Antidepressants in the treatment for chronic low back pain: questioning the validity of meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVES: To contrast the analgesic effect of duloxetine with antidepressants reported in other published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and review articles in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: In this narrative review, the results of 13 RCTs and 5 systematic reviews examining the analgesic effect of various antidepressants in CLBP were contrasted with those of 3 placebo-controlled duloxetine RCTs. Treatment effects based on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average score in the duloxetine RCTs were assessed in all completers (by study and overall) and in last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) analyses (extracted from study reports). 30%- and 50%-reduction response rates were compared between duloxetine and placebo. RESULTS: Eleven different antidepressants were examined in 13 individual RCTs. Sample sizes, treatment durations, and analysis methods varied across studies. Reviews each included 5 to 9 of the RCTs and came to different conclusions regarding the analgesic effect of antidepressants: 2 found no evidence while 3 reported some evidence. The completer analysis showed greater improvements in BPI average scores with duloxetine vs. placebo (significant in 2 studies). Overall, the least square mean (standard error) difference between treatments was - 0.7 (0.15) (P < 0.0001). Overall response rates were significantly larger with duloxetine than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the diversity of previous studies and the pooling methods used, the conclusions regarding the analgesic effect of antidepressants in CLBP drawn from systematic reviews must be interpreted with caution. Appropriately designed and powered studies similar to recently published duloxetine studies are recommended to demonstrate the analgesic effect of antidepressants.

Does recall of preinjury disability change over time?

BACKGROUND: Pre-injury disability must be determined when assessing whether treatment programs return people to pre-injury status, however there is little empirical evidence to support recommendations that this be done as soon as possible after injury to prevent recall bias. OBJECTIVES: To determine disagreement between recall of pre-injury disability at different time points post-injury and bias towards under- or overestimating pre-injury disability. METHODS: Self-reported pre-injury global disability was assessed within days, 6 months and 12 months post-injury in patients admitted to two level 1 adult trauma centres. Kappa statistics and multiple logistic regression models identified predictors of disagreement between time-points. RESULTS: Pre-injury disability was measured at all time-points in 801 patients. Pre-injury disability at baseline was rated as none, mild, moderate, marked and severe in 80%, 12%, 5.1%, 1.9% and 1.0% respectively. Absolute agreement between baseline and 6 and 12 months respectively, was 79% and 80%. Corresponding kappa values (95% confidence intervals) were 0.33 (0.26-0.40) and 0.32 (0-25-0.38). Patients over 65 years or not completing high school were more likely to report less pre-injury disability at 6 and 12 months than at baseline with adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for these groups being 8.24 (4.32-15.72) and 1.93 (1.03-3.64) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence of recall bias in an adult trauma population if self-reported global pre-injury disability was assessed 6 months post-injury. The recall of pre-injury disability up to 6 months post-injury can be used to determine return to pre-injury status, if assessment is not feasible shortly after injury.

Hyperbaric Oxygen for Lower Limb Trauma (HOLLT): an international multi-centre randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) is sometimes used in the management of open fractures and severe soft tissue crush injury, aiming to reduce complications and improve outcomes. METHODS: Patients with open tibial fractures were randomly assigned within 48 hours of injury to receive standard trauma care or standard care plus 12 sessions of HBOT. The primary outcome was the incidence of necrosis or infection or both occurring within 14 days of injury. RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty patients were enrolled. Intention to treat primary outcome occurred in 25/58 HBOT assigned patients and 34/59 controls (43% vs 58%, odds ratio (OR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 1.18, P = 0.12). Tissue necrosis occurred in 29% of HBOT patients and 53% of controls (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.78, P = 0.01). There were fewer late complications in patients receiving HBOT (6/53 vs 18/52, OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.64, P = 0.007) including delayed fracture union (5/53 vs 13/52, OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.95, P = 0.04). Quality of life measures at one and two years were superior in HBOT patients. The mean score difference in short form 36 was 2.90, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.77, P = 0.002, in the short musculoskeletal function assessment (SMFA) was 2.54, 95% CI 0.62 to 4.46, P = 0.01; and in SMFA daily activities was 19.51, 95% CI 0.06 to 21.08, P = 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: In severe lower limb trauma, early HBOT reduces tissue necrosis and the likelihood of long-term complications, and improves functional outcomes. Future research should focus on optimal dosage and whether HBOT has benefits for other injury types.

Features and methods to discriminate between mechanism-based categories of pain experienced in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi expert consensus study.

ABSTRACT: Classification of musculoskeletal pain based on underlying pain mechanisms (nociceptive, neuropathic, and nociplastic pain) is challenging. In the absence of a gold standard, verification of features that could aid in discrimination between these mechanisms in clinical practice and research depends on expert consensus. This Delphi expert consensus study aimed to: (1) identify features and assessment findings that are unique to a pain mechanism category or shared between no more than 2 categories and (2) develop a ranked list of candidate features that could potentially discriminate between pain mechanisms. A group of international experts were recruited based on their expertise in the field of pain. The Delphi process involved 2 rounds: round 1 assessed expert opinion on features that are unique to a pain mechanism category or shared between 2 (based on a 40% agreement threshold); and round 2 reviewed features that failed to reach consensus, evaluated additional features, and considered wording changes. Forty-nine international experts representing a wide range of disciplines participated. Consensus was reached for 196 of 292 features presented to the panel (clinical examination-134 features, quantitative sensory testing-34, imaging and diagnostic testing-14, and pain-type questionnaires-14). From the 196 features, consensus was reached for 76 features as unique to nociceptive (17), neuropathic (37), or nociplastic (22) pain mechanisms and 120 features as shared between pairs of pain mechanism categories (78 for neuropathic and nociplastic pain). This consensus study generated a list of potential candidate features that are likely to aid in discrimination between types of musculoskeletal pain.

Cervical spine magnetic resonance imaging in alert, neurologically intact trauma patients with persistent midline tenderness and negative computed tomography results.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We aim to determine the prevalence and factors associated with cervical discoligamentous injuries detected on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in acute, alert, neurologically intact trauma patients with computed tomography (CT) imaging negative for acute injury and persistent midline cervical spine tenderness. We present the cross-sectional analysis of baseline information collected as a component of a prospective observational study. METHODS: Alert, neurologically intact trauma patients presenting to a Level I trauma center with CT negative for acute injury, who underwent MRI for investigation of persistent midline cervical tenderness, were prospectively recruited. Deidentified images were assessed, and injuries were identified and graded. Outcome measures included the presence and extent of MRI-detected injury of the cervical ligaments, intervertebral discs, spinal cord and associated soft tissues. RESULTS: There were 178 patients recruited during a 2-year period to January 2009. Of these, 78 patients (44%) had acute cervical injury detected on MRI. There were 48 single-column injuries, 15 two-column injuries, and 5 three-column injuries. Of the remaining 10 patients, 6 had isolated posterior muscle edema, 2 had alar ligamentous edema, 1 had epidural hematoma, and 1 had atlanto-occipital edema. The injuries to 38 patients (21%) were managed clinically; 33 patients were treated in cervical collars for 2 to 12 weeks, and 5 patients (2.8%) underwent operative management, 1 of whom had delayed instability. Ordinal logistic regression revealed that factors associated with a higher number of spinal columns injured included advanced CT-detected cervical spondylosis (odds ratio [OR] 11.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9 to 34.3), minor isolated thoracolumbar fractures (OR 5.4; 95% CI 1.5 to 19.7), and multidirectional cervical spine forces (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.2 to 5.2). CONCLUSION: In patients with cervical midline tenderness and negative acute CT findings, we found that a subset of patients had MRI-detected cervical discoligamentous injuries and that advanced cervical spine degeneration evident on CT, minor thoracolumbar fracture, and multidirectional cervical spine forces were associated with increased injury extent. However, a larger study is required to validate which variables may reliably predict clinically important injury in such patients, thereby indicating the need for further radiographic assessment.

Comparing the responsiveness of functional outcome assessment measures for trauma registries.

BACKGROUND: Measuring long-term disability and functional outcomes after major trauma is not standardized across trauma registries. An ideal measure would be responsive to change but not have significant ceiling effects. The aim of this study was to compare the responsiveness of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), GOS-Extended (GOSE), Functional Independence Measure (FIM), and modified FIM in major trauma patients, with and without significant head injuries. METHODS: Patients admitted to two adult Level I trauma centers in Victoria, Australia, who survived to discharge from hospital, were aged 15 years to 80 years with a blunt mechanism of injury, and had an estimated Injury Severity Score >15 on admission, were recruited for this prospective study. The instruments were administered at baseline (hospital discharge) and by telephone interview 6 months after injury. Measures of responsiveness, including effect sizes, were calculated. Bootstrapping techniques, and floor and ceiling effects, were used to compare the measures. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-three patients participated, of which 234 patients (96%) completed the study. The GOSE and GOS were the most responsive instruments in this major trauma population with effect sizes of 5.3 and 4.4, respectively. The GOSE had the lowest ceiling effect (17%). CONCLUSIONS: The GOSE was the instrument with greatest responsiveness and the lowest ceiling effect in a major trauma population with and without significant head injuries and is recommended for use by trauma registries for monitoring functional outcomes and benchmarking care. The results of this study do not support the use of the modified FIM for this purpose.

Functional and health-related quality of life outcomes after pediatric trauma.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric trauma results in lower mortality than adults and a high potential for lifelong functional impairment and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL). There is no consensus regarding the best approach to measuring outcomes in this group. METHODS: One hundred and fifty injured children admitted to a pediatric trauma center participated in this study. The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL), Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ-PF28), King's Outcome Scale for Childhood Head Injury (KOSCHI), modified Glasgow Outcome Scale (mGOS), and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) were administered at 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months after injury by telephone. Change in instrument scores was assessed using multilevel mixed effects models. Mean HRQL scores were compared with population norms for the CHQ-PF28 and with healthy children for the PedsQL. RESULTS: Follow-up at all time points was completed for 144 (96%) cases. The median injury severity score was 10, and 65% of the patients enrolled were men. At 12 months, the percentage of cases with ongoing disability was 14% for the FIM, 61% using the mGOS, and 58% for the KOSCHI. CHQ-PF28 physical and PedsQL psychosocial health scores were below healthy child norms at 12 months. Improvement across all time points was demonstrated for the KOSCHI, mGOS, CHQ-PF28 physical, and PedsQL psychosocial summary scores. CONCLUSIONS: Seriously injured children showed ongoing disability and reduced HRQL 12 months after injury. The CHQ-PF28 and PedsQL, and the mGOS and KOSCHI, performed comparably. The FIM demonstrated considerable ceiling effects, and improvement over time was not shown. The results inform the methodology of pediatric outcomes studies and protocol development for the routine follow-up of pediatric trauma patients.

Impact of the Opioid Epidemic and Associated Prescribing Restrictions on People Who Live With Chronic Noncancer Pain in Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about the consequences of the opioid epidemic on people living with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP). This study examined this issue in people who lived in the most impacted province by opioid overdoses in Canada (British Columbia [BC]) or one of the least impacted (Quebec [QC]), and examined the factors associated with opioid use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was carried out in adults living in BC (N=304) and QC (N=1071) who reported CNCP (≥3 months) and completed an online questionnaire that was tailored to their opioid status. RESULTS: Almost twice as many participants in BC as in QC were proposed to cease their opioid medication in the past year (P<0.001). The proportion who reported having hoarded opioids in fear of not being able to get more in the future was also significantly higher in BC (P<0.001) compared with QC. In addition, they were significantly more likely to have had their opioid dose decreased than those in QC (P=0.001). No significant association was found between opioid discontinuation and province of residence. Two-thirds of the BC participants felt that the media coverage of the opioid crisis was very to extremely detrimental to CNCP patients in general, this percentage being significantly higher than in QC (P<0.001). DISCUSSION: The opioid epidemic and associated prescribing restrictions have had harmful effects on Canadians with CNCP. The clinical community, the general public, and the media need to be aware of these negative consequences to decrease patients' stigmatization and minimize inadequate treatment of CNCP.

COVID-19 impact and response by Canadian pain clinics: A national survey of adult pain clinics.

Background: As the result of public health authority responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, pain clinics have had to cease providing in-person appointments to reduce contact between patients and staff. Over the past decade, Canadians living with chronic pain have faced long waiting times for care within multidisciplinary pain clinics. We are concerned that ceasing in-person pain services exacerbates the daily hardships already faced by Canadians living with chronic pain. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canadian pain clinics, their responses, and changes to clinic practices that might be maintained when the pandemic is over. Methods: A survey of Canadian adult multidisciplinary pain clinics was conducted to determine impacts on medical and allied health care services and the strategies used to deliver care to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Responses received from 17 adult pain clinics across Canada showed that adult multidisciplinary pain clinics had to cease or significantly reduce in-person patient contacts during the COVID-19 pandemic and responded by offering telehealth options. Despite their efforts, patients are waiting longer and have lost access to usual care. Increased levels of pain, stress, and medication use, particularly opioids and cannabinoids, were reported. Conclusions: Access to adaptable and innovative technologies, such as telehealth, can assist in the care of the one in five Canadians living with chronic pain during times of crises and must be included as a vital component of a comprehensive Canadian pain strategy.

Contexte: Suite aux mesures prises par les autorités de santé publique en réponse à la pandémie de COVID-19, les cliniques antidouleur ont dû cesser de proposer des rendez-vous en personne afin de réduire les contacts entre les patients et le personnel. Au cours de la dernière décennie, les Canadiens vivant avec la douleur chronique ont dû faire face à de longs délais d'attente pour obtenir des soins dans les cliniques antidouleur multidisciplinaires. Nous sommes préoccupés par le fait que l'arrêt des services antidouleur en personne exacerbe les difficultés quotidiennes auxquelles sont déjà confrontés les Canadiens qui vivent avec la douleur chronique.Objectifs: Cette étude visait à évaluer les repercussions de la pandémie de COVID-19 sur les cliniques antidouleur au Canada, leurs réactions et les changements dans leurs pratiques qui pourraient être maintenus en raison de la pandémie.Méthodes: Une enquête a été menée auprès des cliniques antidouleur multidisciplinaires pour adultes au Canada afin de determiner les répercussions sur les services médicaux et les services paramédicaux, ainsi que les strategies utilisées pout fournir des soins de santé aux patients pendant la pandémie de COVID-19.Résultats: Les réponses reçues de 17 cliniques antidouleur pour adultes au Canada ont montré que les cliniques antidouleur multidisciplinaires pour adultes avaient dû cesser ou réduire considérablement les contacts en personne avec les patients pendant la COVID-19 et qu'elles ont réagi en proposant des options de télésanté. Malgré leurs efforts, les patients attendent plus longtemps et n'ont plus accès aux soins habituels. L'augmentation des niveaux de douleur, de stress et de médication, en particulier les opioïdes et les cannabioïdes, a été signalée.Conclusion: L'accès à des technologies adaptables et innovantes, telles que la télésanté, peut contribuer aux soins des 20 % de Canadiens vivant avecla douleur chronique en période de crise et doit constituer un élément essentiel d'une stratégie canadienne globale de lutte contre la douleur.

Occipital condyle fractures: incidence and clinical follow-up at a level 1 trauma centre.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the incidence, management, and outcomes of occipital condyle fractures at a level 1 trauma center. Blunt trauma patients with occipital condyle fracture admitted to a level 1 trauma center over a 3-year period were identified. Prospective clinical and functional follow-up was undertaken, including further radiographic imaging. The incidence of occipital condyle fracture in patients presenting to our level 1 trauma center was 1.7/1,000 per year. Twenty-four patients were followed up at a mean of 27 months post-injury. There was one case of isolated occipital condyle fracture; all other patients had sustained additional orthopedic, cervical spine, and/or head injury. Seven (29%) patients sustained unilateral Type III avulsion fractures, none of which were isolated injuries. Traumatic brain injury was detected in 46% of study patients, and 42% had cervical spine injury. External halothoracic immobilization was used in 33% of cases. Fracture union with anatomical alignment occurred in 21 patients (88%). No patient had cranial nerve deficit at admission or follow-up. Three patients (12.5%) had moderate to severe neck pain/disability at follow-up, all of whom had sustained multiple injuries. Occipital condyle fractures most frequently occur in conjunction with additional injuries, particularly head and cervical spine injuries. Most cases can be managed successfully nonoperatively. Functional outcome is generally determined by pain and disability related to other injuries, rather than occipital fracture configuration.

Evidence-Based Recommendations on the Pharmacological Management of Osteoarthritis and Chronic Low Back Pain: An Asian Consensus

The overall burden of chronic musculoskeletal pain in Asian countries will continue to increase as the population ages, as will the demand for safe and effective pain management. Currently available Asian guidelines are mostly outdated and targeted only to primary care. Implementation of international guidelines may be unsuitable for Asian patients due to cultural, local economic and regulatory factors. With the aim of developing Asian-specifi c consensus recommendations for the pharmacological management of osteoarthritis (OA) pain and chronic low back pain (cLBP), we convened to review and discuss recent available evidence for pharmacotherapy, clinical experiences, and current practice challenges they face in the region, including challenges in opioid use. Taking these into consideration, we provided general recommendations for the overall assessment and management of OA pain and cLBP. The strength of the recommendations regarding the use of pharmacological agents was assessed using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Where evidence is confl icting or limited, we made no recommendation pending the availability of further evidence. We recommend topical non-steroidal anti-infl ammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as a fi rst-line pharmacological treatment of OA pain, while oral NSAIDs should be considered as a fi rst-line pharmacological treatment of cLBP. Acetaminophen has been commonly used as the fi rst-line treatment for OA pain and cLBP, but its long-term use is not recommended based on recent evidence. These consensus recommendations are not prescriptive, and serve as a guide for decision-making in clinical practice. The optimal management of OA pain and cLBP should ultimately be individualized to each patient.

Functional measures at discharge: are they useful predictors of longer term outcomes for trauma registries?

OBJECTIVE: Trauma registries are integral to trauma systems, but reliance on mortality as the primary outcome measure remains a limitation. Some registries have included measures of discharge function, usually the modified Functional Independence Measure (FIM) or the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), with the potential benefit being the ability to identify patients at risk for poor outcome. This study investigates the ability of these measures to predict longer term outcomes. METHODS: Two hundred forty-three blunt major trauma patients participated. Data were captured from the trauma registry and discharge function was assessed using the modified FIM, FIM, and GOS. At 6 months postinjury, the GOS, FIM, modified FIM, return to work/study, and other outcome measures were collected by telephone interview. Multivariate analyses were used to assess the performance of discharge functional measures as predictors of 6-month outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-six (97.1%) participants were followed at 6 months postinjury. Disability was prevalent at 6 months; 42% had not returned to work/study, and only 32% were categorized as a "good recovery" by the GOS. Neither the GOS nor modified FIM at discharge were independent predictors of 6-month outcomes, whereas the FIM score and the FIM motor score were independent predictors of functional recovery (adjusted odds ratios 0.97; 95% confidence intervals: 0.96-0.99) and return to work/study (adjusted odds ratios 1.03, 95% confidence intervals: 1.01-1.04), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For trauma registries to compare outcomes between regions and improvements over time, it is important that survivors with poor long-term outcomes are identified. Present measurement of discharge outcomes for trauma patients is inadequate for this purpose.

Pain medicine and its models: helping or hindering?

OBJECTIVE: To identify whether the biopsychosocial framework of illness has overcome the limitations of the biomedical model of disease when applied in the practice of pain medicine. DESIGN: Critical review of the literature concerning the application of biopsychosocial models to the praxis of pain medicine and the concepts of living systems. RESULTS: The biopsychosocial model of illness, formulated by Engel in 1977, has generated the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) definition of pain, two major conceptual frameworks in pain medicine, and three putative explanatory models for pain. However, in the absence of a theory that seeks to understand the lived experience of pain as an emergent and unpredictable phenomenon, these progeny of the biopsychosocial model have been caught in circular argument and have been unable to overcome biomedical reductionism or the perpetuation of body-mind dualism. In particular, the implication that pain can be a "thing" separate and distinct from the body bears little relationship to the lived experience of pain. Such marginalizing results when an observer attempts to reduce the experience of the pain of another person. CONCLUSIONS: The self-referentiality of living systems (through their qualities of autopoiesis, noncentrality and negentropy) sees pain "emerge" in unpredictable ways that defy any lineal reduction of the lived experience to any particular "thing." Pain therefore constitutes an aporia, a space and presence that defies us access to its secrets. We suggest a project in which pain may be apprehended in the clinical encounter, through the engagement of two autonomous self-referential beings in the intersubjective or so-called third space, from which new therapeutic possibilities can arise.

Prehospital prediction of the severity of blunt anatomic injury.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the ability of paramedics to predict patients requiring a major trauma service. To assess whether paramedic prediction of severity of injury to individual body regions is accurate and could add to overall paramedic prediction of injury severity. METHODS: Helicopter paramedics in Victoria prospectively recorded the severity of injury to the head, thoracic, and abdomen regions, and whether the patient required a major trauma service, for primary response adult (>15 years) trauma patients. Paramedic predictions of injuries were compared with patient outcomes. Major trauma was defined as death in hospital; an Injury Severity Score >15; intensive care unit admission >24 hours; and urgent surgery. A severe anatomic injury was defined as an Abbreviated Injury Scale severity >/=3. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated. RESULTS: Two hundred and seven patients were enrolled in the study, with 62.3% defined as major trauma. The sensitivity of paramedic predictions ranged from 57.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]; 45.4-68.9) for the head to 38.5 (95% CI; 22.1-57.9) for the abdomen. Specificities ranged from 98.3 (95% CI; 93.5-99.6) for the thorax to 93.5 (95% CI; 87.9-96.6) for the head region. The sensitivity and specificity of paramedic predictions of a major trauma status were 97.7 (95% CI; 93-99.2) and 28.2 (95% CI; 19.3-39.1), respectively. The paramedics correctly categorized all patients who were admitted to an intensive care unit, required urgent surgery or died in hospital as major trauma. CONCLUSIONS: Paramedics were unable to reliably identify severe injury to individual body regions. Sensitivity of paramedic judgment of major trauma status was high. Assessment of the severity of injury to individual body regions did not appear to improve accuracy.

Twelve-month outcomes of serious orthopaedic sport and active recreation-related injuries admitted to Level 1 trauma centers in Melbourne, Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and identify predictors of 12-month outcomes of serious orthopaedic injuries due to sport and active recreation. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with 12-month follow-up. SETTING: Two Level 1 adult trauma centers in Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 366 adults admitted to two Level 1 trauma centers for an orthopaedic sport and active recreation injury between August 2003 and March 2006. Patients were captured by the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry (VOTOR), followed up at 12 months, and were free of moderate to severe disability prior to injury. ASSESSMENT OF RISK FACTORS: Independent variables assessed for predictors of outcome were sporting group, age, sex, marital status, education level, Injury Severity Score, injury patterns, and head injury status. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The 12-item Short Form Health Survey and maximum pain scores. RESULTS: At 12 months postinjury, 22.8% of patients reported moderate to severe physical disability, 12.1% reported moderate to severe mental health disability, and 11.1% reported moderate to severe pain. There were significant differences in physical outcomes between sporting groups, with motor and equestrian sports reporting the worst physical outcomes. Multivariate analysis indentified increasing age (P = 0.010) and patterns of injury (P = 0.040) as significant predictors of a poor physical outcome at 12 months. No significant independent predictors of outcome for mental health and maximum pain at 12 months were identified. CONCLUSION: Almost one-quarter of participants reported moderate to severe physical disability at 12 months postinjury. Increasing age and patterns of injury were found to be significant predictors of a poor physical outcome at 12 months.

Can the modified functional independence measure be reliably obtained from the patient medical record by different raters?

BACKGROUND: The National Trauma Databank minimum dataset includes three items of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) collected at hospital discharge. Reliable collection of the modified FIM through medical record review could enable trauma registries to obtain a functional outcome measure without patient interview. This study investigated the interrater reliability of the medical record modified FIM, and the level of agreement with the modified FIM scored through patient assessment. METHODS: Four raters scored the modified FIM from the medical records of 44 major trauma patients postdischarge. The medical record modified FIM scores were compared with the modified FIM score obtained through patient assessment at discharge. Weighted (Kw) and unweighted [kappa] statistics were used to describe absolute and near agreement between pairs of raters. RESULTS: The average level of agreement between raters was slight for the feeding (mean Kw, 0.13) item, fair for the expression (mean Kw, 0.28) item, and moderate for the locomotion (mean Kw, 0.47) item. Compared with the patient assessment modified FIM, the average level of agreement was moderate (mean Kw, 0.55) for the locomotion item, and fair for the expression and feeding items, with mean Kw of 0.38 and 0.20, respectively. CONCLUSION: The interrater reliability of the medical record modified FIM, and agreement with the modified FIM obtained through patient assessment, was low. Meaningful comparisons of this outcome measure across registries and hospitals could be limited, and comparisons within a registry or hospital over time may be similarly affected by changes in staff.