Perfusion Pressure Lacks Diagnostic Specificity for the Diagnosis of Acute Compartment Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of perfusion pressure (PP) thresholds for fasciotomy. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Seven Level-1 trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifty adults with severe leg injuries and ≥2 hours of continuous PP data who had been enrolled in a multicenter observational trial designed to develop a clinical prediction rule for acute compartment syndrome (ACS). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: For each patient, a given PP criterion was positive if it was below the specified threshold for at least 2 consecutive hours. The diagnostic performance of PP thresholds between 10 and 30 mm Hg was determined using 2 reference standards for comparison: (1) the likelihood of ACS as determined by an expert panel who reviewed each patient's data portfolio or (2) whether the patient underwent fasciotomy. RESULTS: Using the likelihood of ACS as the diagnostic standard (ACS considered present if median likelihood ≥70%, absent if <30%), a PP threshold of 30 mm Hg had diagnostic sensitivity 0.83, specificity 0.53, positive predictive value 0.07, and negative predictive value 0.99. Results were insensitive to more strict likelihood categorizations and were similar for other PP thresholds between 10- and 25-mm Hg. Using fasciotomy as the reference standard, the same PP threshold had diagnostic sensitivity 0.50, specificity 0.50, positive predictive value 0.04, negative predictive value 0.96. CONCLUSION: No value of PP from 10 to 30 mm Hg had acceptable diagnostic performance, regardless of which reference diagnostic standard was used. These data question current practice of diagnosing ACS based on PP and suggest the need for further research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Trauma Collaborative Care Intervention: Effect on Surgeon Confidence in Managing Psychosocial Complications After Orthopaedic Trauma.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of the Trauma Collaborative Care (TCC) program on surgeon confidence in managing the psychosocial sequelae of orthopaedic trauma was evaluated as part of a larger prospective, multisite, cluster clinical trial. We compared confidence and perceived resource availability among surgeons practicing in trauma centers that implemented the TCC program with orthopaedic trauma surgeons in similar trauma centers that did not implement the TCC. DESIGN: Prospective cohort design. SETTING: Level-I trauma centers. PARTICIPANTS: Attending surgeons and fellows (N = 95 Pre and N = 82 Post). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Self-report 10-item measure of surgeon confidence in managing psychosocial issues associated with trauma and perceived availability of support resources. RESULTS: Analyses, performed on the entire sample and repeated on the subset of 52 surgeons who responded to the survey at both times points, found surgeons at intervention sites experienced a significantly greater positive improvement (P < 0.05) in their (1) belief that they have strategies to help orthopaedic trauma patients change their psychosocial situation; (2) confidence in making appropriate referrals for orthopaedic trauma patients with psychosocial problems; and (3) belief that they have access to information to guide the management of psychosocial issues related to recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Initial data suggest that the establishment of the TCC program can improve surgeons' perceived availability of resources and their confidence in managing the psychosocial sequelae after injury. Further studies will be required to determine if this translates into beneficial patient effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.