Prescriber and pharmacist attitudes toward inclusion of diagnosis or clinical indication on prescription orders.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacy and medication safety organizations have long recommended that diagnosis or clinical indication be required on medication orders to improve the safety and effectiveness of care. OBJECTIVE: To assess attitudes of Arizona prescribers and pharmacists toward the inclusion of the clinical indication or the diagnosis on prescription orders and perceived barriers to its implementation in Arizona. METHODS: Data were obtained by questionnaires from pharmacists and primary care prescribers after a continuing pharmacy education presentation on the value of including a clinical indication or a diagnosis on prescription orders. The survey was distributed to licensed pharmacists who attended the Arizona Pharmacy Association's Southwest Clinical Pharmacy Seminar. The survey was distributed to primary care providers with active Arizona licenses who attended the Arizona Osteopathic Medical Association Annual Convention and to nurse practitioners after an Arizona Nurse Practitioner Council educational webinar. Prescriber and pharmacist responses were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. An a priori alpha of 0.05 was used, and in the cases of multiple comparisons, a Bonferroni correction was employed. RESULTS: A total of 74 complete questionnaires were submitted by prescribers and 54 by pharmacists. Approximately 71% of the prescribers and 66% of the pharmacists agreed that they would support voluntary inclusion of a diagnosis or a clinical indication on prescription orders (P = 0.81). However, the 2 groups disagreed on whether the inclusion of the diagnosis or clinical indication should be a requirement (44% of prescribers agreed vs. 96% of pharmacists, P < 0.001). Two perceived barriers revealed statistically significant differences, with the prescribers being more concerned about possible insurance rejections than pharmacists (P = 0.005, whereas the pharmacists were more concerned about potential software transmission accuracy than prescribers (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Arizona prescribers and pharmacists in our convenience sample supported the voluntary inclusion of a diagnosis or a clinical indication on prescriptions orders but disagreed as to whether it should be required. Prescribers especially indicated they have a variety of concerns that need to be overcome before they could support a statewide mandate.

A comparison of cortical button with interference screw versus suture anchor techniques for distal biceps brachii tendon repairs.

BACKGROUND: Distal biceps brachii tendon repairs performed by a "tension slide technique" with a cortical button and interference screw (CB) are stronger than repairs by suture anchor (SA) techniques in biomechanical studies. However, clinical comparison of the 2 techniques is lacking in the literature. METHODS: Distal biceps tendon ruptures repaired with either a CB or SA technique through a single incision were identified from 2008 to 2013 at a single institution. Patients more than a year out from surgery completed a Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. In addition, patients were assessed for range of motion, strength, and complications. All assessments were performed by individuals blinded to the surgical technique. Strength and motion values from the operative extremity minus the nonoperative arm values yielded differential values that were averaged and used to compare treatment groups. RESULTS: The CB (n = 20) and SA (n = 17) groups had similar demographics, except for the time from the surgery to evaluation (18 ± 5 vs 32 ± 15 months, respectively; P = .007). Range of motion differed slightly between the groups. The CB group demonstrated better pronation (0° ± 5° vs -4° ± 10°; P < .05), and the SA group demonstrated better flexion (2° ± 0° vs -3° ± 5°; P < .05) and supination (-2° ± 5° vs -7° ± 12°; P < .05). Strength did not differ significantly between the groups. DASH scores did not significantly differ between the groups with univariate analysis, but multivariate analysis demonstrated slightly better DASH scores with the CB technique (4.5 ± 4.4 vs 10.3 ± 14.9; P < .0009). Complication rates were similar between groups (CB 30%, SA 35%; P > .05). CONCLUSION: CB and SA techniques provide good clinical results with similar complication rates.

A Comparison of Nonoperative and Operative Treatment of Complete Proximal Hamstring Ruptures.

BACKGROUND: The early repair of acute proximal hamstring ruptures provides better clinical results than delayed repair. However, it is unclear how nonoperative treatment compares with the operative treatment of these injuries. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical results of the nonoperative and operative treatment of acute proximal hamstring ruptures. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 25 patients with complete, retracted proximal hamstring ruptures presenting to 1 institution were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were given the option of proximal hamstring repair at the time of the initial evaluation. Patients with at least 12 months of follow-up from the time of surgery or injury were included in the evaluation. Both nonoperative and operative treatment groups were evaluated using the same outcome measures. The primary outcome measure was the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS). Secondary outcome measures included the Short Form-12 (SF-12) physical and mental component summaries, strength testing, a single-leg hop test, the patient's perception of strength, and the ability to return to activity. RESULTS: There were 11 patients treated nonoperatively, with a mean follow-up of 2.48 ± 3.66 years, and 14 patients treated operatively, with a mean follow-up of 3.56 ± 2.11 years. The mean LEFS scores for the nonoperative and operative groups were 68.50 ± 7.92 and 74.71 ± 5.38, respectively (P = .07). No statistical differences were found between the groups regarding SF-12 scores and mean single-leg hop distance compared with the uninjured leg. Isometric testing of the injured hamstring in the nonoperative group demonstrated significant clinical weakness compared with the uninjured side at both 45° and 90° of flexion (57.54% ± 7.8% and 67.73% ± 18.8%, respectively). Isokinetic testing of the injured leg in the operative group demonstrated 90.87% ± 16.3% strength of the uninjured leg. All patients in the operative group were able to return to preinjury activities, whereas 3 patients in the nonoperative group were unable to return (chi-square = 4.33, P = .07). CONCLUSION: Patients with acute proximal hamstring ruptures treated surgically regained approximately 90% strength of the uninjured extremity and tended to have a greater likelihood of returning to preinjury activities than patients treated nonoperatively.

High-Grade Partial and Retracted (<2 cm) Proximal Hamstring Ruptures: Nonsurgical Treatment Revisited.

BACKGROUND: High-grade partial proximal hamstring tears and complete tears with retraction less than 2 cm are a subset of proximal hamstring injuries where, historically, treatment has been nonoperative. It is unknown how nonoperative treatment compares with operative treatment. HYPOTHESIS: The clinical and functional outcomes of nonoperative and operative treatment of partial/complete proximal hamstring tears were compared. We hypothesize that operative treatment of these tears leads to better clinical and functional results. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A retrospective review identified patients with a high-grade partial or complete proximal hamstring rupture with retraction less than 2 cm treated either operatively or nonoperatively from 2007 to 2015. All patients had an initial period of nonoperative treatment. Surgery was offered if patients had continued pain and/or limited function refractory to nonoperative treatment with physical therapy. Outcome measures were each patient's strength perception, ability to return to activity, Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) score, Short Form-12 (SF-12) physical and mental component outcome scores, distance traversed by a single-leg hop, and Biodex hamstring strength testing. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were enrolled in the study. The 15 patients who were treated nonoperatively sustained injuries at a mean age of 55.73 ± 14.83 years and were evaluated 35.47 ± 30.35 months after injury. The 10 patients who elected to have surgery sustained injuries at 50.40 ± 6.31 years of age (P = .23) and were evaluated 30.11 ± 19.43 months after surgery. LEFS scores were significantly greater for the operative group compared with the nonoperative group (77/80 vs 64.3/80; P = .01). SF-12 physical component scores for the operative group were also significantly greater (P = .03). Objectively, operative and nonoperative treatment modalities showed no significant difference in terms of single-leg hop distance compared with each patient's noninjured leg (P = .26) and torque deficit at isokinetic speeds of 60 and 180 deg/s (P = .46 and .70, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo operative and nonoperative treatment of high-grade partial and/or complete proximal hamstring tears with <2 cm retraction demonstrate good clinical and functional outcomes. In our series, 40% of patients treated nonoperatively with physical therapy went on to have surgery. For those patients with persistent pain and/or loss of function despite conservative treatment, surgical repair is a viable treatment option that is met with good results.

Distal biceps brachii tendon repairs: a single-incision technique using a cortical button with interference screw versus a double-incision technique using suture fixation through bone tunnels.

BACKGROUND: Distal biceps brachii tendon repairs performed with a tension slide technique using a cortical button (CB) and interference screw are stronger than those based on suture fixation through bone tunnels (BTs) in biomechanical studies. However, clinical comparison of these 2 techniques is lacking in the literature. PURPOSE: To perform a clinical comparison of the single-incision CB and double-incision BT techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Distal biceps tendon ruptures repaired through either the single-incision CB or double-incision BT technique were retrospectively identified at a single institution. Patients>1 year out from surgery were assessed for range of motion, strength, and complications, and they completed a DASH questionnaire (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand). RESULTS: Patients in the CB group (n=20) were older (52±9.5 vs 43.7±8.7 years; P=.008), had a shorter interval from surgery to evaluation (17.7±5 vs 30.8±16.5 months; P=.001), and were less likely to smoke (0% vs 28.5%; P=.02) compared with the BT patients (n=21). DASH scores were similar between groups (4.46±4.4 [CB] vs 5.7±7.5 [BT]; P=.65). Multivariate analysis revealed no differences in range of motion or strength between groups. More CB patients (30%; n=6) experienced a complication compared with those in the BT group (4.8%; n=1) (P=.04), and these complications were predominantly paresthesias of the superficial radial nerve that did not resolve. There were no reoperations or repair failures in either group. CONCLUSION: Both the single-incision CB and double-incision BT techniques provided excellent clinical results. Complications were more common in the single-incision CB group and most commonly involved paresthesias of the superficial radial nerve.

Immediate sensory nerve-mediated respiratory responses to irritants in healthy and allergic airway-diseased mice.

The immediate responses of the upper respiratory tract (URT) to the irritants acrolein and acetic acid were examined in healthy and allergic airway-diseased C57Bl/6J mice. Acrolein (1.1 ppm) and acetic acid (330 ppm) vapors induced an immediate increase in flow resistance, as measured in the surgically isolated URT of urethane-anesthetized healthy animals. Acrolein, but not acetic acid, induced a small URT vasodilatory response. In awake spontaneously breathing mice, both vapors induced a prolonged pause at the start of expiration (a response mediated via stimulation of nasal trigeminal nerves) and an increase in total respiratory specific airway flow resistance, the magnitude of which was similar to that observed in the isolated URT. Both responses were significantly reduced in animals pretreated with large doses of capsaicin to defunctionalize sensory nerves, strongly suggesting a role for sensory nerves in development of these responses. The breathing pattern and/or obstructive responses were enhanced in mice with ovalbumin-induced allergic airway disease. These results suggest that the primary responses to acrolein and acetic acid vapors are altered breathing patterns and airway obstruction, that sensory nerves play an important role in these responses, and that these responses are enhanced in animals with allergic airway disease.

Intra-articular hip injections for lateral hip pain.

Occult intra-articular hip pathology is commonly found in patients with greater trochanteric pain syndrome, and may be a possible pain generator in patients with recalcitrant lateral hip pain. We investigated the effect of intra-articular hip injections in patients with recalcitrant lateral hip pain. Between September 2012 and May 2013, patients over the age of 18 with a history lateral hip pain who had received prior treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications, physical therapy and peritrochanteric corticostroid injections were enrolled. Treatment consisted of an ultrasound guided intra-articular corticosteroid injection followed by a course of directed physical therapy and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication. Patients performed GaitRite analysis at baseline and 12 weeks following the injection. In addition, the Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Scores (HOS), Short Form 36 (SF-36) and a visual analogue pain score (VAS) were collected at baseline, 1, 6 and 12 weeks.A total of 16 patients were studied. Patients experienced significant improvements from their baseline mHHS at 1 and 12 weeks (P = 0.03, P = 0.04). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was exceeded at multiple timepoints on various clinical outcome surveys. Velocity and stride length were not significantly improved at 12 weeks. Intra-articular hip injections may decrease pain and improve function in patients with recalcitrant lateral hip pain, and occult intra-articular hip pathology should be considered in the etiology of lateral hip pain. Though low enrollment numbers left this study underpowered, MCID comparisons demonstrated potential benefit from this treatment.

Osteoporotic ankle fractures.

Ankle fractures are one of the most common injuries in the elderly and their incidence is anticipated to increase over the next 20 years. Appropriate management of ankle fractures in this population requires an understanding of the issues unique to the elderly. Osteoporosis must be considered when counseling patients about their ankle fracture. Good outcomes can be achieved with surgical fixation of ankle fractures in the elderly. Postoperative complications are higher in patients with diabetes and peripheral vascular disease, and in patients who smoke. This article reviews how to evaluate and treat ankle fractures in elderly patients with osteoporosis, evaluates the outcomes, and discusses surgical techniques.