Objective To examine the association of physician burnout with the career engagement and the quality of patient care globally. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL were searched from database inception until May 2021. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Observational studies assessing the association of physician burnout (including a feeling of overwhelming emotional exhaustion, feelings of cynicism and detachment from job defined as depersonalisation, and a sense of ineffectiveness and little personal accomplishment) with career engagement (job satisfaction, career choice regret, turnover intention, career development, and productivity loss) and the quality of patient care (patient safety incidents, low professionalism, and patient satisfaction). Data were double extracted by independent reviewers and checked through contacting all authors, 84 (49%) of 170 of whom confirmed their data. Random-effect models were used to calculate the pooled odds ratio, prediction intervals expressed the amount of heterogeneity, and meta-regressions assessed for potential moderators with significance set using a conservative level of P<0.10. Results 4732 articles were identified, of which 170 observational studies of 239 246 physicians were included in the meta-analysis. Overall burnout in physicians was associated with an almost four times decrease in job satisfaction compared with increased job satisfaction (odds ratio 3.79, 95% confidence interval 3.24 to 4.43, I 2 =97%, k=73 studies, n=146 980 physicians). Career choice regret increased by more than threefold compared with being satisfied with their career choice (3.49, 2.43 to 5.00, I 2 =97%, k=16, n=33 871). Turnover intention also increased by more than threefold compared with retention (3.10, 2.30 to 4.17, I 2 =97%, k=25, n=32 271). Productivity had a small but significant effect (1.82, 1.08 to 3.07, I 2 =83%, k=7, n=9581) and burnout also affected career development from a pooled association of two studies (3.77, 2.77 to 5.14, I 2 =0%, n=3411). Overall physician burnout doubled patient safety incidents compared with no patient safety incidents (2.04, 1.69 to 2.45, I 2 =87%, k=35, n=41 059). Low professionalism was twice as likely compared with maintained professionalism (2.33, 1.96 to 2.70, I 2 =96%, k=40, n=32 321), as was patient dissatisfaction compared with patient satisfaction (2.22, 1.38 to 3.57, I 2 =75%, k=8, n=1002). Burnout and poorer job satisfaction was greatest in hospital settings (1.88, 0.91 to 3.86, P=0.09), physicians aged 31-50 years (2.41, 1.02 to 5.64, P=0.04), and working in emergency medicine and intensive care (2.16, 0.98 to 4.76, P=0.06); burnout was lowest in general practitioners (0.16, 0.03 to 0.88, P=0.04). However, these associations did not remain significant in the multivariable regressions. Burnout and patient safety incidents were greatest in physicians aged 20-30 years (1.88, 1.07 to 3.29, P=0.03), and people working in emergency medicine (2.10, 1.09 to 3.56, P=0.02). The association of burnout with low professionalism was smallest in physicians older than 50 years (0.36, 0.19 to 0.69, P=0.003) and greatest in physicians still in training or residency (2.27, 1.45 to 3.60, P=0.001), in those who worked in a hospital (2.16, 1.46 to 3.19, P<0.001), specifically in emergency medicine specialty (1.48, 1.01 to 2.34, P=0.042), or situated in a low to middle income country (1.68, 0.94 to 2.97, P=0.08). Conclusions This meta-analysis provides compelling evidence that physician burnout is associated with poor function and sustainability of healthcare organisations primarily by contributing to the career disengagement and turnover of physicians and secondarily by reducing the quality of patient care. Healthcare organisations should invest more time and effort in implementing evidence-based strategies to mitigate physician burnout across specialties, and particularly in emergency medicine and for physicians in training or residency. Systematic review registration PROSPERO number CRD42021249492.

Purpose Fragility ankles fractures in the geriatric population are challenging to manage, due to fracture instability, soft tissue compromise, and patient co-morbidities. Traditional management options include open reduction internal fixation, or conservative treatment, both of which are fraught with high complication rates. We aimed to present functional outcomes of elderly patients with fragility ankle fractures treated with retrograde ankle fusion nails. Methods A retrospective observational study was performed on patients who underwent intramedullary nailing with a tibiotalocalcaneal nail. Twenty patients met the inclusion criteria of being over sixty and having multiple co-morbidities. Patient demographics, AO/OTA fracture classification, intra-operative and post-operative complications, time to mobilisation and union, AOFAS and Olerud-Molander scores, and patient mobility were recorded. Results There were seven males and thirteen females, with a mean age of 77.82 years old, five of whom are type 2 diabetics. Thirteen patients returned to their pre-operative mobility state, and the average Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI) was 5.05. Patients with a low CCI are more likely to return to pre-operative mobility status (p = 0.16; OR = 4.00). All patients achieved radiographical union, taking on average between 92.5 days and 144.6 days. The mean post-operative AOFAS and Olerud-Molander scores were 53.0 and 50.9, respectively. There were four cases of superficial infection, four cases of broken or loose distal locking screws. There were no deep infections, periprosthetic fractures, nail breakages, or non-unions. Conclusion Tibiotalocalcaneal nailing is an effective and safe option for managing unstable ankle fractures in the elderly. This technique leads to lower complication rates and earlier mobilisation than traditional fixation methods.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Septic arthritis (SA) is a dangerous condition that requires emergency treatment. Managed by culture-specific antibiotics, irrigation, and debridement (I&D), some patients require repeat surgical treatment. The objectives were to determine the risk factors for SA and risk factors for repeat arthroscopic I&D in SA patients. We hypothesized that variables which directly or indirectly contributed to a larger infection burden would be associated with the development of SA and the need for repeat arthroscopic I&D. Methods All patients ≥ 18 years old presenting to the emergency department, orthopaedic and rheumatology clinics at our major trauma centre between January 2018 and January 2020 with a hot, swollen joint were retrospectively evaluated. Patients with previous trauma and metalwork in the affected joint, periprosthetic joint infection, previous joint arthroplasty surgery, soft tissue infection, missing data, transferred to another centre, diagnosis not concerning the joint, and < 24-month follow-up were excluded. Two hundred eleven patients were included (SA: 28; pseudogout: 32; gout: 50; others: 101). Variables of interest in the 3-month period preceding the diagnosis of SA were compared between SA and non-SA patients using univariable analysis. A multivariable logistic regression model was formed using covariates with corresponding univariable tests of p < 0.200. Similar analyses were performed to compare SA patients with multiple washouts/procedures with those with one washout/procedure. Results Multivariable analysis showed multiple risk factors for SA, namely rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (OR: 3.4; 95% CI: 1.2–10.0; p = 0.023); skin infection (OR: 3.3; 95% CI: 1.2–9.0; p = 0.017), liver disease (OR: 9.9; 95% CI: 2.2–43.9; p = 0.003), knee joint involvement (OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.3–9.4; p = 0.014), and use of immunosuppressive medication (OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.2–10.6; p = 0.027). Risk factors for multiple washouts included synovial WBC levels > 10.5 × 109 cells/L (OR: 3.0; 95% CI: 2.3–38.8; p = 0.009) and RA (OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.9–66.3; p = 0.017). Conclusions These findings suggest that prophylactic actions against septic arthritis should be targeted at patients with liver disease, RA, or skin infection. Repeat arthroscopic I&D of septic joints may be needed, especially in patients with synovial WBC levels > 10.5 × 109 cells/L and RA. Key Points• The risk factors for septic arthritis determined in this study are rheumatoid arthritis, skin infection, liver disease, knee joint involvement, and immunosuppressant usage.• Some septic arthritis patients need multiple rounds of arthroscopic irrigation and debridement. The risk factors for this are a synovial WBC count > 10.5 × 109 cells/L and rheumatoid arthritis.