If you don't remember your password, you can reset it by entering your email address and clicking the Reset Password button. You will then receive an email that contains a secure link for resetting your password
If the address matches a valid account an email will be sent to __email__ with instructions for resetting your password
The purpose of this study was to evaluate case volume and variability of hip arthroscopy exposure among graduating orthopaedic residents.
Methods
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) surgical case log data from 2016 to 2020 for graduating United States orthopaedic surgery residents were assessed. Arthroscopy procedures of the pelvis/hip were identified. The average number of cases performed per resident was compared from 2016 to 2020 to determine the percent change in case volume. The 10th, 30th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of case volumes from 2016 to 2020 were presented to demonstrate case volume variability.
Results
There was no change in the number of hip arthroscopy procedures between 2016 and 2020 [average: 8.4 ± 10 (range: 0 to 87) vs. 9.8 ± 12 (range: 0 to 101)] (P = .995). There was a wide variability in case volume among residents. The 90th percentile of residents performed 24 cases in 2020, compared to 2 cases in the 30th percentile and 0 cases amongst the 10th percentile of residents.
Conclusions
Despite the growing popularity of hip arthroscopy, resident exposure to this highly technical procedure remains limited, with about one-third of residents performing 2 or less cases by graduation.
Clinical Relevance
Understanding case volume and variability is important for orthopaedic surgery programs to ensure that graduating residents are gaining adequate exposure.
Introduction
Substantial changes in orthopaedic surgery residency education have occurred in the last decade. In 2013, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) implemented a new accreditation system for graduate medical education in the United States.
Although the traditional accreditation process focused on the details of process and administration, the NAS focuses more on continuous monitoring of measurable and meaningful outcomes of resident training.
However, continued analyses are critical for implementing standardized training expectations that reflect changes in the orthopaedic landscape and reduce discrepancy in resident education.
little is known about resident exposure to this technically demanding procedure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate case volume and variability of hip arthroscopy exposure among graduating orthopaedic residents. We hypothesize that case volume has remained low over the past 5 years and that wide variability in case volume is present among residents.
Methods
The ACGME case log reports for graduating orthopaedic surgery residents were reviewed from 2016 to 2020. The ACGME presents national averages of several procedures within particular anatomic categories using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Procedures include incision, excision, intro or removal, repair/revision/reconstruction, trauma, fracture/dislocation, manipulation, arthrodesis, amputation, and arthroscopy. Anatomic categories include shoulder, humerus/elbow, forearm/wrist, hand/fingers, pelvis/hip, femur/knee, leg/ankle, and foot/toes. In this study, we assessed the mean number of total (adult and pediatric) arthroscopy cases performed per resident listed under the “pelvis/hip” ACGME case category from 2016 to 2020 to determine a percent change in volume. The CPT codes and definitions for each arthroscopy procedure within the “pelvis/hip” ACGME case category are provided in Table 1. In addition, the 10th, 30th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of case volumes from 2016 to 2020 were presented to demonstrate case volume variability.
Table 1CPT Codes with Description of Arthroscopy Procedures for the Hip/Pelvis
29860
Arthroscopy, hip, diagnostic; with or without synovial biopsy (separate procedure)
29861
Arthroscopy, hip, surgical; with removal of loose body or foreign body
29862
Arthroscopy, hip, surgical; with debridement/shaving of articular cartilage (chondroplasty), abrasion arthroplasty, and/or resection of labrum
29863
Arthroscopy, hip, surgical; with synovectomy
29914
Arthroscopy, hip, surgical; with femoroplasty (i.e., treatment of cam lesion)
29915
Arthroscopy, hip, surgical; with acetabuloplasty (i.e., treatment of pincer lesion)
The mean case volumes reported per resident were compared using unpaired 2-tailed t tests. The level of statistical significance was designated as P < .05. Excel software, version 16.0 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) was used for data input and statistical tests.
Results
The total number of orthopaedic surgery residency programs was 153 (705 residents) in 2016, 156 (709 residents) in 2017, 154 (729 residents) in 2018, 154 (725 residents) in 2019, and 154 (724 residents) in 2020 (Table 2).
Table 2The Demographics of Orthopaedic Surgery ACGME Case Log Respondents
The average number of total “pelvis/hip” procedures performed per resident was 216.1 ± 67 (median: 205; range: 80-487) in 2016, which increased to 248.9 ± 72 in 2020 (median: 241; range: 104-552), representing an 11.5% increase (P < .001) (Table 3). The average number of “pelvis/hip” arthroscopy procedures performed per resident in 2016 was 8.4 ± 10 (median: 5; range: 0-87), which increased to 9.8 ± 12 in 2020, representing a 16.7% increase (P = .995) (Table 3). Case volume for the total number of pelvis/hip procedures and the total number of arthroscopy procedures of the pelvis/hip performed per resident during the study period are depicted in Fig 1.
Table 3Mean Number of Pelvis/Hip Arthroscopy Procedures per Graduating Orthopaedic Surgery Resident From 2016 to 2020
There was a low level of variability in the total number of pelvis/hip procedures and a wide level of variability in pelvis/hip arthroscopy case volume among residents over the study period (Fig 2). The average number of total pelvis/hip cases performed by the 10th percentile and 90th percentile of residents was 141 and 299 in 2016, representing a 2.12 fold difference, compared to 164 and 347 in 2020, which also represents a 2.12 fold-difference (Table 4).
Fig 2Mean case volume for pelvis/hip arthroscopy procedures in the 10th through 90th percentiles of orthopaedic residents.
The average number of pelvis/hip arthroscopy cases performed by the 10th percentile and 90th percentile of residents was 0 and 22 in 2016, respectively, compared to 0 and 24 in 2020 (Table 4). Roughly 1 of every 10 residents failed to perform a single hip arthroscopy case each year of the study period, and about one-third performed 2 cases or less (Table 4).
Discussion
The most important finding of this study is that exposure to hip arthroscopy in graduating orthopaedic residents has remained low over the last 5 years, despite a significant increase in the total number of hip procedures performed per resident during this time. In addition, we found that about one third of graduating US orthopaedic residents performed 2 or fewer hip arthroscopy cases upon graduation.
Case logging of hip arthroscopy procedures was introduced by the ACGME in 2012. Since then, one study has examined hip arthroscopy case volume among US graduating orthopaedic surgery residents.
In 2012, residents performed an average of 0.9 hip arthroscopy cases, compared to 6.2 cases in 2013, representing a 588.9% increase. However, as this study only examined the percent change in case volume over a 1-year period, longitudinal data were difficult to examine. Our study is unique in that it offers an updated analysis of these data over a 5-year span, which also coincides with the growing national popularity of this procedure. We found that residents performed an average of 8.4 hip arthroscopy cases in 2016, compared to 9.8 in 2020. However, this increase was not significant, which implies that resident exposure to hip arthroscopy has plateaued during this time. Furthermore, compared to the data presented by Gil et al.,
present-day hip arthroscopy case volume among orthopaedic surgery residents has only increased by roughly 3 cases per year in nearly a decade.
Resident case volumes for hip arthroscopy do not seem to reflect the national rise in the incidence of this procedure. There has been a significant increase in the utilization of arthroscopic hip procedures over the last 2 decades.
As such, the importance of added exposure among orthopaedic surgery trainees is ever present.
A possible explanation for low resident case volumes for hip arthroscopy lies in the complexity of the procedure. Given its technical demand, hip arthroscopy procedures are often assisted by fellows compared to residents.
studied case log data for hip arthroscopy among orthopaedic surgery sports medicine fellows and reported a 310% rise in case volume from 2011 to 2016. An even greater increase (>600%) was found among the number of candidates taking the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part 2 examination.
In addition, lack of resident exposure to hip arthroscopy may be a consequence of reduced access, as not every residency program has a hip arthroscopist on staff. Furthermore, even at institutions with faculty who have hip arthroscopy training, surgical volume is widely variable and may be as low as low as 1 to 2 cases per year.
Although the ACGME has mandated case minimum requirements for knee and shoulder arthroscopy (30 and 20 cases, respectively),
no such guidelines have been implemented for hip arthroscopy. A recent systematic review on the learning curve associated with hip arthroscopy reported a wide spread of cutoff numbers to achieve procedural proficiency, ranging from 20 to more than 500 cases.
While expertise in hip arthroscopy is unachievable in residency alone, early procedural exposure may equip residents with a better understanding of the key surgical steps in hip arthroscopy.
Perhaps the implementation of an ACGME case minimum requirement may help to increase resident exposure to this increasingly popular procedure and better prepare trainees for fellowship and early practice.
Limitations
The present study is not without limitations. The ACGME case log data do not specify the types of procedures (or indications of said procedures) within the pelvis/hip category. Therefore, while overall case volume and variability for arthroscopic procedures of the pelvis/hip were provided, these findings are not applicable to specific CPT procedural codes. Next, the ACGME case log data accuracy may be influenced by bias due to underreporting or overreporting among residents.
This may be particularly evident when logging arthroscopic procedures that are associated with a variety of CPT codes. Finally, the degree of resident participation within each case cannot be determined. Thus, resident case log data should not serve as a direct reflection of procedural proficiency.
Conclusions
Despite the growing popularity of hip arthroscopy, resident exposure to this highly technical procedure remains limited, with about a third of residents performing 2 or fewer cases upon graduation.
00058-X&id=gr1.jpg){kind=link}
00058-X&id=gr2.jpg){kind=link}