons' rationale for use of IONM, and (3) IONM practices and potential conflicts of interest associated with its use.Methods:Respondents were asked to select each IONM modality they used during 20 different surgical scenarios within the spine followed by rating the importance of several reasons when selecting to use IONM. Finally, the occurrence of conflicts of interest, out-of-network billing, and cost were assessed.Results:Approximately one-half (47%) of respondents who perform anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion/total disk arthroplasty for radiculopathy use IONM, opposed to 76% for myelopathy. The presence of cord compression and/or neurologic symptoms increased IONM use by approximately 30% during trauma cases. Medicolegal was the reason of highest importance when choosing to use IONM (7.4 ± 2.9; mean ± SD), followed by surgeon reassurance (6.2 ± 2.7; P < 0.0001 versus medicolegal) and belief it affects patient outcomes (5.2 ± 3.0; P = 0.004 versus reassurance).Conclusions:Although there is increasing use of IONM, this has not translated to an absolute requirement for every spine surgery. Surgeons are faced with opposing influences of the medicolegal system and insurance payers. Future guidelines on using IONM should not be absolute, but rather should consider the risks of each procedure, along with how patients and surgeons value these risks, in addition to the costs. The findings of this study should help to serve as a guide to surgeons, payers, and courts as contemporary, common practices for the use of IONM during spinal surgical scenarios.

Case: We describe a case of septic hip arthritis and enterocutaneous fistula formation caused by the seeding of a hip joint during hip arthroscopy performed in the setting of a psoas abscess. Treatment consisted of multiple debridements and femoral head resection with subsequent total hip arthroplasty. Conclusions: This case highlights the importance of a thorough history, physical examination, and assessment of available imaging before proceeding to surgery, even when the procedure is one considered to have minimal risks, such as arthroscopy.