Can Patient-centered Education and Pain Management Delivered by Coaches Improve Pain Outcomes After Orthopaedic Trauma? A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain after orthopaedic trauma is complex, and many patients who have experienced orthopaedic trauma are at increased risk for prolonged opioid utilization after the injury. Patient-centered interventions capable of delivering enhanced education and opioid-sparing pain management approaches must be implemented and evaluated in trauma care settings to improve pain outcomes and minimize opioid-related risks. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Does personalized pain education and management delivered by coaches (1) improve pain-related outcomes, (2) reduce opioid consumption, and (3) improve patient-reported outcome measures (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] scores) compared to written discharge instructions on pain management and opioid safety? METHODS: This clinical trial aimed to examine the effect of a personalized pain education and management intervention, delivered by paraprofessional coaches, on pain-related outcomes and opioid consumption compared with usual care (written discharge instructions on pain management and opioid safety). Between February 2021 and September 2022, 212 patients were randomized to the intervention (49% [104]) or control group (51% [108]). A total of 31% (32 of 104) and 47% (51 of 108) in those groups, respectively, were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 12 weeks or had incomplete datasets, leaving 69% (72 of 104) and 53% (57 of 108) for analysis in the intervention and control group, respectively. Patients randomized to the intervention worked with the paraprofessional coaches throughout hospitalization after their orthopaedic injury and at their 2-, 6-, and 12-week visits with the surgical team after discharge to implement mindfulness-based practices and nonpharmacological interventions. Most participants in the final sample of 129 identified as Black (73% [94 of 129]) and women (56% [72 of 129]), the mean Injury Severity score was 8 ± 4, and one-third of participants were at medium to high risk for an opioid-use disorder based on the Opioid Risk Tool. Participants completed surveys during hospitalization and at the 2-, 6-, and 12-week follow-up visits. Surveys included average pain intensity scores over the past 24 hours measured on the pain numeric rating scale from 0 to 10 and PROMIS measures (physical functioning, pain interference, sleep disturbance). Opioid utilization, measured as daily morphine milligram equivalents, was collected from the electronic health record, and demographic and clinical characteristics were collected from self-report surveys. Groups were compared in terms of mean pain scores at at the 12-week follow-up, daily morphine milligram equivalents both during inpatient and at discharge, and mean PROMIS scores at 12 weeks of follow-up. Additionally, differences in the proportion of participants in each group achieving minimum clinically important differences (MCID) on pain and PROMIS scores were examined. For pain scores, an MCID of 2 points on the pain numeric rating scale assessing past 24-hour pain intensity was utilized. RESULTS: We found no difference between the intervention and control in terms of mean pain score at 12 weeks nor in the proportions of patients who achieved the MCID of 2 points for 24-hour average pain scores (85% [61 of 72] versus 72% [41 of 57], respectively, OR 2.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9 to 5.3]; p = 0.08). No differences were noted in daily morphine milligram equivalents utilized between the intervention and control groups during hospitalization, at discharge, or in prescription refills. Similarly, we observed no differences in the proportions of patients in the intervention and control groups who achieved the MCID on PROMIS Physical Function (81% [58 of 72] versus 63% [36 of 57], respectively, OR 2.2 [95% CI 0.9 to 5.2]; p = 0.06). We saw no differences in the proportions of patients who achieved the MCID on PROMIS Sleep Disturbance between the intervention and control groups (58% [42 of 72] versus 47% [27 of 57], respectively, OR 1.4 [95% CI 0.7 to 3.0]; p = 0.31). The proportion of patients who achieved the MCID on PROMIS Pain Interference scores did not differ between the intervention and the control groups (39% [28 of 72] versus 37% [21 of 57], respectively, OR 1.1 [95% CI 0.5 to 2.1]; p = 0.95). CONCLUSION: In this trial, we observed no differences between the intervention and control groups in terms of pain outcomes, opioid medication utilization, or patient-reported outcomes after orthopaedic trauma. However, future targeted research with diverse samples of patients at increased risk for poor postoperative outcomes is warranted to ascertain a potentially meaningful patient perceived effect on pain outcomes after working with coaches. Other investigators interested in this interventional approach may consider the coach program as a framework at their institutions to increase access to evidence-based nonpharmacological interventions among patients who are at increased risk for poor postoperative pain outcomes. Smaller, more focused programs connecting patients to coaches to learn about nonpharmacological pain management interventions may deliver a larger impact on patient's recovery and outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Radiographic Prediction of Soft Tissue Injury Associated with Tibial Plateau Fractures: The Direction of Articular Depression Matters.

This investigation aimed to evaluate the impact of coronal articular fragment displacement of Schatzker type II tibial plateau fractures on concomitant soft tissue knee injuries. One hundred consecutively treated patients were included. Depression depth and coronal articular fragment displacement were measured radiographically, and medial collateral ligament (MCL) and lateral meniscus (LM) injury, and pain and range of motion (ROM) on final follow up, were recorded. Multivariable regression was then performed. Coronal articular fragment displacement was medially and laterally hinged in 74% and 26% of patients, respectively. MCL injuries were significantly higher in the lateral hinge group (odds ratio [OR]: 3.25; confidence interval [CI]: 1.07 to 9.84; p = 0.03). No difference was found in LM injury incidence and amount of articular depression between groups. At final follow-up, average pain and ROM was similar between groups. Findings demonstrate a significant correlation between laterally hinged articular depression in Schatzker II tibial plateau fractures and concomitant MCL injury. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(4):270-275, 2023).

Integration of Life Care Specialists Into Orthopaedic Trauma Care to Improve Postoperative Outcomes: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: AIM: This pilot study assessed the feasibility and impact of integrating a Life Care Specialist (LCS) into orthopaedic trauma care. DESIGN: This was a prospective feasibility single group pilot study at a level 1 trauma center. METHOD: The LCS is a paraprofessional behavior-based "pain coach" and delivered patient-centered opioid safety education, trained participants on nonpharmacologic pain management approaches, conducted opioid risk assessments, and coordinated care. Numeric Rating Scale pain scores were assessed on admission, at discharge, and at 2-week follow-up. Daily morphine milligram equivalents (MME) during hospitalization, opioid medication use at 2-weeks, and patient satisfaction were recorded. T test compared mean morphine milligram equivalents (MME) to historical orthopaedic trauma patient population's mean dosage at discharge from the study site. Generalized linear models assessed pain scores over time. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of 121 total participants met criteria for moderate to severe risk of opioid misuse at initial hospitalization. On average, 2.8 LCS pain management interventions were utilized, most frequently progressive muscle relaxation (80%) and sound therapy (48%). Mean inpatient MME/day was 40.5, which was significantly lower than mean historical MME/day of 49.7 (p < .001). Pain scores improved over time from admission to 2-weeks postoperatively (p < .001). Nearly all participants agreed that the LCS was helpful in managing pain (99%). CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate feasibility to integrate LCS into orthopaedic trauma care, evident by participant engagement and satisfaction, and that LCS serve as valuable resources to assist with pain management and opioid education.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Heterotopic Ossification in the Knee After Reamed Tibial Nailing.

INTRODUCTION: Heterotopic ossification (HO) in the knee after tibial intramedullary nailing (IMN) has yet to be thoroughly investigated. Our aim was to assess frequency and associated factors for HO in the knee after tibial IMN. METHODS: This is a retrospective review at a single level 1 urban trauma center of 213 patients who underwent reamed tibial IMN. Plain radiographs were reviewed postoperatively and on final follow-up (≥6 weeks). Chart review was performed for surgical approach (suprapatellar versus infrapatellar), demographics, injury characteristics, and clinical follow-up. The primary outcome was frequency of HO. RESULTS: HO on final follow-up (mean: 41.43 weeks) was recorded in 15% cases. Postsurgical retroinfrapatellar reaming debris (odds ratio [OR], 4.73), Injury Severity Score (OR, 1.05), intensive care unit admission (OR, 2.89), chest injury (OR, 3.4), and ipsilateral retrograde femoral IMN (OR, 5.08) showed a notable association with HO development. No association was observed in HO formation between surgical approach, knee pain, or range-of-motion deficits. DISCUSSION: Radiographic evidence of HO in the knee after reamed tibial IMN is not uncommon and is associated with retained reaming debris, Injury Severity Score, chest injury, intensive care unit admission, and ipsilateral retrograde femoral nailing. No differences were noted in HO formation between approaches. HO was not associated with knee pain or range-of-motion deficits.

The effect of a Life Care Specialist on pain management and opioid-related outcomes among patients with orthopedic trauma: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Orthopedic trauma patients face complex pain management needs and are frequently prescribed opioids, leaving them at-risk for prolonged opioid use. To date, post-trauma pain management research has placed little emphasis on individualized risk assessments for misuse and systematically implementing non-pharmacologic pain management strategies. Therefore, a community-academic partnership was formed to design a novel position in the healthcare field (Life Care Specialist (LCS)), who will educate patients on the risks of opioids, tapering usage, safe disposal practices, and harm reduction strategies. In addition, the LCS teaches patients behavior-based strategies for pain management, utilizing well-described techniques for coping and resilience. This study aims to determine the effects of LCS intervention on opioid utilization, pain control, and patient satisfaction in the aftermath of orthopedic trauma. METHODS: In total, 200 orthopedic trauma patients will be randomized to receive an intervention (LCS) or a standard-of-care control at an urban level 1 trauma center. All patients will be assessed with comprehensive social determinants of health and substance use surveys immediately after surgery (baseline). Follow-up assessments will be performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively, and will include pain medication utilization (morphine milligram equivalents), pain scores, and other substance use. In addition, overall patient wellness will be evaluated with objective actigraphy measures and patient-reported outcomes. Finally, a survey of patient understanding of risks of opioid use and misuse will be collected, to assess the influence of LCS opioid education. DISCUSSION: There is limited data on the role of individualized, multimodal, non-pharmacologic, behavioral-based pain management intervention in opioid-related risk-mitigation in high-risk populations, including the orthopedic trauma patients. The findings from this randomized controlled trial will provide scientific and clinical evidence on the efficacy and feasibility of the LCS intervention. Moreover, the final aim will provide early evidence into which patients benefit most from LCS intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04154384 . Registered on 11/6/2019 (last updated on 6/10/2021).