:Historic and present-day marginalization has resulted in a high burden of disease and worse health outcomes for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities in the United States. Musculoskeletal disease is the leading cause of disability for the general population in the U.S. today. However, few have examined musculoskeletal disease burden and access to orthopaedic surgical care in the AI/AN communities. A high prevalence of hip dysplasia, arthritis, back pain, and diabetes, and a high incidence of trauma and road traffic-related mortality, suggest a disproportionately high burden of musculoskeletal pathology among the AI/AN communities and a substantial need for orthopaedic surgical services. Unfortunately, AI/AN patients face many barriers to receiving specialty care, including long travel distances and limited transportation to health facilities, inadequate staff and resources at Indian Health Service (IHS)-funded facilities, insufficient funding for referral to specialists outside of the IHS network, and sociocultural barriers that complicate health-system navigation and erode trust between patients and providers. For those who manage to access orthopaedic surgery, AI/AN patients face worse outcomes and more complications than White patients. There is an urgent need for orthopaedic surgeons to participate in improving the availability of quality orthopaedic services for AI/AN patients through training and support of local providers, volunteerism, advocating for a greater investment in the IHS Purchased/Referred Care program, expanding telemedicine capabilities, and supporting community-based participatory research activities.

Background: The burden of musculoskeletal trauma is increasing worldwide, especially in low-income countries such as Malawi. Ankle fractures are common in Malawi and may receive suboptimal treatment due to inadequate surgical capacity and limited provider knowledge of evidence-based treatment guidelines. Methods: This study was conducted in 3 phases. First, we assessed Malawian orthopaedic providers’ understanding of anatomy, injury identification, and treatment methods. Second, we observed Malawian providers’ treatment strategies for adults with ankle fractures presenting to a central hospital. These patients’ radiographs underwent blinded, post hoc review by 3 U.S.-based orthopaedic surgeons and a Malawian orthopaedic surgeon, whose treatment recommendations were compared with actual treatments rendered by Malawian providers. Third, an educational course addressing knowledge deficits was implemented. We assessed post-course knowledge and introduced a standardized management protocol, specific to the Malawian context. Results: In Phase 1, deficits in injury identification, ideal treatment practices, and treatment standardization were identified. In Phase 2, 17 (35%) of 49 patients met operative criteria but did not undergo a surgical procedure, mainly because of resource limitations and provider failure to recognize unstable injuries. In Phase 3, 51 (84%) of 61 participants improved their overall performance between the pre-course and post-course assessments. Participants answered a mean of 32.4 (66%) of 49 questions correctly pre-course and 37.7 (77%) of 49 questions correctly post-course, a significant improvement of 5.2 more questions (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.8 to 6.6 questions; p < 0.001) answered correctly. Providers were able to identify 1 more injury correctly of 8 injuries (mean, 1.1 questions [95% CI, 0.6 to 1.6 questions]; p < 0.001) and to identify 1 more ideal treatment of the 7 that were tested (mean, 1.0 question [95% CI, 0.5 to 1.4 questions]; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Adult ankle fractures in Malawi were predominantly treated nonoperatively despite often meeting evidence-based criteria for surgery. This was due to resource limitations, knowledge deficits, and lack of treatment standardization. We demonstrated a comprehensive approach to examining the challenges of providing adequate orthopaedic care in a resource-limited setting and the successful implementation of an educational intervention to improve care delivery. This approach can be adapted for other conditions to improve orthopaedic care in low-resource settings.

Category: Trauma; Ankle; Other Introduction/Purpose: The burden of trauma is growing worldwide, especially in low-income countries. In Malawi, ankle fractures are common and may receive inadequate treatment due to limited surgical capacity and provider knowledge of evidence- based treatment guidelines. We sought to examine ankle fracture management in Malawi, identify providers’ knowledge gaps, and address these knowledge gaps in ways that were relevant to the Malawian context. Methods: This study had three phases. First, we performed a baseline assessment of orthopaedic providers’ knowledge of anatomy, injury identification, and ideal treatment methods. Second, we observed providers’ treatment strategies while they cared for adult patients with ankle fractures over a five-week period at a large central hospital. We performed blinded, post-hoc reviews of patient x-rays and compared our treatment recommendations to the plans and rationales of Malawian providers. Third, we implemented an educational course addressing the knowledge gaps we identified, performed pre- and post-course knowledge assessments, and launched a standardized protocol for ankle fracture management in Malawi. Results: In our baseline assessment, we identified significant knowledge gaps in identification of common injuries on x-ray and ideal treatment practices. In our observations of treatment practices, 17/49 patients (35%) met operative criteria based on evidence-based guidelines but did not receive operative treatment by Malawian providers. For 7/17 (41%) of these patients, Malawian providers believed nonoperative treatment was ideal. In our educational course, 51/61 participants (84%) performed better between the pre- and post-course assessments. Overall scores improved from a mean of 66% to 77%, an improvement of 5.2/49 questions (95% CI 3.8-6.6, p<0.001). Providers could identify one more injury correctly out of 6 that were tested (95% CI 0.6-1.6, p<0.001), and identify one more ideal treatment out of 7 (95% CI 0.5-1.4, p<0.001). Conclusion: In Malawi, ankle fractures are common, and most are treated non-operatively. This is partly due to resource limitations, but also due to gaps in provider knowledge and lack of treatment standardization. Here we demonstrated a comprehensive approach to examining the challenges to providing adequate care, as well as the successful implementation of an intervention to improve care capacity nationwide.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate characteristics of reinjury following forearm fractures in adolescents. An Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective cohort study of forearm fractures (ages 10–18 years) treated by a single academic pediatric orthopaedic group from June 2009 to May 2020 was conducted. All both bone forearm (BBFA) and radius or ulna primary and secondary injuries were included. We excluded open, surgically treated, physeal, epiphyseal, and radial head/neck fractures. Demographics, injury characteristics, and radiographic data were recorded. We evaluated associations of ipsilateral same-site refracture (RE-FRACTURE) versus ipsilateral or contralateral different-site forearm fractures occurring as secondary later injuries (OTHER). Thirty-three of 719 patients sustained a secondary forearm fracture (4.6%; mean age, 11.5 years; M:F, 5.6:1). RE-FRACTURES, compared with OTHER forearm locations, were associated with a sports mechanism at time of original injury (P = 0.024) and mid-shaft position of fracture on the radius (77.6 vs. 29.8 mm from distal physis; P < 0.001) and ulna (72.0 vs. 27.2 mm from distal physis; P = 0.003). RE-FRACTURES also demonstrated increased radius to ulna distance between BBFA primary injury sites on anteroposterior (19.6 vs. 10.6 mm; P = 0.009) and lateral radiographs (19.6 vs. 10.5 mm; P = 0.020) compared with OTHER forearm locations. Residual angulation and fracture-line visibility were not significantly associated with secondary fracture. Ipsilateral same-site refractures tend to occur in adolescents within 1 year following treatment for widely spaced (>15 mm) and mid-shaft forearm fractures incurred during athletic activity. Further research may be warranted to evaluate biologic, bone health, or personality traits that may lead to secondary fractures of the pediatric forearm.

Background: The forearm is the most common site of fracture, and perhaps re-fracture, in the pediatric population. Although both bone forearm (BBFA) fractures represent approximately 30% of pediatric upper extremity fractures, little is known about BBFA re-fractures, particularly among youth athletes. Purpose: To evaluate characteristics of BBFA re-fracture and recurrent fractures. Methods: An IRB-approved retrospective chart review based on CPT and ICD-9/10 codes of forearm fractures (ages 10-18 years) treated by a single academic pediatric orthopedic group from June 2009 to May 2020 was conducted. All BBFA, radial, or ulnar fractures with ipsilateral same-site, or non-identical ipsilateral or contralateral forearm fracture were included. Demographics, injury characteristics, length of immobilization, timing of return to activity, and radiographic data (angulation, distance between radius fracture and ulna fracture [in mm], position of fracture within bone, and radiographic healing). An analysis was performed to evaluate associations of ipsilateral same-site re-fracture versus ipsilateral or contra-lateral non-identical site fractures. Results: Twenty-nine of 686 BBFA and distal radius fractures were identified to have recurrent fracture (4.23%), with an average age of 11.5 years and male-to-female ratio of 6.25:1. 67% of ipsilateral same-site re-fractures occurred within one year. The most common mechanisms of primary fracture were contact sports (40%) and tumbling (30%), and re-fracture occurred 182 days after original fracture. 52% percent of recurrent fractures were ipsilateral same-site re-fractures, while 48% occurred in a non-identical site, either ipsilaterally or contralaterally. The most common mechanisms of recurrent fracture were contact sports (38%), falls (38%), and tumbling (14%). Ipsilateral same-site re-fractures compared to other recurrent fractures, were significantly associated with a mid-shaft location (p=0.0029), increased radius to ulna fracture distance (21.14 mm versus 11.3 mm, p=0.0277) [Figure 1], and earlier occurrence following index fracture (re-fracture= 397.33 days versus non-identical recurrent fracture= 884.07 days, p=0.0056). Degree of angulation was not significantly associated with re-fracture. Conclusion: Recurrent fracture may occur at different times and locations following primary injury treatment. Ipsilateral same-site re-fractures tend to occur within the first year of treatment following mid-shaft fractures incurred during contact sports and tumbling, with widely spaced radial and ulnar fracture sites. Further research may be warranted to evaluate biologic, bone health, or personality traits that may lead to recurrent and re-fractures in pediatric forearm fractures. [Figure: see text]