» In-person networking, particularly away rotations, remains an important factor for medical students interested in pursuing orthopaedic surgery. There are also strong associations with doing an away rotation and matching at that specific institution. » Active engagement at a national or regional conference is a more effective means of networking compared with passive participation. Poster and podium presentations are a better way of networking at conferences and enhance the student's application for residency. » Local, regional, and national orthopaedic society meetings and structured education programs are great opportunities for medical students interested in orthopaedic surgery to network with other residents, attendings, and leaders in the field. » Virtual networking modalities, such as emailing, participating in webinars, and engaging on social media, are another source of effective communication with attendings, residents, and internal and external institutions. » Students underrepresented in medicine also have networking opportunities such as targeted pipeline programs and mentorship initiatives that improve exposure to orthopaedic surgery and advocacy.
Background: Metal hypersensitivity reactions are infrequently reported but clinically significant after spinal implant surgery. Clinical presentation can mimic infection or mechanical failure, making diagnosis difficult. Evidence to guide diagnosis and management is largely limited to short case series and case reports. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the clinical presentation, diagnostic methods, and outcomes of metal hypersensitivity associated with spinal implants. Methods: A systematic review was conducted of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from inception through June 22, 2026, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Title and abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Eligible studies included adult patients with suspected or confirmed metal hypersensitivity following spinal implant surgery that reported patient-level clinical outcomes. Results: Fifteen studies with a total of 19 patients met inclusion criteria (53% female, 42% male, and 5% not reported). The median patient age was 47 years (range, 19-69). Twelve procedures (63%) were fusion-based, while 7 (37%) were motion preserving, including disk arthroplasty and artificial facet replacement systems. Common clinical presentations included persistent pain, with 8 patients (42%) exhibiting dermatologic manifestations. Metal hypersensitivity was immunologically confirmed by positive patch testing and/or lymphocyte transformation testing in 11 patients (58%), while 8 (42%) were diagnosed clinically. Onset of symptoms ranged from immediately postoperatively to 15 years after implantation. Eighteen patients underwent removal or revision with clinical improvement in 14 of 16 with a reported outcome (88%). Conclusion: Metal hypersensitivity reactions following spinal implants are infrequently reported but may present either immediately or in a delayed manner with symptoms that mimic more common postoperative complications, such as infection or pseudarthrosis, or may present with dermatologic manifestations. In cases where other etiologies are ruled out, hardware removal was frequently, though not invariably, associated with clinical improvement, which was reported narratively rather than by validated outcome measures. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level V . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
» Core muscle injury (CMI) is a common cause of groin pain in athletes and reflects pathology of the inguinal canal, rectus abdominis–adductor longus (RA-AL) aponeurosis, and pubic symphysis. » There is a substantial lack of consensus on terminology and diagnostic criteria for CMI, hindering standardized evaluation, management, and research initiatives. » Diagnosis relies on structured history, physical examinations, and provocative maneuvers to identify CMI and concurrent pathology, and fluid-sensitive pelvic magnetic resonance imaging to characterize RA-AL injury. » Treatment strategies differ across sports medicine physicians, general surgeons, and orthopaedic surgeons, underscoring the need for early cross-departmental referrals to ensure all contributing pathologies are comprehensively identified and addressed. » When both adductor/RA-AL aponeurosis and inguinal canal/abdominal wall pathologies are present, prioritizing collaborative cases between orthopaedic and general surgeons is essential for decreasing operating room time, streamlining rehabilitation, and optimizing return-to-sport outcomes.
Technical performance alone does not establish clinical readiness; strong accuracy or discrimination does not demonstrate that an artificial intelligence (AI) tool will generalize, improve clinical care, or remain safe after deployment. Existing AI frameworks provide important guidance for reporting, risk of bias, model evaluation, and clinical trials, but they do not provide a single longitudinal stage describing a technology's progression from development through monitored clinical deployment. We propose the Orthopaedic Surgery Clinical AI Readiness (OSCAR) scale as a 6-stage conceptual framework spanning model development, internal and external validation, early clinical evaluation, comparative clinical validation, and monitored deployment. Illustrative applications of OSCAR demonstrate how technically strong models may remain at stage 1, external validation advances a tool to stage 2, live workflow evaluation represents stage 3, and comparative clinical evidence is required for stage 4. OSCAR is intended to complement, not replace, established reporting and risk-of-bias standards. The framework remains unvalidated and requires stakeholder consensus, explicit decision criteria, inter-rater reliability testing, and prospective evaluation.
Background: There is growing interest in identifying psychological factors associated with outcomes following total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the available evidence is heterogeneous, and uncertainty remains regarding which psychological factors are most consistently associated with postoperative outcomes following arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of available evidence of association between psychological factors and function or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after arthroplasty. Methods: An umbrella review was conducted, and 3 electronic databases were searched, and systematic reviews were included. We reported the risk of bias assessments of primary studies as reported in systematic reviews. Only high quality studies were included in qualitative synthesize. Results: A total of 25 systematic reviews, including data from 40,024 patients, were included. Two psychological vulnerability factors, including depression, and anxiety negatively affect postoperative function/HRQoL after THA or TKA. Our findings also indicated that distress, kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, and pessimism negatively impact postoperative function/HRQoL outcomes following TKA, though no reviews have addressed these factors for THA. Conversely, the psychological protective factors of patient expectations and mental well-being were found to positively influence function/HRQoL outcomes following both TKA. Conclusion: These findings may help clinicians target specific elements to enhance the management of patients and could potentially improve outcomes by addressing these factors through tailored interventions. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
