Low Rates of Reporting Race, Ethnicity, and Socioeconomic Status in Studies Published in Top Orthopaedic Journals

Greater socioeconomic deprivation predicts worse functional status two years after orthopaedic surgery, but not magnitude of change from baseline

Background

The purpose of this study was to analyze if Area Deprivation Index (ADI), as a geography-based proxy for socioeconomic status (SES), is associated with differences in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) 2 years after outpatient orthopaedic surgery.

Methods

Patients undergoing outpatient orthopaedic surgery from June 2015 to November 2018 were administered Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and joint-specific surveys at baseline and 2 years postoperatively. ADI was computed from home address. Tests of association were used to characterize 2-year PROs dependence on ADI. This informed covariate selection for multivariable linear regression examined PRO change over 2 years with ADI in the context of other self-reported socioeconomic covariates.

Results

Enrollment was 2117 patients, 1483 (70 %) completed follow-up. Lower SES as measured by home address was associated with lower function and less improvement from baseline at 2 years postoperatively. This trend was most apparent in PROMIS instruments.

Conclusion

SES as approximated by ADI is associated with PROs at 2 years after outpatient orthopaedic surgery for a subset of PROs. ADI should be considered for inclusion in statistical models using an SES-sensitive PRO as an outcome, understanding that model performance may also depend on if a single value or change over time is being estimated.

Socioeconomic and Demographic Variables Are Lacking in Meniscectomy Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the inclusion of sociodemographic factors in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on meniscectomy outcomes, with the goal of understanding the extent to which RCTs on meniscectomy consider sociodemographic variables.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Medline were queried from January 1, 2014, to October 10, 2024, for meniscectomy RCTs in high-impact journals. Each RCT was assessed for inclusion of the following background and sociodemographic variables: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), race/ethnicity, education level, insurance, smoking/tobacco use, socioeconomic status, marital status, alcohol use, proficiency in country's official language, employment status, and residence status. Temporal trends were analyzed using Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Of 301 RCTs screened, 11 reports on unique meniscectomy trials were included. All 11 studies included age. Sex and BMI were included in 10 studies (90.9%). Patients' proficiency in the official language(s) of the study country was only included in 4 studies (36.4%). Employment status was reported in 2 studies (18.2%), and race/ethnicity and smoking/tobacco use were each included in one study (9.1%). Socioeconomic status, residency status, alcohol use, marital status, and insurance were not reported in any included RCT. There was no significant difference in the reporting of at least one sociodemographic variable (excluding age, sex, and BMI) in later studies (2015-2019) versus earlier studies (2020-2024, p=0.061).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of high-impact meniscectomy RCTs revealed deficient reporting of sociodemographic variables over the last decade. RCTs on meniscectomy outcomes should consistently report key sociodemographic variables to better elucidate the external validity of their findings.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This analysis highlights the historical oversight of sociodemographic factors in meniscectomy trials and thus emphasizes the critical need to incorporate these variables in future orthopedic clinical research to improve the generalizability, utility, and replicability of study findings.

Ethnic and racial minority patients are under-represented in US clinical trials for surgical management of hip fractures

INTRODUCTION

The impact of social determinants on clinical outcomes following surgeries for orthopaedic injuries are well-documented. In this study, we sought to quantify the representation of women, racial, and ethnic minorities in US-based clinical trials for hip fracture surgery.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional analysis of patients enrolled in US-based, interventional clinical trials for hip fractures registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (2000-2022). Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated for demographic groups in clinical trials relative to their prevalence among patients receiving hip fracture surgery in the National Inpatient Sample (2006-2015). PPRs between 0.8-1.2 were considered equitable representation. PPRs<0.8 were considered underrepresentation and PPRs>1.2 were considered overrepresentation. Temporal trends were analyzed between previous (2000-2010) and contemporary (2011-2022) periods.

RESULTS

There were thirty-eight hip fracture clinical trials involving 6937 participants included in this study. All clinical trials reported sex, but only sixteen trials (42 %) reported race and ten trials (26 %) reported ethnicity. In total, trial participants were predominately White (89.3 %) and female (68.0 %). Few patients were non-White including Asian (7.2 %), Black (2.1 %), and Hispanic (0.8 %). Female (PPR=0.97) and male (PPR=1.07) patients had equitable representation. However, Hispanic (PPR=0.22), and African American (PPR=0.51) patients were underrepresented. White patients (PPR=1.00) had equitable representation while Asian patients were overrepresented (PPR=4.50). The rate of race (P < 0.001) and ethnicity (P = 0.010) reporting increased between previous and contemporary periods.

CONCLUSION

Recruitment of racial and ethnic minorities into hip fracture clinical trials remains limited. The impact of social determinants on outcomes after trauma surgery requires equitable representation of all groups in clinical trials to ensure translatability of results. Stakeholders across healthcare, industry, and government must work to address these disparities.

The Effect of Community-Level Socioeconomic Status on Surgical Outcomes Following Revision Lumbar Fusion

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of community-level socioeconomic status (SES) on surgical outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following revision lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent revision lumbar fusion surgery from 2011-2021 were grouped by Distressed Community Index (DCI) into Prosperous, Comfortable, Mid-tier, and At-Risk/Distressed cohorts. Demographics, surgical information, and PROMs were compared based on DCI community status. Outcome measures were collected preoperatively, 3 months postoperatively, and 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Eight hundred fifty three patients were included in the final cohort. There was no difference in terms of surgical approach or utilization of a staged procedure between the patient groups. Readmission (P = 0.752) and reoperation rates (P = 0.467) were similar across all community groups. Furthermore, for patients who required reoperation, the incision and drainage or revision surgery rate in each cohort was not statistically different (P = 0.902). Prosperous community patients reported significantly lower Visual Analog Scale Back pain preoperatively in comparison to patients from other DCI communities. All groups experienced a similar degree of postoperative improvement in Visual Analog Scale Back scores (P = 0.271). There were no other differences in preoperative or postoperative PROMs analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are socioeconomic differences based on DCI, community-level SES was not predictive of worse surgical outcomes following revision lumbar fusion. Patients from the most distressed communities were able to achieve similar improvement after revision surgery. This should encourage spine surgeons to feel comfortable discussing an indicated revision lumbar procedure with patients, and not view SES as a barrier to successful outcomes.

Reporting of Participants' Sex, Race, Ethnicity, and Socioeconomic Status in Pituitary Surgery Literature

Introduction  Social determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with differential outcomes after pituitary tumor treatment. However, the specific impact of SDOH is not well characterized. One reason may be the lack of collection and reporting of sociodemographic variables in the literature. This study aims to evaluate the frequency of reporting and distribution of participants' sex, race, ethnicity, income, and education level within pituitary surgery literature. We will compare the reported clinical research population demographics to the 2020 U.S. census. Methods  A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for pituitary surgery clinical research published between July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022. We excluded studies that lacked a comparison group, were not original research (i.e., systematic reviews, meta-analysis), or included national databases and registry data. Results  The final analysis included 92 studies. A total of 99% of studies collected data on subject sex. On average 49% (range: 14-100%) of study populations were male. Only 4% ( n  = 4) studies included racial demographic data. Two studies included information on participants' ethnicity and two included education background. No studies included income or insurance data. Four U.S. studies included demographic distribution, and the reported race and ethnicity percentages are similar to the U.S. 2020 census distribution. Conclusion  Most clinical pituitary research collects and reports data on participant sex. However, very few studies collect and report data on other sociodemographic variables that can play a role in outcomes. The lack of sociodemographic information in clinical research literature makes it difficult to determine the role of SDOH on pituitary surgery outcomes.

Demographic and Socioeconomic Patient Data Are Rarely Included in Randomized Controlled Trials for Femoral Acetabular Impingement and Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

Purpose

To determine the rate of reporting for sociodemographic variables in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating femoral acetabular impingement (FAI) and hip arthroscopy.

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were queried for articles relating to FAI and hip arthroscopy. Articles included in final analysis were RCTs investigating operative management of FAI. Included RCTs were analyzed for reporting of age and sex or gender as well as the following sociodemographic variables: race, ethnicity, insurance status, income, housing status, work status, and education level in the results section or any section of the paper. Data was analyzed using χ2 and Fisher exact tests with significance defined as P < .05.

Results

Forty-eight RCTs were identified from 2011 to 2023. Age was reported in 48 of 48 (100%) of included papers; sex or gender was reported in 47 of 48 (97.9%). Reporting of sociodemographic variables in any section respectively was: race (7/48, 14.6%), ethnicity (4/48, 8.33%), insurance status (0/48, 0%), income (1/48, 2.08%), housing status (0/48, 0%), work status (3/48, 6.25%), and education (2/48, 4.17%). There was no significant difference for reporting demographic variables with respect to journal or year of publication (P = .666 and P = .761, respectively). Sociodemographic variables (9/48) were reported significantly less frequently than age and sex or gender (48/48) (P < .001).

Conclusions

This study found that sociodemographic variables in FAI and hip arthroscopy RCTs are reported with much lower frequency than age and sex or gender. These findings may demonstrate the need to include patient sociodemographic data in RCTs so that their results can be better generalized and applied to the appropriate patient population.

Level of Evidence

Level II, systematic review of level I and II evidence.

Socioeconomic Status and Race Are Rarely Reported in Randomized Controlled Trials for Achilles Tendon Pathology in the Top 10 Orthopaedic Journals: A Systematic Review

Background

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are crucial in comparative research, and a careful approach to randomization methodology helps minimize bias. However, confounding variables like socioeconomic status (SES) and race are often underreported in orthopaedic RCTs, potentially affecting the generalizability of results. This study aimed to analyze the reporting trends of SES and race in RCTs pertaining to Achilles tendon pathology, considering 4 decades of data from top-tier orthopaedic journals.

Methods

This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and used PubMed to search 10 high-impact factor orthopaedic journals for RCTs related to the management of Achilles tendon pathology. The search encompassed all articles from the inception of each journal until July 11, 2023. Data extraction included year of publication, study type, reporting of SES and race, primary study location, and intervention details.

Results

Of the 88 RCTs identified, 68 met the inclusion criteria. Based on decade of publication, 6 articles (8.8%) reported on SES, whereas only 2 articles (2.9%) reported on race. No RCTs reported SES in the pre-1999 period, but the frequency of reporting increased in subsequent decades. Meanwhile, all RCTs reporting race were published in the current decade (2020-2030), with a frequency of 20%. When considering the study location, RCTs conducted outside the United States were more likely to report SES compared with those within the USA.

Conclusion

This review revealed a concerning underreporting of SES and race in Achilles tendon pathology RCTs. The reporting percentage remains low for both SES and race, indicating a need for comprehensive reporting practices in orthopaedic research. Understanding the impact of SES and race on treatment outcomes is critical for informed clinical decision making and ensuring equitable patient care. Future studies should prioritize the inclusion of these variables to enhance the generalizability and validity of RCT results.

Perioperative risk stratification tools for shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification tools are being increasingly utilized to guide patient selection for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to identify the existing calculators used to predict discharge disposition, postoperative complications, hospital readmissions, and patient candidacy for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty and to compare the specific components used to generate their prediction models.

METHODS

This review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and OVID Medline were searched for studies that developed calculators used to determine patient candidacy for outpatient surgery or predict discharge disposition, the risk of postoperative complications, and hospital readmissions after anatomic or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Reviews, case reports, letters to the editor, and studies including hemiarthroplasty cases were excluded. Data extracted included authors, year of publication, study design, patient population, sample size, input variables, comorbidities, method of validation, and intended purpose. The pros and cons of each calculator as reported by the respective authors were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eleven publications met inclusion criteria. Three tools assessed patient candidacy for outpatient TSA, 3 tools evaluated the risk of 30- or 90-day hospital readmission and postoperative complications, and 5 tools predicted discharge destination. Four calculators validated previously constructed comorbidity indices used as risk predictors after shoulder arthroplasty, including the Charlson Comorbidity Index, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, modified Frailty Index, and the Outpatient Arthroplasty Risk Assessment, while 7 developed newcalculators. Nine studies utilized multiple logistic regression to develop their calculators, while 1 study developed their algorithm based on previous literature and 1 used univariate analysis. Five tools were built using data from a single institution, 2 using data pooled from 2 institutions, and 4 from large national databases. All studies used preoperative data points in their algorithms with one tool additionally using intraoperative data points. The number of inputs ranged from 5 to 57 items. Four calculators assessed psychological comorbidities, 3 included inputs for substance use, and 1 calculator accounted for race.

CONCLUSION

The variation in perioperative risk calculators after TSA highlights the need for standardization and external validation of the existing tools. As the use of outpatient shoulder arthroplasty increases, these calculators may become outdated or require revision. Incorporation of socioeconomic and psychological measures into these calculators should be investigated.