Musculoskeletal Preparticipation Physical Evaluation-Does it Lead to Decreased Musculoskeletal Morbidity?

A preparticipation physical evaluation (PPE) is a requirement that many athletes must complete before participating in organized sports. Currently, the traditional musculoskeletal (MSK) portion of the PPE lacks robust evidence to support its ability to accurately predict those at greater risk for MSK injury. Functional movement testing has garnered attention for potential use in the PPE having shown some promise for greater sensitivity at identifying those at greater risk for MSK injury. Despite the widespread use of MSK PPE screening to identify athletes at greater risk for MSK injury, there is no significant evidence demonstrating that subsequent interventions result in decreased MSK injury.

Surface Area Graphic Evaluation (SAGE) Diagram Documentation in Burn Patients: Room for Quality Improvement.

Background The first step in the management of burn patients is an accurate estimation of the total body surface area (TBSA) involvement. Depending on which, burns are categorized as major (>20%) and minor (<20%). This then dictates fluid resuscitation and level of care. At the University of New Mexico Burn Center, we use Surface Area Graphic Evaluation (SAGE) diagramming to objectively estimate the body surface area involvement. We hypothesized patients undergoing SAGE documentation will have better outcomes.  Methods This is a retrospective study of 320 consecutive patients from 2014-2018 at the University of New Mexico Burn Center. Only patients treated surgically were included. We recorded patient demographics, comorbidities, and burn details. The primary measure of interest was SAGE documentation and the secondary measure of interest was outcomes associated with it. Results We found that a SAGE diagram was only documented for a minority of patients (40%). After comparing patients in the SAGE group vs. No SAGE group, we found that the patients were the same in both groups with regards to demographics, comorbidities, and burn characteristics. The use of a SAGE diagram did not appear to be a significant predictor of complications, including surgical site infections, graft loss, donor site complications, postoperative pneumonia, urinary tract infections, deep vein thrombosis, or myocardial infarction (p=0.254). Conclusion Only a minority of patients get a SAGE diagram documented. However, our study did not find any improved outcomes with the use of a SAGE diagram. There is a need for prospective studies to validate the utility of SAGE diagramming in predicting adverse outcomes in major burns.