Informed Consent and Digit Replantation: Current State and Recommendations for Ethical Patient Care.

The importance of informed consent and the value of shared decision-making in hand surgery are well-established and particularly critical in the setting of digit amputation when considering replantation. Informed consent requires an understanding of not only the immediate and long-term risks and benefits of surgery, as well as the risks and alternatives involved, but also the capacity of the patient to make a medical decision. However, patients who have acutely sustained a disfiguring trauma are often in distress and may not fully process the consent discussion. Digit replantation is an "elective emergency"-the decision must be made immediately but is not lifesaving-which poses a difficult dilemma: are surgeons acting in patients' best interests by pursuing replantation if we engage those patients in informed consent discussions when they may not have capacity? This article explores the relevant bioethical principles associated with digit replantation, summarizes updated literature regarding informed consent and shared decision-making, and provides recommendations for patient education materials to standardize informed consent discussions for surgeons approaching patients at this unique intersection of considering revision amputation versus replantation.

Utilizing Computer-Assisted Design and Virtual Surgical Planning for Correction of Unilateral Lambdoid Synostosis.

Unilateral lambdoid synostosis is the rarest form of single-suture craniosynostosis. Although various surgical approaches have been described, cranial vault remodeling remains the predominant approach. To aid in surgical planning, preoperative virtual surgical modeling using a patient's presenting computed tomography scan can be used to increase reconstructive precision and to reduce operative time. Presented is a 7-month-old male with unilateral lambdoid synostosis who underwent medically modeled cranial vault reconstruction.

Prophylactic Desexualizing Mastectomy for an Intellectually Disabled Woman: Protective Measure or Disregard for Autonomy?

Historically, sterilization of the so-called feeble-minded has been advocated in the name of eugenics. Surrogate decision-making that impacts sexuality of the intellectually disabled presents significant ethical dilemmas. We describe a 19-year-old intellectually disabled woman who presented with her legal decision-maker for surgical correction of her asymmetric chest and hypoplastic breast. The decision-maker requested a mastectomy to make the patient's breasts as inconspicuous as possible, and to reduce the risk of sexual assault and pregnancy. This case covers the ethical considerations on whether or not to prophylactically desexualize an intellectually disabled woman.

Comparing Health Outcomes of Privileged US Citizens With Those of Average Residents of Other Developed Countries.

Importance: The average health outcomes in the US are not as good as the average health outcomes in other developed countries. However, whether high-income US citizens have better health outcomes than average individuals in other developed countries is unknown. Objective: To assess whether the health outcomes of White US citizens living in the 1% and 5% richest counties (hereafter referred to as privileged White US citizens) are better than the health outcomes of average residents in other developed countries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study, conducted from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015, identified White US citizens living in the 1% (n = 32) and 5% (n = 157) highest-income counties in the US and measured the following 6 health outcomes associated with health care interventions: infant and maternal mortality, colon and breast cancer, childhood acute lymphocytic leukemia, and acute myocardial infarction. The study used Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development data, CONCORD-3 cancer data, and Medicare data to compare their outcomes with all residents in 12 other developed countries: Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland. Statistical analysis took place from July 25, 2017, to August 29, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Infant mortality; maternal mortality; 5-year survival of patients with colon cancer, breast cancer, or childhood acute lymphocytic leukemia; and 30-day age-standardized case fatality after acute myocardial infarction. Results: The infant mortality rate among White US citizens in the 5% highest-income counties was 4.01 per 1000, and the maternal mortality rate among White US citizens in the 5% highest-income counties was 10.85 per 100 000, both higher than the mean rates for any of the 12 comparison countries. (The infant mortality rate for the top 1% counties was 3.54 per 1000, and the maternal mortality rate was 10.05 per 100 000.) The 5-year survival rate for White US citizens in the 5% highest-income counties was 67.2% (95% CI, 66.7%-67.7%) for colon cancer, higher than that of average US citizens (64.9% [95% CI, 64.7%-65.1%]) and average citizens in 6 countries, comparable with that of average citizens in 4 countries, and lower than that of average citizens for 2 countries. The 5-year survival rate for breast cancer among White US women in the 5% highest-income US counties was 92.0% (95% CI, 91.6%-92.4%), higher than in all 12 comparison countries. The 5-year survival rate for White children with acute lymphocytic leukemia in the 5% highest-income US counties was 92.6% (95% CI, 90.7%-94.2%), exceeding the mean survival rate for only 1 country and comparable with the mean survival rates in 11 countries. The adjusted 30-day acute myocardial infarction case-fatality rate for White US citizens in the 5% highest-income US counties was 8% below the rate for all US citizens and was 5% below the rate for all US citizens in the 1% highest-income US counties; these estimates were similar to the median outcome of other high-income countries. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that privileged White US citizens have better health outcomes than average US citizens for 6 health outcomes but often fare worse than the mean measure of health outcomes of 12 other developed countries. These findings imply that even if all US citizens experienced the same health outcomes enjoyed by privileged White US citizens, US health indicators would still lag behind those in many other countries.