Healthcare Utilization Following Hemipelvectomy or Hip Disarticulation in the Military Health System.

INTRODUCTION: Amputations at the hip and pelvic level are often performed secondary to high-energy trauma or pelvic neoplasms and are frequently associated with a prolonged postoperative rehabilitation course that involves a multitude of health care providers. The purpose of this study was to examine the health care utilization of patients with hip- and pelvic-level amputations that received care in the U.S. Military Health System. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent a hip- or pelvic-level amputation in the Military Health System between 2001 and 2017. We compiled and reviewed all inpatient and outpatient encounters during three time points: (1) 3 months pre-amputation to 1 day pre-amputation, (2) the day of amputation through 12 months post-amputation, and (3) 13-24 months post-amputation. Health care utilization was defined as the average number of encounter days/admissions for each patient. Concomitant diagnoses following amputation including post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, anxiety, depression, and chronic pain were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 106 individuals with hip- and pelvic-level amputations were analyzed (69 unilateral hip disarticulation, 6 bilateral hip disarticulations, 27 unilateral hemipelvectomy, 2 bilateral hemipelvectomies, and 2 patients with a hemipelvectomy and contralateral hip disarticulation). Combat trauma contributed to 61.3% (n = 65) of all amputations. During the time period of 3 months pre-amputation, patients had an average of 3.8 encounter days. Following amputation, health care utilization increased in both the year following amputation and the time period of 13-24 months post-amputation, averaging 170.8 and 77.4 encounter days, respectively. Patients with trauma-related amputations averaged more total encounter days compared to patients with disease-related amputations in the time period of 12 months following amputation (203.8 vs.106.7, P < .001) and the time period of 13-24 months post-amputation (92.0 vs. 49.0, P = .005). PTSD (P = .02) and traumatic brain injuries (P < .001) were more common following combat-related amputations. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the increased health care resource demand following hip- and pelvic-level amputations in a military population, particularly for those patients who sustained combat-related trauma. Additionally, patients with combat-related amputations had significantly higher rates of concomitant PTSD and traumatic brain injury. Understanding the extensive needs of this unique patient population helps inform providers and policymakers on the requirements for providing high-quality care to combat casualties.

Heterotopic Ossification Formation in Military Beneficiaries Following Hip- and Pelvic-Level Amputations.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic hip and pelvic level amputations are uncommon but devastating injuries and associated with numerous complications that can significantly affect quality of life for these patients. While heterotopic ossification (HO) formation has been reported at rates of up to 90% following traumatic, combat-related amputations, previous studies included few patients with more proximal hip and pelvic level amputations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the Military Health System medical record and identified patients with both traumatic and disease-related hip- and pelvic-level amputations performed between 2001 and 2017. We reviewed the most recent pelvis radiograph at least 3 months following amputation to determine bony resection level and the association between HO formation and reason for amputation (trauma versus disease related). RESULTS: Of 93 patients with post-amputation pelvis radiographs available, 66% (n = 61) had hip-level amputations and 34% (n = 32) had a hemipelvectomy. The median duration from the initial injury or surgery to the most recent radiograph was 393 days (interquartile range, 73-1,094). HO occurred in 75% of patients. Amputation secondary to trauma was a significant predictor of HO formation (χ2 = 24.58; P < .0001); however, there was no apparent relationship between the severity of HO and traumatic versus non-traumatic etiology (χ2 = 2.92; P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Amputations at the hip were more common than pelvic-level amputations in this study population, and three-fourths of hip- and pelvic-level amputation patients had radiographic evidence of HO. The rate of HO formation following blast injuries and other trauma was significantly higher compared with patients with non-traumatic amputations.

Multicenter study evaluating factors associated with treatment outcome for low back pain injections.

BACKGROUND: There has been a worldwide surge in interventional procedures for low back pain (LBP), with studies yielding mixed results. These data support the need for identifying outcome predictors based on unique characteristics in a pragmatic setting. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated the association between over two dozen demographic, clinical and technical factors on treatment outcomes for three procedures: epidural steroid injections (ESIs) for sciatica, and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injections and facet interventions for axial LBP. The primary outcome was change in patient-reported average pain intensity on a numerical rating scale (average NRS-PI) using linear regression. For SIJ injections and facet radiofrequency ablation, this was average LBP score at 1 and 3 months postprocedure, respectively. For ESI, it was average leg pain 1- month postinjection. Secondary outcomes included a binary indicator of treatment response (success). RESULTS: 346 patients were enrolled at seven hospitals. All groups experienced a decrease in average NRS-PI (p<0.0001; mean 1.8±2.6). There were no differences in change in average NRS-PI among procedural groups (p=0.50). Lower baseline pain score (adjusted coefficient -0.32, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.16, p<0.0001), depressive symptomatology (adjusted coefficient 0.076, 95% CI 0.039 to 0.113, p<0.0001) and obesity (adjusted coefficient 0.62, 95% CI 0.038 to 1.21, p=0.037) were associated with smaller pain reductions. For procedural outcome, depression (adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91, 0.97, p<0.0001) and poorer baseline function (adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.36, 0.96, p=0.034) were associated with failure. Smoking, sleep dysfunction and non-organic signs were associated with negative outcomes in univariate but not multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying treatment responders is a critical endeavor for the viability of procedures in LBP. Patients with greater disease burden, depression and obesity are more likely to fail interventions. Steps to address these should be considered before or concurrent with procedures as considerations dictate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02329951.

Clinical evaluation of the revolutionizing prosthetics modular prosthetic limb system for upper extremity amputees.

Individuals with upper extremity (UE) amputation abandon prostheses due to challenges with significant device weight-particularly among myoelectric prostheses-and limited device dexterity, durability, and reliability among both myoelectric and body-powered prostheses. The Modular Prosthetic Limb (MPL) system couples an advanced UE prosthesis with a pattern recognition paradigm for intuitive, non-invasive prosthetic control. Pattern recognition accuracy and functional assessment-Box & Blocks (BB), Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test (JHFT), and Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control (ACMC)-scores comprised the main outcomes. 10 participants were included in analyses, including seven individuals with traumatic amputation, two individuals with congenital limb absence, and one with amputation secondary to malignancy. The average (SD) time since limb loss, excluding congenital participants, was 85.9 (59.5) months. Participants controlled an average of eight motion classes compared to three with their conventional prostheses. All participants made continuous improvements in motion classifier accuracy, pathway completion efficiency, and MPL manipulation. BB and JHFT improvements were not statistically significant. ACMC performance improved for all participants, with mean (SD) scores of 162.6 (105.3), 213.4 (196.2), and 383.2 (154.3), p = 0.02 between the baseline, midpoint, and exit assessments, respectively. Feedback included lengthening the training period to further improve motion classifier accuracy and MPL control. The MPL has potential to restore functionality to individuals with acquired or congenital UE loss.

Waddell (Nonorganic) Signs and Their Association With Interventional Treatment Outcomes for Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: The rising use of injections to treat low back pain (LBP) has led to efforts to improve selection. Nonorganic (Waddell) signs have been shown to portend treatment failure for surgery and other therapies but have not been studied for minimally invasive interventions. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated the association between Waddell signs and treatment outcome in 3 cohorts: epidural steroid injections (ESI) for leg pain and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injections and facet interventions for LBP. Categories of Waddell signs included nonanatomic tenderness, pain during sham stimulation, discrepancy in physical examination, overreaction, and regional disturbances divulging from neuroanatomy. The primary outcome was change in patient-reported "average" numerical rating scale for pain intensity (average NRS-PI), modeled as a function of the number of Waddell signs using simple linear regression. Secondary outcomes included a binary indicator of treatment response. We conducted secondary and sensitivity analyses to account for potential confounders. RESULTS: We enrolled 318 patients: 152 in the ESI cohort, 102 in the facet cohort, and 64 in the SIJ cohort, having sufficient data for primary analysis on 308 patients. Among these, 62% (n = 192) had no Waddell signs, 18% (n = 54) had 1 sign, 11% (n = 33) had 2, 5% (n = 16) had 3, 2% (n = 7) had 4, and about 2% (n = 6) had all 5 signs. The mean change in average NRS-PI in each of these 6 groups was -1.6 ± 2.6, -1.1 ± 2.7, -1.5 ± 2.5, -1.6 ± 2.6, -1 ± 1.5, and 0.7 ± 2.1, respectively, and their corresponding treatment failure rates were 54% (102 of 192), 67% (36 of 54), 70% (23 of 33), 75% (12 of 16), 71% (5 of 7), and 83% (5 of 6). In the primary analysis, an increasing number of Waddell signs were not associated with a significant decrease in average NRS-PI (coefficient [Coef] = 0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.43 to 0.05; P = .12). A higher number of Waddell signs were associated with treatment failure, with a 1.35 increased odds of treatment failure per cumulative number of signs (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Whereas this study found no consistent relationship between Waddell signs and decreased mean pain scores, a significant relationship between the number of Waddell signs and treatment failure was observed.

Amputation-Site Soft-Tissue Restoration Using Adipose Stem Cell Therapy.

Soft-tissue deficits in amputation stumps can lead to significant pain and disability. An emerging treatment option is stem cell-enriched fat grafting. This is the first study assessing the potential for this treatment modality in lower extremity amputation sites. In this prospective cohort study, five injured military personnel suffering from pain and limited function at amputation sites were recruited. Fat grafting enriched with stromal vascular fraction was performed at amputation sites to provide additional subcutaneous tissue padding over bony structures. Outcomes measures included complications, demographic data, physical examination, cellular subpopulations, cell viability, graft volume retention, pain, Lower Extremity Functional Scale, Functional Mobility Assessment, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and rates of depression. Follow-up was 2 years. There were no significant complications. Volume retention was 61.5 ± 24.0 percent. Overall cell viability of the stromal vascular fraction was significantly correlated with volume retention (p = 0.016). There was no significant correlation between percentage of adipose-derived stem cells or number of cells in the stromal vascular fraction and volume retention. There was a nonsignificant trend toward improvement in pain scores (3.0 ± 2.5 to 1.2 ± 1.6; p = 0.180 at 2 years). There were no significant changes in disability indexes. Results from this pilot study demonstrate that stromal vascular fraction-enriched fat grafting is a safe, novel modality for the treatment of symptomatic soft-tissue defects in traumatic lower extremity amputations. Volume retention can be anticipated at slightly over 60 percent. Further studies are needed to assess efficacy. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Therapeutic, IV.

Which Regional Pain Rating Best Predicts Patient-Reported Improvement in Lumbar Radiculopathy?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the best regional pain score cutoff value that corresponds with patient-reported improvement in lumbosacral radiculopathy (LSR). DESIGN: Retrospective pooled data analysis from 3 randomized, controlled, multicenter trials using similar outcome assessments. All participants were exposed to interventions (epidural injections). SETTING: Military medical centers (6 U.S.A., 1 Germany) and large tertiary care hospitals (4 urban, 1 Veterans Affairs) between 2008 and 2014. SUBJECTS: A total of 352 active duty military personnel and civilians ≥ 18 years of age with LSR. METHODS: Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) with area under the curve (AUC) were calculated for 1-month outcomes for pain (numeric rating scale) using absolute and relative change in regional pain scores (back, leg) to predict clinical improvement (global perceived effect). RESULTS: Leg pain demonstrated greater predictive ability to identify clinical improvement compared to back pain for both absolute (ROC AUC [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.855 [0.813, 0.896] vs. 0.753 [0.702, 0.805]; P < 0.001) and relative (AUC [95% CI]; 0.867 [0.826, 0.909] vs. 0.780 [0.729, 0.831]; P = 0.002) reduction in reported pain. Clinical improvement was best identified using a leg pain reduction threshold of ≥ 1.75 points (absolute) and ≥ 23.5% (relative). CONCLUSIONS: Region-specific pain cutoff ratings predicted clinical improvement for patients with LSR. Cutoff points using newly identified, smaller reductions of 1.75 points and 23.5% more accurately predicted clinical improvement for LSR than conventionally used cutoffs (2 points and 30%). LSR patients report meaningful clinical improvement with smaller reductions in pain compared to other chronic pain diagnoses, suggesting LSR patients may have different expectations.

Classification and Treatment of Chronic Neck Pain: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neck pain exerts a steep personal and socioeconomic toll, ranking as the fourth leading cause of disability. The principal determinant in treatment decisions is whether pain is neuropathic or nonneuropathic, as this affects treatment at all levels. Yet, no study has sought to classify neck pain in this manner. METHODS: One hundred participants referred to an urban, academic military treatment facility with a primary diagnosis of neck pain were enrolled and followed up for 6 months. Pain was classified as neuropathic, possible neuropathic, or nonneuropathic using painDETECT and as neuropathic, mixed, or nociceptive by s-LANSS (self-completed Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs pain scale) and physician designation. Based on previous studies, the intermediate possible neuropathic pain category was considered to be a mixed condition. The final classification was based on a metric combining all 3 systems, slightly weighted toward physician's judgment, which is considered the reference standard. RESULTS: Fifty percent of participants were classified as having possible neuropathic pain, 43% as having nonneuropathic pain, and 7% with primarily neuropathic pain. Concordance was high between the various classification schemes, ranging from a low of 62% between painDETECT and physician designation for possible neuropathic pain, to 83% concordance between s-LANSS and the 2 other systems for neuropathic pain. Individuals with neuropathic pain reported higher levels of baseline disability, were more likely to have a coexisting psychiatric illness, and underwent surgery more frequently than other pain categories, but were also more likely to report greater reductions in disability after 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Although pure neuropathic pain comprised a small percentage of our cohort, 50% of our population consisted of mixed pain conditions containing a possible neuropathic component. There was significant overlap between the various classification schemes.

The Military Extremity Trauma Amputation/Limb Salvage (METALS) study: outcomes of amputation versus limb salvage following major lower-extremity trauma.

BACKGROUND: The study was performed to examine the hypothesis that functional outcomes following major lower-extremity trauma sustained in the military would be similar between patients treated with amputation and those who underwent limb salvage. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 324 service members deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq who sustained a lower-limb injury requiring either amputation or limb salvage involving revascularization, bone graft/bone transport, local/free flap coverage, repair of a major nerve injury, or a complete compartment injury/compartment syndrome. The Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) questionnaire was used to measure overall function. Standard instruments were used to measure depression (the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD Checklist-military version), chronic pain (Chronic Pain Grade Scale), and engagement in sports and leisure activities (Paffenbarger Physical Activity Questionnaire). The outcomes of amputation and salvage were compared by using regression analysis with adjustment for age, time until the interview, military rank, upper-limb and bilateral injuries, social support, and intensity of combat experiences. RESULTS: Overall response rates were modest (59.2%) and significantly different between those who underwent amputation (64.5%) and those treated with limb salvage (55.4%) (p = 0.02). In all SMFA domains except arm/hand function, the patients scored significantly worse than population norms. Also, 38.3% screened positive for depressive symptoms and 17.9%, for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). One-third (34.0%) were not working, on active duty, or in school. After adjustment for covariates, participants with an amputation had better scores in all SMFA domains compared with those whose limbs had been salvaged (p < 0.01). They also had a lower likelihood of PTSD and a higher likelihood of being engaged in vigorous sports. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to the percentage of patients with depressive symptoms, pain interfering with daily activities (pain interference), or work/school status. CONCLUSIONS: Major lower-limb trauma sustained in the military results in significant disability. Service members who undergo amputation appear to have better functional outcomes than those who undergo limb salvage. Caution is needed in interpreting these results as there was a potential for selection bias.

Evolution of orthopaedic rehabilitation care.

Rehabilitation following surgical reconstruction for combat-related extremity injuries sustained in the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan has been challenging. The goal of rehabilitation is to restore limb function to facilitate the reintegration of patients with these severe injuries into society. The US Department of Defense has developed a network of rehabilitation centers of excellence within the military healthcare system in collaboration with the US Department of Veterans Affairs to optimize outcomes using technologic and systemic advances in prostheses in patients who have undergone limb salvage procedures or amputation. Managing pain during rehabilitation and optimizing function following high bilateral lower extremity amputation remains a clinical challenge. However, continued research is likely to improve outcomes in this severely injured patient population. To that end, two research consortia, the Bridging Advanced Developments for Exceptional Rehabilitation and the Center for Rehabilitation Sciences Research, have recently been created to address identified knowledge gaps.

Reprioritization of research for combat casualty care.

Since the beginning of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan more than a decade ago, much has been learned with regard to combat casualty care. Although progress has been significant, knowledge gaps still exist. The seventh Extremity War Injuries symposium, held in January 2012, reviewed the current state of knowledge and defined knowledge gaps in acute care, reconstructive care, and rehabilitative care in order to provide policymakers information on the areas in which research funding would be the most beneficial.

Epidural steroids, etanercept, or saline in subacute sciatica: a multicenter, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Perineural inhibitors of tumor necrosis factor have recently generated intense interest as an alternative to epidural steroid injections for lumbosacral radiculopathy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether epidural steroids, etanercept, or saline better improves pain and function in adults with lumbosacral radiculopathy. DESIGN: A multicenter, 3-group, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 2008 to 2011. Randomization was computer-generated and stratified by site. Pharmacists prepared the syringes. Patients, treating physicians, and nurses assessing outcomes were blinded to treatment assignment. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00733096) SETTING: Military and civilian treatment centers. PATIENTS: 84 adults with lumbosacral radiculopathy of less than 6 months' duration. INTERVENTION: 2 epidural injections of steroids, etanercept, or saline, mixed with bupivacaine and separated by 2 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was leg pain 1 month after the second injection. All patients had 1-month follow-up visits; patients whose condition improved remained blinded for the 6-month study period. RESULTS: The group that received epidural steroids had greater reductions in the primary outcome measure than those who received saline (mean difference, -1.26 [95% CI, -2.79 to 0.27]; P = 0.11) or etanercept (mean difference, -1.01 [CI, -2.60 to 0.58]; P = 0.21). For back pain, smaller differences favoring steroids compared with saline (mean difference, -0.52 [CI, -1.85 to 0.81]; P = 0.44) and etanercept (mean difference, -0.92 [CI,-2.28 to 0.44]; P = 0.18) were observed. The largest differences were noted for functional capacity, in which etanercept fared worse than the other treatments: steroids vs. etanercept (mean difference, -16.16 [CI, -26.05 to -6.27]; P = 0.002), steroids vs. saline (mean difference, -5.87 [CI, -15.59 to 3.85]; P = 0.23), and etanercept vs. saline (mean difference, 10.29 [CI, 0.55 to 20.04]; P = 0.04). More patients treated with epidural steroids (75%) reported 50% or greater leg pain relief and a positive global perceived effect at 1 month than those who received saline (50%) or etanercept (42%) (P = 0.09). LIMITATION: Short-term follow-up, small sample size, and a possibly subtherapeutic dose of etanercept. CONCLUSION: Epidural steroid injections may provide modest short-term pain relief for some adults with lumbosacral radiculopathy, but larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm their benefits. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The John P. Murtha Neuroscience and Pain Institute, International Spinal Intervention Society, and Center for Rehabilitation Sciences Research.