Cumulative costs of severe traffic injuries in Finland: a 2-year retrospective observational study of 252 patients.

Road traffic injuries cause considerable financial strain on health care systems worldwide. We retrospectively analyzed injury-related costs of 252 severely injured (New Injury Severity Score, NISS ≥ 16) patients treated at Tampere University Hospital (TAUH) between 2013 and 2017, with 2-year follow-up. The costs were divided into direct treatment, indirect costs, and other costs. We analyzed various injury- and patient-related factors with costs. The total costs during the 2-year study period were 20 million euros. Median cost was 41,202 euros (Q1 23,409 euros, Q3 97,726 euros), ranging from 2,753 euros to 549,787 euros. The majority of costs (69.1%) were direct treatment costs, followed by indirect costs (28.4%). Other costs were small (5.4%). Treatment costs increased with the severity of the injury or when the injury affected the lower extremities or the face. Indirect costs were higher in working age patients and in patients with a higher level of education. The relative proportions of direct and indirect costs were constant regardless of the amount of the total costs. The largest share of costs was caused by a relatively small proportion of high-cost patients during the 1st year after injury. Combined, this makes planning of resource use challenging and calls for further studies to further identify factors for highest costs.

Validity and Reliability of the Thumb Grasp and Pinch Assessment for Children After Reconstruction of Congenital Hypoplastic Thumbs.

PURPOSE: The Thumb Grasp and Pinch Assessment (T-GAP) is a new instrument for evaluating thumb use in children with congenital hypoplastic thumbs. The assessors video-record the children while they perform nine specific activities and score their grasp types using T-GAP. A high T-GAP score indicates more mature grasp patterns. The developers reported the instrument's validity and reliability for index finger pollicization. This study investigated T-GAP's validity and reliability in children with reconstructed hypoplastic thumbs. METHODS: Four hand surgeons and two hand therapists from two hospitals rated video clips of 20 Manske type II and IIIa hands twice in 17 patients who performed the T-GAP at least 1 year after opposition transfer and thumb ligament reconstruction. To investigate the validity, we calculated correlation coefficients for T-GAP scores and clinical outcomes, including thumb ROM, grip and pinch strength, and visual analog assessments of thumb function and appearance. To estimate T-GAP's inter- and intrarater reliability, we calculated intraclass correlation coefficients and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Thumb Grasp and Pinch Assessment score showed a strong linear correlation (r = 0.815-0.944) and a moderate to strong nonlinear correlation (ρ = 0.527-0.744) with visual analog scale assessments of thumb function and appearance, respectively; a moderate nonlinear correlation (ρ = 0.464) with grip strength; and a moderate nonlinear correlation (ρ = 0.541) with thumb MCP joint range of motion. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the interrater reliability was 0.892 (95% CI, 0.768-0.954) in round 1 and 0.898 (95% CI, 0.754-0.959) in round 2, and for intrarater reliability, the mean was 0.882 (95% CI, 0.785-0.980). CONCLUSIONS: Thumb Grasp and Pinch Assessment score had a moderate to strong construct validity and a moderate concurrent validity. Both inter- and intrarater reliability was strong. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study supports the T-GAP instrument's validity and reliability for assessing functional outcomes in congenital hypoplastic thumb reconstruction.

Bias in Hand Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials: Systematic Review and Meta-Epidemiological Study.

PURPOSE: Inappropriately reported or conducted studies may decrease the quality of care due to under- or overestimation of the benefits or harms of interventions. Our aim was to evaluate how often hand surgical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) use and report adequate methods to ensure internal validity, and whether inadequate reporting or methods are associated with the magnitude of treatment effect estimates. METHODS: Data Sources were the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase databases until November 2020. We included published RCTs investigating the effects of any surgical intervention in the hand and wrist region. We assessed internal validity using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool for 6 domains: selection, performance, detection, attrition, selective reporting, and "other" bias. We extracted the primary outcome and calculated the effect size for each study. We used mixed-effect meta-regression to assess whether the RoB modified the magnitude of the effects. RESULTS: For 207 assessed trials, the RoB was unclear or high for 72% in selection, 93% in performance, 88% in detection, 25% in attrition, 22% in selective reporting, and 34% in the "other" bias domain. Trials with a high or unclear risk of selection bias yielded 0.28 standardized mean difference (95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.55) larger effect sizes compared to studies with a low risk. Risks of bias for other domains did not modify the intervention effects. The risk for selection bias declined over time: the odds ratio for a high or unclear RoB was 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.95) per additional year of publication CONCLUSIONS: The internal validity and credibility of hand surgical RCTs can be improved by using established methods to achieve true randomization, blinding of the participants and study personnel, publishing the trial protocol and avoiding selective reporting of the outcomes, and reporting the trial as recommended in the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians should be aware that RCTs that do not use or report proper randomization and allocation concealment may overestimate the treatment effects.

Subacromial decompression surgery for adults with shoulder pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the benefits and harms of subacromial decompression surgery in adult patients with subacromial pain syndrome lasting for more than 3 months. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain, physical function and health-related quality of life. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches for benefits and harms were conducted to 23 July 2018 in MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Health Technology Assessment. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials comparing subacromial decompression surgery for subacromial pain syndrome with any other treatment(s). For harms, we included prospective cohort studies. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently determined eligibility, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of eligible studies. Thirty patients seeking primary or outpatient care for subacromial pain syndrome and a parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendations) provided input regarding systematic review design and interpretation. RESULTS: There was high certainty evidence of no additional benefit of subacromial decompression surgery over placebo surgery in reducing pain at 1 year following surgery (mean difference [MD] -0.26, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.33, minimally important difference [MID] 1.5) or improving physical function at 1-2 years (MD 2.8, 95% CI -1.4 to 6.9, MID 8.3). There was moderate certainty evidence for no additional benefit of subacromial decompression surgery on health-related quality of life at 1 year (MD -0.03 points, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.06, MID 0.07). There was moderate certainty evidence for six serious harms per 1000 (95% CI 5 to 7) patients undergoing subacromial decompression. CONCLUSION: Subacromial decompression surgery provided no important benefit compared with placebo surgery or exercise therapy, and probably carries a small risk of serious harms. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWREGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018086862.