Download PDF
J Wrist Surg 2021; 10(04): 316-321
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1725962
Scientific Article

Factors Associated with a Recommendation for Operative Treatment for Fracture of the Distal Radius

David W.G. Langerhuizen
1   Department of Orthopaedic & Trauma Surgery, Flinders University, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia
,
Stein J. Janssen
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam Movement Sciences (AMS), Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
,
Joost T.P. Kortlever
3   Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
,
David Ring
3   Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
,
Gino M.M.J. Kerkhoffs
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam Movement Sciences (AMS), Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
,
Ruurd L. Jaarsma
1   Department of Orthopaedic & Trauma Surgery, Flinders University, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia
,
Job N. Doornberg   *
1   Department of Orthopaedic & Trauma Surgery, Flinders University, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Evidence suggests that there is substantial and unexplained surgeon-to-surgeon variation in recommendation of operative treatment for fractures of the distal radius. We studied (1) what factors are associated with recommendation for operative treatment of a fracture of the distal radius and (2) which factors are rated as the most influential on recommendation of operative treatment.

Methods One-hundred thirty-one upper extremity and fracture surgeons evaluated 20 fictitious patient scenarios with randomly assigned factors (e.g., personal, clinical, and radiologic factors) for patients with a fracture of the distal radius. They addressed the following questions: (1) Do you recommend operative treatment for this patient (yes/no)? We determined the influence of each factor on this recommendation using random forest algorithms. Also, participants rated the influence of each factor—excluding age and sex— on a scale from 0 (not at all important) to 10 (extremely important).

Results Random forest algorithms determined that age and angulation were having the most influence on recommendation for operative treatment of a fracture of the distal radius. Angulation on the lateral radiograph and presence or absence of lunate subluxation were rated as having the greatest influence and smoking status and stress levels the lowest influence on advice to patients.

Conclusions The observation that—other than age—personal factors have limited influence on surgeon recommendations for surgery may reflect how surgeon cognitive biases, personal preferences, different perspectives, and incentives may contribute to variations in care. Future research can determine whether decision aids—those that use patient-specific probabilities based on predictive analytics in particular—might help match patient treatment choices to what matters most to them, in part by helping to neutralize the influence of common misconceptions as well as surgeon bias and incentives.

Level of Evidence There is no level of evidence for the study.

Keywords

distal radial fracture - surgery - decision making - artificial intelligence - machine learning - deep learning - predictive modelling

Note

This study was performed at Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Dell Medical School, Austin, TX.


Ethical Approval

The study did not require approval from the Institutional Review Board.


* The Science of Variation Group contributors are mentioned in Appendix A.




Publication History

Received: 22 September 2020

Accepted: 21 January 2021

Article published online:
11 March 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Ansari U, Adie S, Harris IA, Naylor JM. Practice variation in common fracture presentations: a survey of orthopaedic surgeons. Injury 2011; 42 (04) 403-407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Walenkamp MM, Mulders MA, Goslings JC, Westert GP, Schep NW. Analysis of variation in the surgical treatment of patients with distal radial fractures in the Netherlands. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2017; 42 (01) 39-44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Fanuele J, Koval KJ, Lurie J, Zhou W, Tosteson A, Ring D. Distal radial fracture treatment: what you get may depend on your age and address. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91 (06) 1313-1319
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Thio QCBS, Karhade AV, Ogink PT. et al. Can machine-learning techniques be used for 5-year survival prediction of patients with chondrosarcoma?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018; 476 (10) 2040-2048
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Perotte A, Ranganath R, Hirsch JS, Blei D, Elhadad N. Risk prediction for chronic kidney disease progression using heterogeneous electronic health record data and time series analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2015; 22 (04) 872-880
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bennett WL, Maruthur NM, Singh S. et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety of medications for type 2 diabetes: an update including new drugs and 2-drug combinations. Ann Intern Med 2011; 154 (09) 602-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Karhade AV, Thio QCBS, Ogink PT. et al. Development of machine learning algorithms for prediction of 30-day mortality after surgery for spinal metastasis. Neurosurgery 2019; 85 (01) E83-E91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Janssen SJ, Hermanussen HH, Guitton TG, van den Bekerom MP, van Deurzen DF, Ring D. Greater tuberosity fractures: does fracture assessment and treatment recommendation vary based on imaging modality?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474 (05) 1257-1265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bruinsma WE, Guitton TG, Warner JJ, Ring D. Science of Variation Group. Interobserver reliability of classification and characterization of proximal humeral fractures: a comparison of two and three-dimensional CT. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (17) 1600-1604
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Zou RY, Schonlau M. The random forest algorithm for statistical learning with applications in Stata. Stata J 2018; 20 (01) 3-29
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Members of the Writing, Review, and Voting Panels of the AUC on the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures. Watters WC, Sanders JO, Murray J, Patel N. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Appropriate Use Criteria on the treatment of distal radius fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (02) 160-161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hageman MG, Becker SJ, Bot AG, Guitton T, Ring D. Science of Variation Group. Variation in recommendation for surgical treatment for compressive neuropathy. J Hand Surg Am 2013; 38 (05) 856-862
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kyriakedes JC, Crijns TJ, Teunis T, Ring D, Bafus BT. Science of Variation G. International Survey: factors associated with operative treatment of distal radius fractures and implications for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons appropriate use criteria. J Orthop Trauma 2019
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Halford GS, Baker R, McCredden JE, Bain JD. How many variables can humans process?. Psychol Sci 2005; 16 (01) 70-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Maddox TM, Rumsfeld JS, Payne PRO. Questions for artificial intelligence in health care. JAMA 2019; 321 (01) 31-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Verghese A, Shah NH, Harrington RA. What this computer needs is a physician: humanism and artificial intelligence. JAMA 2018; 319 (01) 19-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Bailey R, Kaskutas V, Fox I, Baum CM, Mackinnon SE. Effect of upper extremity nerve damage on activity participation, pain, depression, and quality of life. J Hand Surg Am 2009; 34 (09) 1682-1688
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Crichlow RJ, Andres PL, Morrison SM, Haley SM, Vrahas MS. Depression in orthopaedic trauma patients. Prevalence and severity. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (09) 1927-1933
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Jaquet JB, Kalmijn S, Kuypers PD, Hofman A, Passchier J, Hovius SE. Early psychological stress after forearm nerve injuries: a predictor for long-term functional outcome and return to productivity. Ann Plast Surg 2002; 49 (01) 82-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nunez F, Vranceanu AM, Ring D. Determinants of pain in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468 (12) 3328-3332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Vranceanu AM, Jupiter JB, Mudgal CS, Ring D. Predictors of pain intensity and disability after minor hand surgery. J Hand Surg Am 2010; 35 (06) 956-960
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Teunis T, Janssen S, Guitton TG, Ring D, Parisien R. Do orthopaedic surgeons acknowledge uncertainty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474 (06) 1360-1369
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Teunis T, Janssen SJ, Guitton TG, Vranceanu AM, Goos B, Ring D. Surgeon personality is associated with recommendation for operative treatment. Hand (N Y) 2015; 10 (04) 779-784
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Janssen SJ, Teunis T, Guitton TG, Ring D. Science of Variation Group. Do surgeons treat their patients like they would treat themselves?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (11) 3564-3572
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar