Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) platforms, such as ChatGPT, have become increasingly popular outlets for the consumption and distribution of health care–related advice. Because of a lack of regulation and oversight, the reliability of health care–related responses has become a topic of controversy in the medical community. To date, no study has explored the quality of AI-derived information as it relates to common foot and ankle pathologies. This study aims to assess the quality and educational benefit of ChatGPT responses to common foot and ankle–related questions. Methods: ChatGPT was asked a series of 5 questions, including “What is the optimal treatment for ankle arthritis?” “How should I decide on ankle arthroplasty versus ankle arthrodesis?” “Do I need surgery for Jones fracture?” “How can I prevent Charcot arthropathy?” and “Do I need to see a doctor for my ankle sprain?” Five responses (1 per each question) were included after applying the exclusion criteria. The content was graded using DISCERN (a well-validated informational analysis tool) and AIRM (a self-designed tool for exercise evaluation). Results: Health care professionals graded the ChatGPT-generated responses as bottom tier 4.5% of the time, middle tier 27.3% of the time, and top tier 68.2% of the time. Conclusion: Although ChatGPT and other related AI platforms have become a popular means for medical information distribution, the educational value of the AI-generated responses related to foot and ankle pathologies was variable. With 4.5% of responses receiving a bottom-tier rating, 27.3% of responses receiving a middle-tier rating, and 68.2% of responses receiving a top-tier rating, health care professionals should be aware of the high viewership of variable-quality content easily accessible on ChatGPT. Level of Evidence: Level III, cross sectional study.

Background: The Patient Protection Affordable Care Act has expanded Medicaid eligibility in recent years. However, the provisions of the act have not translated to improved Medicaid payments for specialists such as orthopaedic surgeons. The number of health care practitioners who accept Medicaid is already decreasing, with low reimbursement rates being cited as the primary reason for the trend. Hypothesis: Private practice orthopaedic groups will see patients with Medicaid or Medicare at lower rates than academic orthopaedic practices, and business days until appointment availability will be higher for patients with Medicaid and Medicare than those with private insurance. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Researchers made calls to 2 regular-sized orthopaedic practices, 1 small orthopaedic practice, and 1 academic orthopaedic practice in each of the 50 states in the United States. Callers described a scenario of a recent injury resulting in a bucket-handle meniscal tear and an anterior cruciate ligament tear seen on magnetic resonance imaging at an outside emergency department. For a total of 194 practices, 3 separate telephone calls were made, each with a different insurance type. Data regarding insurance acceptance and business days until appointment were tabulated. Student t tests or analysis of variance for continuous data and χ² or Fisher exact tests for categorical data were utilized. Results: After completing 582 telephone calls, it was determined that 31.4% (n = 59) did not accept Medicaid, compared with 2.2% (n = 4) not accepting Medicare and 1% (n = 1) not accepting private insurance ( P < .001). There was no significant association between type of practice and Medicaid refusal ( P = 0.12). Mean business days until appointment for Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance were 5.3, 4.1, and 2.9, respectively ( P < .001). Conclusions: Access to care remains a significant burden for the Medicaid population, given a rate of Medicaid refusal of 32.2% across regular-sized orthopaedic practices. If Medicaid is accepted, time until appointment was significantly longer when compared with private insurance.

Background: Social media platforms, like TikTok, have become popular options for the distribution of health care information. Because of the lack of scientific oversight, the quality of health care–related videos has become a focus of the current literature. However, orthopaedic surgery has lagged behind other fields in acknowledging the widespread utilization of TikTok videos for medical information consumption. This study aims to assess the quality and educational benefits of ankle sprain–related TikTok videos. Methods: TikTok was queried using the hashtag “#anklesprainexercises.” One hundred videos were included after applying the exclusion criteria. The number of views, likes, shares, comments, and favorites was recorded. The content was graded using DISCERN (a well-validated informational analysis tool) and ASEES (a self-designed tool for exercise evaluation). We hypothesized that information on TikTok related to ankle sprain exercises would be poor in quality. Results: The total number of views of the 100 videos was 6 483 412, with a median of 5377.5 (IQR = 1074-20 275). The videos collectively received 385 847 likes, 3642 comments, 55 574 favorites, and 14 918 shares with a median of 267.5 (IQR = 41.5-1678.0), 4.0 (IQR = 0.0-23.0), 42.0 (IQR = 4.8-264.5), and 13.0 (IQR = 1.8-67.8), respectively. General users had a higher percentage of their videos graded as “very poor” (61.8%) in comparison to the number of videos uploaded by health care professionals deemed “very poor” (34.4%). Neither general user nor health care professionals had videos graded as “good” or “excellent.” There were significant differences between the 2 groups for DISCERN 1, 3, and ASSES scores. Conclusion: Although TikTok is a powerful tool for information distribution, the educational value of the videos related to ankle sprain injury exercises was poor. With only 2% of videos receiving a grade of “fair,” and no videos reaching a score of “good” or “excellent,” health care professionals should be aware of the low-quality content easily accessible on TikTok. Level of Evidence: Level III, cross-sectional study.

Routinely, adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) curves that progress beyond 40° in skeletally immature adolescents require surgery. However, some adolescents with AIS and their parents utterly refuse surgery and insist on wearing a brace. Debate continues regarding the appropriateness of bracing for AIS curves exceeding 40° in patients who have rejected surgical intervention. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to review the literature on the effectiveness of bracing and its predictive factors in largermagnitude AIS curves ≥40°. This study replicated the search strategy used by the PICOS system for formulating study questions, which include consideration of the patient/population (P), intervention (I), comparison (C), outcome (O), and study design (S). The search was conducted up to January 2022 in the following bibliographic online databases only in the English language: PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Two assessors reviewed the articles for qualification. Eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias at the study level using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The effect size across the studies was determined using standardized mean differences (Cohen’s d) and 95% confidence intervals for the meta-analysis. Among the eight included moderate quality studies, evidence of potential publication bias (p <0.05) for the trials included was found in the Cobb angle outcome. Results obtained through meta-analysis indicated that the effectiveness of bracing in controlling Cobb angle progression in curves ≥40° is significantly positive. Additionally, initial curve severity, Risser stage, in-brace curve correction, curve type, and apical vertebral rotation were considered risk factors associated with brace effectiveness. This systematic review revealed that bracing could alter the normal course of AIS curves ≥40° in patients refusing posterior spinal fusion (PSF). However, the suggested course for patients refusing PSF remains unclear because of the significant heterogeneity in the risk factors associated with bracing failure.

Background: Because of the lack of scientific oversight, the quality, applicability, and consistency of healthcare-related TikTok videos have become a focus of research exploration. The orthopaedic surgery literature lags behind other medical fields in analyzing the widespread utilization of TikTok videos for medical information delivery. Methods: TikTok was queried using the hashtag #shoulderstabilityexercises, and 109 videos were included. The videos were collected by two authors and independently evaluated using DISCERN (a well-validated informational analysis tool) and shoulder stability exercise education score (a self-designed tool for the evaluation of shoulder instability–related exercises). Results: DISCERN scores of videos uploaded by general users had significantly lower scores in all four categories than those uploaded by healthcare professionals (P < 0.001, P = 0.005, P = 0.002, and P < 0.001). For the shoulder stability exercise education score, general users had a significantly lower score than the healthcare professionals at 3.36 and 4.91 on a 25-point scale, respectively (P = 0.034). General users had more videos graded as very poor (84.2%) in comparison to the number of videos uploaded by healthcare professionals deemed very poor (51.5%). However, the remainder of healthcare professionals had their videos graded as poor (48.5%). Conclusion: Despite slightly improved video quality from healthcare professionals, the overall educational of the videos related to shoulder instability exercises was poor.