Food Desert Residence Is Not Associated With Dietary Adherence or Complication Rates in Patients With Isolated Mandibular Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Mandible fracture management requires postoperative dietary modifications to promote healing. Over 20 million Americans live in food deserts, low-income neighborhoods over one mile from a grocery store. The relationship between food desert residence (FDR) and adherence to postoperative dietary instructions remains unexplored. PURPOSE: This study's purpose is to evaluate the relationships between FDR, known risk factors, dietary adherence, and complications among patients with isolated mandible fractures. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a level 1 trauma center and analyzed patients with mandible fractures between January 2015 and December 2020. Inclusion criteria included operative treatment of adult patients for mandible fractures; pregnant, incarcerated, and patients with incomplete data were excluded. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: FDR was the predictor variable of interest. FDR (coded yes or no) was generated by converting patient addresses to census tract GeoIDs and comparing them to the US Department of Agriculture Food Access Research Atlas. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES: The study examined two outcome variables: dietary adherence and postoperative complications. Dietary adherence was coded as adherent or nonadherent, indicating documented compliance with postoperative dietary modifications. Postoperative complications were coded as present or absent, reflecting infection, hardware failure, and mandible malunion or nonunion. COVARIATES: The covariates analyzed included age, sex, ethnicity, mechanism of injury, medical and psychiatric comorbidities (including diagnoses such as diabetes, hypertension, and schizophrenia), and tobacco use. ANALYSES: Relative risks (RRs) and multivariate logistic regression models were generated for both outcome variables. Two-tailed P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: During the study period, 143 patients had complete data allowing for FDR and dietary adherence determination, 124 of whom (86.7%) had complication data recorded. Of the cohort, 51/143 (35.7%) resided within a food desert, 30/143 (21.0%) exhibited dietary nonadherence, and 46/124 (37.1%) experienced complications. FDR was not associated with increased risk of dietary nonadherence (RR 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52 to 1.61, P = .76) or complications (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.89; P = .46). On multivariate regression, dietary nonadherence was associated with increased complications (odds ratio 2.85, 95% CI 1.01 to 8.09, P = .049). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: There was no association between FDR and dietary nonadherence or complications in mandible fracture patients. However, dietary nonadherence was associated with complications, highlighting the need for further research and intervention.

Controller size matters: User proficiency is affected by endoscopic controller size.

BACKGROUND: Endoscope controllers are traditionally a one-size-fits-all design. However, this design may not fit the modern workforce in endoscopy-related fields. Our study aims to determine if endoscopic controller size, independent of user dexterity, affects user proficiency. METHODS: 54 endoscopically naive participants completed a baseline dexterity test, followed by large-controller endoscopic and small-controller bronchoscopic simulation exercises. Participants were stratified by surgical glove size (≥7.5 and < 7.5) and gender. RESULTS: Endoscopy time was longer in participants with <7.5 size gloves (p = 0.01) and in females (p < 0.001). However, participants with glove size <7.5 had better dexterity measures (p = 0.04). There was no difference in bronchoscopy time based on glove size (p = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Participants with larger hands were more proficient with the larger controller despite being less dexterous than their counterparts. This advantage was less pronounced with the smaller controller. Our findings suggest that endoscopic controllers should be modified in design to accommodate all providers.

Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Is Protective Against Postoperative Cardiothoracic Wound Infection.

BACKGROUND: Sternal wound infections are a rare but life-threatening complication of cardiothoracic surgery. Prior literature has supported the use of negative pressure wound therapy to decrease sternal wound infections and promote healing. This study sought to determine whether closed incision negative pressure therapy reduced wound infection and improved outcomes in cardiothoracic surgery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed including all adult patients who underwent nontraumatic cardiothoracic surgery at a single institution between 2016 and 2018 (n = 1199). Patient characteristics, clinical variables, and surgical outcomes were compared between those who did and did not receive incisional negative pressure wound therapy intraoperatively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis determined factors predictive or protective of the development of complications. RESULTS: Incisional negative pressure wound therapy was used in 58.9% of patients. Patients who received this therapy were older with statistically higher rates of hyperlipidemia, statin, and antihypertensive use. The use of negative pressure wound therapy was found to significantly reduce rates of both wound infection (3.0% vs 6.3%, P = 0.01) and readmission for wound infection (0.7% vs 2.6%, P = 0.01). After controlling for confounding variables, negative pressure wound therapy was found to be a protective factor of surgical wound infection (odds ratio, 0.497; 95% confidence interval, 0.262-0.945). CONCLUSIONS: In the largest population studied to date, this study supported the expanded use of negative pressure therapy on sternal wound incisions to decrease infection rates.