Trends in the Surgical Management of Acromioclavicular Joint Arthritis Among Board‐Eligible US Orthopaedic Surgeons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: (1) Define the epidemiologic trend of distal clavicle excision (DCE) for acromioclavicular (AC) joint arthritis among board-eligible orthopaedic surgeons in the United States, (2) describe the rates and types of reported complications of open and arthroscopic DCE, and (3) evaluate the effect of fellowship training on preferred technique and reported complication rates. METHODS: The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) database was used to identify DCE cases submitted by ABOS Part II Board Certification examination candidates. Inclusion criteria were predetermined using a combination of ICD-9 and CPT codes. Cases were dichotomized into 2 groups: open or arthroscopic DCE. The 2 groups were then analyzed to determine trends in annual incidence, complication rates, and surgeon fellowship training. RESULTS: From April 2004 to September 2013, there were 3,229 open and 12,782 arthroscopic DCE procedures performed and submitted by ABOS Part II Board Eligible candidates. Overall, the annual incidence of open DCE decreased (78-37 cases per 10,000 submitted cases, P = .023). Although the annual number of arthroscopic DCE remained steady (1160-1125, P = .622), the percentage of DCE cases performed arthroscopically increased (65%-79%, P = .033). Surgeons without fellowship training were most likely to perform a DCE via an open approach (31%) whereas surgeons with sports medicine training were more likely to perform DCE arthroscopically compared with other fellowship groups (88%, P < .001). Open DCE was associated with a higher surgical complication rate overall when compared with arthroscopic DCE (9.4% vs 7.6%, respectively; P < .001). When compared with other fellowship-trained surgeons, sports medicine surgeons maintained a lower reported surgical complication rate whether performing open or arthroscopic DCE (5.5%, P = .027). CONCLUSIONS: In recent years, open management of AC joint arthritis has declined among newly trained, board-eligible orthopaedic surgeons, possibly because of an increased complication rate associated with open treatment. Fellowship training was significantly associated with the type of treatment (open vs arthroscopic) rendered and complication rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".