International Microsurgery Club Webinar Series-Bridging the Knowledge Gap during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The Preferred Reconstructive Choice for a Lower Third Tibial Exposure Defect: An Online Survey of 356 Microsurgeons

BACKGROUND

 One of the most challenging yet common areas in reconstructive surgery is the closure of defects in the lower leg. Surgeons can choose from several reconstructive options including local and free flaps. The aim of this study was to understand the reconstructive strategy for lower leg defects of different microsurgeons around the world by harnessing the power of social media and online questionnaires.

METHODS

 A case of a patient with an exposed plate over distal tibial fracture was presented via an online questionnaire distributed on various social media platforms. A total of 369 international microsurgeons replied with their preferred treatment choice. The data were analyzed according to geographic area, microsurgical training, seniority, and subspecialty.

RESULTS

 Among all the respondents (n = 369), 64% would have opted for a free flap reconstruction, while the remaining 36% would have opted for a local/pedicle flap. In the group that would have opted for a free flap, 63% would reconstruct the defect using a free fasciocutaneous flap, while the remaining 37% would have used a free muscle flap. In the local flap group, 60% would have used a local perforator while 30% would have chosen a conventional local flap. While North American and European microsurgeons had a clear preference toward free flaps, Asian, Middle Eastern, African, and South American surgeons were evenly divided between local and free flaps.

CONCLUSION

 In this study, we provide a current global overview of the reconstructive strategies for a lower limb with skin defect and bone or prosthesis exposure. We hope that this will be able to help global microsurgeons and patients worldwide.

Plastic Surgeons and their Financial Relationships with the Industry in the era of COVID: Insights from the Physician Payments Sunshine Act

BACKGROUND

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on physician relationships with industry and subsequent financial implications has not been previously assessed. The aim of this study is to compare pre- and post-COVID-19 payments between industry and medical providers for all plastic surgeons.

METHODS

Payment information was collected for the 2019 and 2020 reporting periods from the Open Payments Program (OPP) database for plastic surgeons and plastic surgeon subspecialists. An analysis was performed of trends and comparison of payments for each year for all plastic surgeons and each subspecialty cohort.

RESULTS

For all plastic surgeons, there was a decrease in industry payments between 2019 and 2020 (- 30.5%). All plastic surgery subspecialties had a decrease in payments with general plastic and reconstructive surgery affected the most (- 56%) and craniofacial surgery affected the least (- 9%). Payments for almost all categories for plastic surgeons decreased along with compensation as faculty or as speakers. Total charitable contributions and grant payments increased by 61 and 273%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of industry-physician payments available through the Sunshine Act shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted industry payments to plastic surgery and its subspecialties. While this study demonstrates the economic impact of the current pandemic, only time will tell whether these trends will persist in the coming years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .