Patterns of Facial Fractures in a Major Metropolitan Level 1 Trauma Center: A 10-year Experience.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To report characteristics and management of facial fractures in a major metropolitan center within the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: Retrospective review at a level 1 trauma academic medical center of 3,946 facial fractures in 1,914 patients who presented from 2008 to 2017. Demographics, injury mechanism, associated injuries, and treatment information were collected. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with management. RESULTS: There were 1,280 males and 630 females with a median age of 42 years. Orbital fractures were the most common (41.4%) followed by maxilla fractures (21.9%). The most common mechanism was fall (43.6%). Surgical management was recommended for 38% of patients. The odds of surgical management were less for females (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.48-0.73). Patients over 70 years were significantly less likely to undergo surgery compared to other age groups (OR 0.15-0.36, P < .001). The odds of surgical management were 1.69 times greater for patients with more than three fractures than for a single fracture (95% CI 1.18-2.42) and 2.23 times greater for traffic injuries compared to injuries from activities of daily living (95% CI 1.42-3.5). CONCLUSIONS: This represents one of the largest comprehensive databases of facial fractures. Our patients were most frequently injured during activities of daily living, most commonly from falls. The majority of patients were managed conservatively. Gender, age, fracture number, and mechanism of injury were independently associated with the decision to treat surgically. Our data are in stark contrast to that from other populations in which assault or motor vehicle accidents predominate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:E2176-E2180, 2021.

Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: Despite the increasing importance of tracking clinical outcomes using valid patient-reported outcome measures, most providers do not routinely obtain baseline preoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data in patients undergoing spine surgery, precluding objective outcomes analysis in individual practices. We conducted a meta-analysis of pre- and postoperative HRQoL data obtained from the most commonly published instruments to use as reference values. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and an institutional registry for studies reporting EQ-5D, SF-6D, and Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary scores in patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical and lumbar spinal conditions published between 2000 and 2014. Observational data was pooled meta-analytically using an inverse variance-weighted, random-effects model, and statistical comparisons were performed. RESULTS: Ninety-nine articles were included in the final analysis. Baseline HRQoL scores varied by diagnosis for each of the 3 instruments. On average, postoperative HRQoL scores significantly improved following surgical intervention for each diagnosis using each instrument. There were statistically significant differences in baseline utility values between the EQ-5D and SF-6D instruments for all lumbar diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled HRQoL values presented in this study may be used by practitioners who would otherwise be precluded from quantifying their surgical outcomes due to a lack of baseline data. The results highlight differences in HRQoL between different degenerative spinal diagnoses, as well as the discrepancy between 2 common utility-based instruments. These findings emphasize the need to be cognizant of the specific instruments used when comparing the results of outcome studies.