Recovery Services for Interpersonal Violence Victims on Healthcare Use at a Trauma Center.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of interpersonal violence (IPV) patients is often complicated by social and mental health comorbidities. New American College of Surgeons (ACS) requirements include provision of psychosocial support services for recovery after injury. We aim to describe utilization and patient outcomes after provision of Trauma Recovery Services (TRS) at our institution for the IPV population. These services include assistance with food, housing, criminal justice, and advocacy. METHODS: IPV patients were identified between September 6, 2018 and December 20, 2020. Demographic information was collected. TRS utilization and specific services rendered were identified. Primary outcome measures included initial length of stay (LOS), number of subsequent emergency department (ED) visits, and outpatient visits within 1 y after the initial injury. Statistical analyses included t-tests, Chi-squared tests, and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 502 patients were included in the final cohort, and 394 patients (78.5%) accepted the utilization of TRS services after initial interaction. Patients were on average 33.4 y old, and 59.4% were females. Patients who were older (P < 0.001) and homeless (P = 0.004) were more likely to use TRS, while victims of sexual assault (P < 0.001) and single patients (P = 0.041) were less likely. Patients who utilized TRS had longer initial LOS (P < 0.001), more ED visits (P < 0.001), and more outpatient visits (P = 0.01) related to the initial complaint, independent of potential confounders on multivariate linear regression. Food and housing service utilization associated with LOS (P = 0.01), ED visits (P < 0.001), and outpatient visits (P < 0.001). Additionally, transportation services were associated with longer LOS (P = 0.01) while patient advocacy services were associated with more ED visits (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: TRS was extensively utilized by IPV patients, and associated with more follow-up appointments, ED visits, and longer LOS. Emphasis on injury mechanisms, baseline demographics, and social features may further characterize patients in need who tend toward utilization.

Social Determinants of Health and Patients With Traumatic Injuries: Is There a Relationship Between Social Health and Orthopaedic Trauma?

BACKGROUND: Although economic stability, social context, and healthcare access are well-known social determinants of health associated with more challenging recovery after traumatic injury, little is known about how these factors differ by mechanism of injury. Our team sought to use the results of social determinants of health screenings to better understand the population that engaged with psychosocial support services after traumatic musculoskeletal injury and fill a gap in our understanding of patient-reported social health needs. QUESTION/PURPOSE: What is the relationship between social determinants of health and traumatic musculoskeletal injury? METHODS: Trauma recovery services is a psychosocial support program at our institution that offers patients and their family members resources such as professional coaching, peer mentorship, post-traumatic stress disorder screening and treatment, educational resources, and more. This team engages with any patient admitted to, treated at, and released from our institution. Their primary engagement population is individuals with traumatic injury, although not exclusively. Between January 2019 and October 2021, the trauma recovery services team interacted with 6036 patients. Of those who engaged with this service, we considered only patients who experienced a traumatic musculoskeletal injury and had a completed social determinants of health screening tool. During the stated timeframe, 13% (814 of 6036) of patients engaged with trauma recovery services and had a complete social determinants of health screening tool. Of these, 53% (428 of 814) had no physical injury. A further 26% (99 of 386) were excluded because they did not have traumatic musculoskeletal injuries, leaving 4.8% (287) for analysis in this cross-sectional study. The study population included patients who interacted with trauma recovery services at our institution after a traumatic orthopaedic injury that occurred between January 2019 and October 2021. Social determinants of health risk screening questionnaires were self-administered prospectively using a screening tool developed by our institution based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services social determinants of health screening questions. Mechanisms of injury were separated into intentional (physical assault, sexual assault, gunshot wound, or stabbing) and unintentional (fall, motor vehicle collision, or motorcycle crash). During the study period, 287 adult patients interacted with trauma recovery services after a traumatic musculoskeletal injury and had complete social determinant of health screening; 123 injuries were unintentional and 164 were intentional. Patients were primarily women (55% [159 of 287]), single (73% [209 of 287]), and insured by Medicaid or Medicare (78% [225 of 287]). Mechanism category was determined after a thorough medical record review to verify the appropriate category. An initial exploratory univariate analysis was completed for the primary outcome variable using the Pearson chi-squared test for categorical variables and a two-tailed independent t-test for continuous variables. All demographic variables and social determinants of health with p < 0.20 in the univariate analysis were included in a multivariate binary regression analysis to determine independent associations with injury mechanism. All variables with p < 0.05 in the multivariate analysis were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: After controlling for potential demographic confounders, younger age (odds ratio [OR] 0.93 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 0.96]; p < 0.001), Black race (compared with White race, OR 2.71 [95% CI 1.20 to 6.16]; p = 0.02), Hispanic ethnicity (compared with White race, OR 5.32 [95% CI 1.62 to 17.47]; p = 0.006), and at-risk status for food insecurity (OR 4.27 [95% CI 1.18 to 15.39]; p = 0.03) were independently associated with intentional mechanisms of injury. CONCLUSION: There is a relationship between the mechanism of traumatic orthopaedic injury and social determinants of health risks. Specifically, data showed a correlation between food insecurity and intentional injury. Healthcare systems and providers should be cognizant of this, as well as the additional challenges patients may face in their recovery journey because of social needs. Screening for needs is only the first step in addressing patient's social health needs. Healthcare systems should also allocate resources for personnel and programs that support patients in meeting their social health needs. Future studies should evaluate the impact of such programming in responding to social needs that impact health outcomes and improve health disparities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic study.

Impact of novel psychosocial programming on readmission and recidivism rates among patients with violence-related trauma.

INTRODUCTION: The Victims of Crime Advocacy and Recovery Program (VOCARP) provides advocacy, mental health resources, and educational materials. This study will report complications, readmissions, and recidivism among crime victims, and who used or did not use victim services. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients engaged with programming from 3/1/17 until 12/31/18 were included. Control groups were patients injured by violent trauma without VOCARP use (N = 212) and patients injured by unintentional injuries (N = 201). Readmissions, complications, reoperations, and trauma recidivism were reported. RESULTS: 1019 patients (83%) used VOCARP. VOCARP users were less often male (56% vs. 71%), less commonly married (12% vs. 41%), and had fewer gunshot wounds (GSWs, 26% vs. 37%) and sexual assaults (4.1% vs. 8%), all p < 0.05. Of all 1,423 patients, 6.6% had a readmission and 7.4% developed a complication. VOCARP patients had fewer complications (4.5% vs. 13.7%), infections (2% vs. 9%), wound healing problems (1% vs. 3.3%), and deep vein thromboses (0.3% vs. 1.9%), all p < 0.05, but no differences in unplanned operations (4.5%). GSW victims had the most complications, readmissions, and unplanned surgeries. Prior trauma recidivism was frequent among all groups, with crime victim patients having 40% prior violence-related injury (vs 9.0% control, p < 0.0001). Trauma recidivism following VOCARP use occurred in 8.5% (vs 5.7% for non-users, p = 0.16). CONCLUSION: Crime victims differ from other trauma patients, more often with younger age, single marital status, and unemployment at baseline. Complications were lower for VOCARP patients. GSW patients had the most complications, readmissions, and unplanned secondary procedures, representing a population for future attention.

What Is the Financial Impact of Orthopaedic Sequelae of Intravenous Drug Use on Urban Tertiary-care Centers?

BACKGROUND: Orthopaedic sequelae such as skin and soft-tissue abscesses are frequent complications of intravenous drug use (IVDU) and comprise many of the most common indications for emergency room visits and hospitalizations within this population. Urban tertiary-care and safety-net hospitals frequently operate in challenging economic healthcare environments and are disproportionately tasked with providing care to this largely underinsured patient demographic. Although many public health initiatives have been instituted in recent years to understand the health impacts of IVDU and the spreading opioid epidemic, few efforts have been made to investigate its economic impact on healthcare systems. The inpatient treatment of orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU is a high-cost healthcare element that is critically important to understand within the current national context of inflationary healthcare costs. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What were the total healthcare costs incurred and total hospital reimbursements received in the treatment of extraspinal orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU? (2) What were the total healthcare costs incurred and total hospital reimbursements received in the treatment of spinal orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU? (3) How did patient insurance status effect the economic burden of orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU? METHODS: An internal departmental record of all successive patients requiring inpatient treatment of orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU was initiated at Boston Medical Center (Boston, MA, USA) in 2012 and MetroHealth Medical Center (Cleveland, OH, USA) in 2015. A total of 412 patient admissions between 2012 to 2017 to these two safety-net hospitals (n = 236 and n = 176, respectively) for orthopaedic complications of IVDU were included in the study. These sequelae included cellulitis, cutaneous abscess, bursitis, myositis, tenosynovitis, septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, and epidural abscess. Patients were included if they were older than 18 years of age, presented to the emergency department for management of a musculoskeletal infection secondary to IVDU, and required inpatient orthopaedic treatment during their admission. Exclusion criteria included all patients presenting with a musculoskeletal infection not directly secondary to active IVDU. Patients presenting with an epidural abscess (Boston Medical Center, n = 36) were evaluated separately to explore potential differences in costs within this subgroup. A robust retrospective financial analysis was performed using internal financial databases at each institution which directly enumerated all true hospital costs associated with each patient admission, independent of billed hospital charges. All direct, indirect, variable, and fixed hospital costs were individually summed for each hospitalization, constituting a true "bottom-up" micro-costing approach. Labor-based costs were calculated through use of time-based costing; for instance, the cost of nursing labor care associated with a patient admission was determined through ascription of the median hospital cost of a registered nurse within that department (that is, compensation for salary plus benefits) to the total length of nursing time needed by that patient during their hospitalization. Primary reimbursements reflected the true monetary value received by the study institutions from insurers and were determined through the total adjusted payment for each inpatient admission. All professional fees were excluded. A secondary analysis was performed to assess the effect of patient insurance status on hospital costs and reimbursements for each patient admission. RESULTS: The mean healthcare cost incurred for the treatment of extraspinal orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU was USD 9524 ± USD 1430 per patient admission. The mean hospital reimbursement provided for the treatment of these extraspinal sequelae was USD 7678 ± USD 1248 per patient admission. This resulted in a mean financial loss of USD 1846 ± USD 1342 per patient admission. The mean healthcare cost incurred at Boston Medical Center for the treatment of epidural abscesses secondary to IVDU was USD 44,357 ± USD 7384 per patient. Hospital reimbursements within this subgroup were highly dependent upon insurance status. The median (range) reimbursement provided for patients possessing a unique hospital-based nonprofit health plan (n = 4) was USD 103,016 (USD 9022 to USD 320,123), corresponding to a median financial gain of USD 24,904 (USD 2289 to USD 83,079). However, the mean reimbursement for all other patients presenting with epidural abscesses (n = 32) was USD 30,429 ± USD 5278, corresponding to a mean financial loss of USD 5768 ± USD 4861. A secondary analysis demonstrated that treatment of extraspinal orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU for patients possessing Medicaid insurance (n = 309) resulted in a financial loss of USD 2813 ± USD 1593 per patient admission. Conversely, treatment of extraspinal orthopaedic sequelae for patients possessing non-Medicaid insurance (n = 67) generated a mean financial gain of USD 2615 ± USD 1341 per patient admission. CONCLUSIONS: Even when excluding all professional fees, the inpatient treatment of orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU resulted in substantial financial losses driven primarily by high proportions of under- and uninsured people within this patient population. These financial losses may be unsustainable for medical centers operating in challenging economic healthcare landscapes. The development of novel initiatives and support of existing programs aimed at mitigating the health-related and economic impact of IVDU must remain a principal priority of healthcare providers and policymakers in coming years. Advocacy for the expansion of Medicaid accountable care organizations and national syringe service programs (SSPs), and the development of specialized outpatient wound and abscess clinics at healthcare centers may help to substantially alleviate the economic burden of the orthopaedic sequelae of IVDU. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level, IV, economic and decision analyses.

Risk of Fracture and Complications After Fixation in Patients With Pre-injury Psychiatric Illness: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to describe the frequency of orthopaedic trauma and postsurgical complications associated with psychiatric diagnoses. DESIGN: Query of TriNetx Analytics Network. SETTING: Participating hospitals. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Those ≥18 years old with psychiatric illness and orthopaedic trauma. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Fractures and postoperative complications were described. A 1:1 propensity score matching function was used. Odds ratios compared intercohort complications. RESULTS: A total of 11,266,415 patients were identified with a psychiatric diagnosis, including bipolar disorder (8.9%), schizophrenia (3.3%), major depression (12.4%), stress-related disorder (9.6%), anxiety disorder (64.5%), borderline personality disorder (1.1%), or antisocial personality (0.2%). Prevalence of 30.2% was found for a fracture and at least 1 psychiatric diagnosis. Antisocial personality disorder had the highest risk ratio relative to people without that mental disorder (relative risk [RR] = 5.09) of having 1 or more associated fracture, followed by depression (RR = 3.03), stress-related disorders (RR = 3.00), anxiety disorders (RR = 2.97), borderline personality disorder (RR = 2.92), bipolar disorder (RR = 2.80), and schizophrenia (RR = 2.69). Patients with at least 1 psychiatric comorbidity had greater risk of pulmonary embolism, superficial and deep surgical site infections, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, deep venous thrombosis, osteonecrosis, and complex regional pain syndrome by 1 month after fixation, when compared with patients without psychiatric disorder. By 1 year, they were also at an increased risk for stroke and myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: All psychiatric comorbidities were associated with increased RR of fracture and higher odds of complications compared with patients without psychiatric comorbidities. Providers should be aware of preexisting psychiatric diagnoses during treatment of acute injuries because of these risks. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The development of a Trauma Resiliency Scale (tRS-18).

Resiliency consists of three core components, which include presence of adversity, protective factors to overcome adversity, and positive outcomes or growth. Therefore, resiliency aligns with the trauma recovery process. This paper describes development of the Trauma Resiliency Scale (tRS) to quantify the resiliency of trauma patients upon presentation and during recovery. Scale items were proposed and reviewed by an expert panel. Group construct validity testing was performed using both individual and focus group feedback with item analysis. Reliability was measured with test-retest administered 14 days apart and evaluated with intraclass correlation coefficient. One hundred and twenty-three items were initially proposed. Following item categorizing, a preliminary 17-item questionnaire was created. The questionnaire was administered to 40 individual participants and a trauma survivor focus group to evaluate construct validity. Following group construct testing, an 18-item Trauma Resiliency Scale (tRS-18) was proposed. Twenty-four participants were given the tRS-18 twice, 14 days apart to establish test-retest. Sixteen of the 18 questions had an intraclass correlation >0.7 (0.793-0.949). The remaining two questions underperformed based on the ICC (0.592 and 0.493) and were manually evaluated for inclusion. The final tRS-18 is a brief, self-administered measure of resiliency designed specifically for trauma patients. Sound psychometric properties including face validity, construct validity, and reliability of the instrument have been demonstrated. The tRS-18 may quantify resiliency at any time point with potential to be predictive of progress during recovery. Level of Evidence III, prognostic.

Trauma recidivism is reduced with engagement in psychosocial programming following orthopaedic trauma.

INTRODUCTION: Recidivism is common following injury. Interventions to enhance patient engagement may reduce trauma recidivism. Education, counseling, peer mentorship, and other resources are known as Trauma Recovery Services (TRS). The authors hypothesized that TRS use would reduce trauma recidivism. METHODS: Over five years at a level 1 trauma center, 954 adults treated operatively for pelvic, spine, and femoral fractures were reviewed. Recidivism was defined as return to trauma center for new injury within 30-months. All patients were offered TRS. Multivariate logistic regression statistical analysis was used to identify predictors of recidivism. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-seven of all patients (42 %) utilized TRS, including educational materials (n = 293), peer visits (n = 360), coaching (n = 284), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) screening (n = 74), and other services. Within the entire sample, 136 patients (14 %) returned to the emergency department for an unrelated trauma event after mean 21 months. 13 % of TRS users became recidivists. Overall, 49 % of recidivists had history of pre-existing mental illness. High rates of TRS engagement between recidivists and non-recidivists were seen (75 %); however, non-recidivists were more likely to use multiple types of recovery services (49 % vs 34 %, p = 0.002), and were more likely to engage with trauma peer mentors (former trauma survivors) more than once (91 % vs 81 %, p = 0.03). After multivariable analysis, patients using multiple different recovery services had a lower risk of recidivism (p = 0.04, OR 0.42, 95 % CI [0.19-0.96]). CONCLUSIONS: Multifaceted engagement with recovery programming is associated with less recidivism following trauma. Future study of resultant reductions in healthcare costs are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II; Prognostic.

Recidivism after orthopaedic trauma has diminished over time.

PURPOSE: The purpose was to analyze our trauma population during two periods to assess for predictors of recidivism. METHODS: Prior (2007-2011, n = 879) and recent (2014-2019, n = 954) orthopaedic trauma patients were reviewed. Recidivists were those returning with an unrelated injury. Recidivism rates were compared, and factors associated with recidivism were identified. RESULTS: Recidivism decreased: 18.7% to 14.3% (p = 0.01). Mean age and sex of the two cohorts were not different. Recent recidivists were more likely to sustain gunshot wound (GSW) injuries (22.1% vs 18.9%, p = 0.09), and mental illness was more common (56.6% vs 28.1%, p < 0.0001). The recent recidivist population was less often married (12.9% vs 23.8%, p = 0.03), and both recidivist groups were often underinsured (Medicaid or uninsured: (60.6% vs 67.0%)). CONCLUSION: Recidivism diminished, although more GSW and mental illness were seen. Recidivists are likely to be underinsured. The changing profile of recidivists may be attributed to socioeconomic trends and new programs to improve outcomes after trauma.

Functional outcomes more than 5 years following acetabulum fracture.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this project were to evaluate functional outcomes more than 5 years after acetabulum fracture and to determine factors related to function. METHODS: This retrospective study consisted of 205 adult patients treated for acetabulum fracture who completed the Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (MFA) a minimum of 5 years following injury. The MFA includes survey of daily activities, gross and fine mobility, social and work function, sleeping, and mood. Higher scores indicate worse function. RESULTS: Two hundred five patients with 210 fractures, 69.3% of whom were male, with mean age of 45.7 and mean body mass index 30.1 were included after mean 128 months follow-up. Fracture patterns included OTA/AO 62A (37.1%), 62B (40.5%), or 62C (22.4%), and 80.0% were treated surgically. Late complications were noted in 35.2%, including posttraumatic arthrosis (PTA: 19.5%), osteonecrosis and/or heterotopic ossification. Mean MFA of all patients was 31.4, indicating substantial residual dysfunction. Worse MFA scores were associated with morbid obesity (body mass index >40: 42.3, P>.09), and current tobacco smoking history vs former smoker vs nonsmoker (45.2 vs 36.1 vs 23.0, P < .002). Patients with late complications had worse mean MFA scores (38.7 vs 27.7, P = .001); PTA was the most common late complication, occurring in 19.5%. CONCLUSIONS: More than 5 years following acetabulum fracture, substantial residual dysfunction was noted, as demonstrated by mean MFA. Worse outcomes were associated with late complications and tobacco smoking. While fracture pattern was not associated with outcome, those patients who had late complications, mostly PTA, had worse outcomes.

Are trauma surgical societies adequately addressing mental health after injury?

BACKGROUND: Survivors of physical trauma, their home caregivers, and their medical providers all have an increased risk of developing psychological distress and trauma-related psychiatric disease. The purpose of this study was to describe the frequency and change over time of trauma society research presentations regarding mental health to identify opportunities for growth. METHODS: Archives from 2018 to 2020 from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, and the Western Trauma Association were reviewed. The studies that measured mental illness, psychosocial distress, and other psychosocial factors were assessed: for (1) the use of patient-reported outcome measures ; (2) the association of psychosocial variables with outcomes; and (3) the interventions investigated. Change over time was assessed using χ2 analysis. RESULTS: Of 1,239 abstracts, 57 (4.6%) addressed at least 1 mental health-related factor. Mental health was more frequently studied over time (2018 [3.2%]; 2019 [3.5%]; 2020 [7.7%]; P = .003). The most frequently measured factors were post-traumatic stress disorder, quality of life, general mental health, and depression. Seventeen (29.8%) abstracts addressed substance abuse, most commonly opioid abuse. Seven (12.3%) abstracts measured mental health in caregivers or medical providers. Patient-reported outcome measures were used in 32 studies (56.1%). Two-thirds of studies reported findings suggesting that mental illness impairs trauma-related outcomes. Only 5 (8.8%) investigated interventions designed to reduce adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Although academic discussion of mental health after trauma increased from 2018 to 2020, the topic remains a limited component of annual programs, patient-reported outcome measures remain underutilized, and intervention studies are rare.

Determinants of functional outcome following ankle fracture.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the patient and injury characteristics that impact functional outcomes after ankle fracture. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Urban level I trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One thousand patients underwent fixation of ankle fracture (AO/OTA 44) between 2006 and 2015. Four hundred sixteen completed functional outcome surveys by telephone or mail at a mean of 5.9 years after injury. INTERVENTION: Open reduction internal fixation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Foot Function Index (FFI) and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA). RESULTS: Mean age was 46.7 years, with 46.2% male. Higher (worse) FFI scores were seen in tobacco users (38.9 vs 30.1), recreational drug users (45.9 vs 32.7), and the morbidly obese (52.0 vs 30.6), all P < .005. Higher (worse) SMFA dysfunction and bothersome scores were also seen in these groups, and in females and alcohol users. Multiple regression analysis identified female gender, obesity, tobacco and alcohol use, complications, secondary procedures, and multiple additional injuries as independent predictors of higher scores (all P < .04). Fracture patterns, open fracture, and development of arthritis had no impact on FFI or SMFA scores. CONCLUSION: Patient characteristics, not under surgeon-control, such as female sex, obesity, and substance use, appear to contribute to patient-reported functional outcome scores more than injury characteristics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, prognostic.

New versus old: 95 degree angled blade plate versus distal femoral locking plate. A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose was to compare the locking condylar plate (LCP) with the 95° angled blade plate (ABP) for distal femoral fracture patterns amenable to either device. Our hypothesis was that LCP would outperform ABP with primary outcome of nonunion and secondary outcomes of reoperation and malunion. METHODS: 78 adult patients with 79 eligible fractures and mean age of 60 years were prospectively randomized to LCP (n = 45) or ABP (n = 34). Mean ISS was 16. 22% fractures were open. Patient-reported functional outcomes were assessed with the Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (MFA). RESULTS: All patients were followed to union, and mean follow-up was 25 months. There were no differences in age, sex, fracture pattern, co-morbidities or mechanism for the two groups. Three patients had infections, one superficial after LCP and one deep infection each after ABP and LCP. Three patients developed nonunion after LCP versus none after ABP (p = 0.06). Nine patients healed with minor deformity after LCP versus 5 following ABP. One fracture had major deformity after ABP versus two after LCP. Eight patients had a secondary procedure following LCP versus two after ABP (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The investigation failed to support newer technology being better. Evidence did not indicate the LCP was superior to the ABP. Trends for primary union and fewer secondary procedures suggest that ABP may have superior performance to LCP for fracture patterns which may be treated with either implant.

Risk Factors for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Acute Trauma Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after traumatic injury. SETTING: Single urban Level I trauma center. DESIGN: Prospective. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred men (66%) and 152 women treated for traumatic injuries were administered the PTSD checklist for a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fifth edition (PCL-5) survey during their first post-hospital visit over a 15-month period. INTERVENTION: Screening for PTSD in trauma patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: The prevalence of disease and risk factors for the development of PTSD based on demographic, medical, injury, and treatment variables. RESULTS: One hundred three patients screened positive for PTSD (26%) after a mean of 86 days after injury. Age less than 45 years was an independent risk factor for the development of PTSD [odds ratio (OR) 2.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.40-4.99)]. Mechanisms of injury associated with the development of PTSD included pedestrians struck by motor vehicles [OR 7.35, 95% CI (1.58-34.19)], motorcycle/all terrain vehicle crash [OR 3.17, 95% CI (1.04-9.65)], and victims of crime [OR 3.49, 95% CI (0.99-9.20)]. Patients sustaining high-energy mechanism injuries and those who were victims of crime scored higher on the PCL-5 [OR 2.39, 95% CI (1.35-4.22); OR 4.50, 95% CI (2.52-8.05), respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: One quarter of trauma patients screened positive for PTSD at 3 months after their injury. A mechanism of injury is a risk factor for PTSD, and younger adults, victims of crime, and pedestrians struck by motor vehicles are at higher risk. These findings offer the potential to more effectively target and refer vulnerable patient populations to appropriate treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a compete description of levels of evidence.

Are we missing the mark? Relationships of psychosocial issues to outcomes after injury: A review of OTA annual meeting presentations.

OBJECTIVES: To observe the availability of information about social, emotional, and psychological factors in abstracts presented at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) annual meeting. DATA SOURCE: OTA website (https://ota.org/education/meetings-and-courses/meeting-archive/). STUDY SELECTION: All abstracts selected for paper or poster presentation at the 2016 through 2018 OTA annual meetings, as published in the final program. Studies were included if they sought to measure mental illness, substance use or abuse, pain, or other psychosocial issues. If studies utilized 1 or more patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), they were also included. DATA EXTRACTION: For each abstract meeting inclusion criterion, studies were assessed for interventions intended to improve outcomes in any of the listed psychosocial domains. DATA SYNTHESIS/RESULTS: Nine hundred forty-two abstracts were evaluated over a 3-year period. Of these, 294 (31.2%) met inclusion criteria. Twenty-five abstracts (8.5% of 294) reported mental illness, with depression (n = 14), anxiety (n = 9), and posttraumatic stress disorder (n = 5) being the most common. Eighty-eight abstracts (29.9% of 294) reported substance-use of tobacco, alcohol, narcotics, and/or recreational drugs. Tobacco-use was most prevalent (n = 59), followed by opioid-use (n = 31). Ten abstracts reported substance abuse. Pain was measured in 95 abstracts, and 203 abstracts utilized PROMs. Thirty-five abstracts found that these psychosocial elements significantly impacted outcomes or complications. Many abstracts did not assess the influence of these factors on clinical outcomes (n = 99). Sixteen studies described an intervention aimed at mitigating these features. CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrates limited attention to the impact of psychological, social, and environmental factors on outcomes after orthopaedic trauma. Substance-abuse problems and mental health concerns are not only predictors of poor clinical and PROMs of pain and quality of life after injury, but have also been implicated in subsequent recidivism. Only 3% of 942 abstracts observed mental health and 1% reported substance-abuse. Moving forward, greater understanding of psychosocial issues may enhance interventions to impact long-term outcomes.

Transcutaneous Hemoglobin Screening in an Adult Orthopaedic Trauma Population.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a noninvasive hemoglobin measurement device in an orthopaedic trauma population. DESIGN: Prospective. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One hundred five patients consecutively admitted to the orthopaedic trauma service after surgical treatment of fracture. INTERVENTION: Transcutaneous hemoglobin (TcHgb) monitoring using the Masimo Pronto Pulse CO-Oximeter model with Rainbow SET Technology for spot TcHgb measurement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: TcHgb measurements and standard venipuncture hemoglobin (vHgb) were obtained. Patient preferences for each were recorded. RESULTS: TcHgb measurements were obtained in 100 patients and compared with their corresponding vHgb measurements. The mean vHgb and TcHgb were 10.2 ± 1.9 g/dL and 11.2 ± 2.1 g/dL, respectively, and the mean difference was 1.1 ± 1.6 g/dL, which was statistically different from 0 (P < 0.001). In 76% of cases, the TcHgb device overestimated vHgb. In a subgroup of patients undergoing procedures with minimal expected blood loss (external fixators of knee or ankle, irrigation and debridement, or open reduction and internal fixation of ankle or calcaneal fractures), the mean difference between vHgb and TcHgb was 0.68 ± 1.6 g/dL (P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: A preliminary study of TcHgb monitoring with the tested device as a potential screening mechanism to limit unnecessary blood draws showed statistical difference from vHgb; however, the mean bias 1.1 g/dL of hemoglobin was notably small. In a subgroup of patients undergoing procedures with minimal expected blood loss, the device may have merit. Larger studies are required to determine the clinical relevance of differences in measurements between the 2 methods. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Implementing psychosocial programming at a level 1 trauma center: results from a 5-year period.

BACKGROUND: The primary goal of the present study is to describe the psychosocial support services provided at our institution and the evolution of such programming through time. This study will also report the demographics and injury patterns of patients using available resources. METHODS: Trauma Recovery Services (TRS) is a social and psychological support program that provides services and resources to patients and families admitted to our hospital. It includes a number of different services such as emotional coaching from licensed counselors, educational materials, peer mentorship from trauma survivors, monthly support groups, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) screening and programming for victims of crime. Patients using services were prospectively recorded by hired staff, volunteers and students who engaged in distributing programming. Demographics and injury characteristics were retrospectively gathered from patient's medical records. RESULTS: From May of 2013 through December 2018, a total of 4977 discrete patients used TRS at an urban level 1 trauma center. During the study period, 31.4% of the 15 640 admitted adult trauma patients were exposed to TRS and this increased from 7.2% in 2013 to 60.1% in 2018. During the period of 5.5 years, 3317 patients had 'direct contact' (coaching and/or educational materials) and 1827 patients had at least one peer visit. The average number of peer visits was 2.7 per patient (range: 2-15). Of the 114 patients who attended support groups over 4 years, 55 (48%) attended more than one session, with an average of 3.9 visits (range: 2-10) per patient. After the establishment of PTSD screening and Victims of Crime Advocacy and Recovery Program (VOCARP) services in 2017, a total of 482 patients were screened for PTSD and 974 patients used VOCARP resources during the period of 2 years, with substantial growth from 2017 to 2018. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital-provided resources aimed at educating patients, expanding support networks and bolstering resiliency were popular at our institution, with nearly 5000 discrete patients accessing services during a period of 5.5 years. Moving forward, greater investigation of program usage, development, and efficacy is necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II therapeutic.

Implementation of a mobile app for trauma education: results from a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: In an era of shared decision making, patient expectations for education have increased. Ideal resources would offer accurate information, digital delivery and interaction. Mobile applications have potential to fulfill these requirements. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate adoption of a patient education application (app: http://bit.ly/traumaapp) at multiple sites with disparate locations and varied populations. METHODS: A trauma patient education application was developed at one trauma center and subsequently released at three new trauma centers. The app contains information regarding treatment and recovery and was customized with provider information for each institution. Each center was provided with promotional materials, and each had strategies to inform providers and patients about the app. Data regarding utilization was collected. Patients were surveyed about usage and recommendations. RESULTS: Over the 16-month study period, the app was downloaded 844 times (70%) in the metropolitan regions of the study centers. The three new centers had 380, 89 and 31 downloads, while the original center had 93 downloads. 36% of sessions were greater than 2 min, while 41% were less than a few seconds. The percentage of those surveyed who used the app ranged from 14.3% to 44.0% for a weighted average of 36.8% of those having used the app. The mean patient willingness to recommend the app was 3.3 on a 5-point Likert scale. However, the distribution was bimodal: 60% of patients rated the app 4 or 5, while 32% rated it 1 or 2. DISCUSSION: The adoption of a trauma patient education app was successful at four centers with disparate patient populations. The majority of patients were likely to recommend the app. Variations in implementation strategies resulted in different rates of download. Integration of the app into patient education by providers is associated with more downloads. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III care management.

Prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder in acute trauma patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of positive screening for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) amongst trauma patients. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal study. SETTING: Single urban US level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred fifty-two adult trauma patients were administered the PTSD checklist for DSM-V (PCL-5) survey upon posthospital outpatient clinic visit. This included 300 men (66%) and 152 women with mean age 43.8 years and mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) 11.3, with 83% having fractures of the pelvis and/or extremities. Medical and injury related variables were recorded. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors predictive of screening positive for PTSD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Prevalence and risk factors for screening positive for PTSD amongst the trauma patient population. RESULTS: Twenty-six percent of trauma patients screened positive for PTSD after mean 86 days following injury. These patients were younger (35 vs 46 years old, P < 0.001) and more commonly African American (56% vs 43% Caucasian, P < 0.001). Pedestrians struck by motor vehicles (OR 4.70, P = 0.040) and victims of crime (OR 4.12, P = 0.013) were more likely to screen positive. Psychiatric history, injury severity (ISS), and injury type did not predict positive screening. CONCLUSION: One-in-four patients suffering traumatic injuries screened positive for PTSD suggesting the prevalence of PTSD among trauma patients far exceeds that of the general population. Predictive factors included victims of crime and pedestrians struck by motor vehicles. Screening measures are needed in orthopaedic trauma surgery clinics to refer these at-risk patients for proper evaluation and treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic; Level II.

Enhancing Trauma Patient Experience Through Education and Engagement: Development of a Mobile Application.

The purpose was to determine the utility of an open access mobile device application (App: http://bit.ly/traumaapp) to improve patient education and engagement. Methods: A patient education app was developed with information regarding injury, treatment, and recovery for orthopaedic and other injuries. Data regarding usage, satisfaction, and desired improvements were gathered. Results: The app was downloaded 725 times, and the pages in the app were viewed 9,043 times in 34 months. User sessions >2 minutes accounted for 34%. Participation was less in those older than 55 years (12% versus 68% P < 0.001). Sixteen percent of patients did not have a device to use the app. Most (55%) rated it as helpful or extremely helpful; 78% of users were likely to recommend it. Patients most frequently suggested more information on other injuries and simpler language. Discussion: There was strong interest in this simple, free patient education app. Despite an urban, trauma population, five of six patients had access to a device that could load the app. Nearly half of the patients downloaded an orthopaedic patient education app when offered. Those who did not use the app were more likely to be older than 55 years. This represents an innovative opportunity for education and engagement of our patients and their families.