Pelvic Ring Fractures in Older Adult Patients-Assessing Physician Practice Variation among (Orthopedic) Trauma Surgeons.

PURPOSE: Pelvic fractures in older adults are a major public health problem and socioeconomic burden. The standard of care has changed over the past years, and there is limited consensus on which patients benefit from surgical fixation. There is currently no nationwide treatment protocol to guide the decision-making process. Therefore, the aim of this survey was to provide more insight into if, when, and why patients with a fragility fracture of the pelvis (FFPs) would be considered for additional imaging and surgical fixation by treating physicians. METHODS: An online clinical vignette-based survey of hypothetical scenarios was sent out to all orthopedic and trauma surgeons in the Netherlands. The questionnaire comprised multiple-choice questions and radiographic images. Differences between subgroups were calculated using the X2 test or the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: 169 surgeons responded to the survey, with varying levels of experience and working in different types of hospitals. In a patient with a simple pubic ramus fracture and ASA 2 or ASA 4, 32% and 18% of the respondents would always advise a CT scan for further analysis. In the same patients, 11% and 31% of the respondents would not advise a CT scan, respectively. When presented with three cases of increasing severity of co-morbidity (ASA) and/or increasing age and/or different clinical presentation of an FFP type 3c on a CT scan, an increasing number of respondents would not consider surgical fixation. There was significant variation in practice patterns between the respondents who do not work in a hospital performing pelvic and acetabular (P&A) fracture surgery and those who do work in a P&A referral hospital. Most respondents (77%) refer patients 1-5 times a year to an expert center for surgical fixation. CONCLUSION: There is currently a wide variety of clinical practices regarding the imaging and management of FFPs, which seems to be influenced by the type of hospital the patients are presented to. A regional or national evidence-based treatment protocol should be implemented to ensure a more uniform approach.

Supporting the medial hinge in proximal humerus fractures with an intramedullary plate.

Proximal humerus fractures are common and approximately 20% of displaced fractures may benefit from surgery. A lack of medial support is found to be a predictor of failure after surgical fixation of proximal humerus fractures. The optimal technique for restoring the medial hinge is unclear. We describe two cases of patients with a dislocated 4-part humerus fracture treated with a locking plate and an additional small intramedullary plate to support the medial hinge. This technique is simple and allows for an enhanced stability of the medial hinge during and after surgery.

Analyzing the heart rhythm during chest compressions: Performance and clinical value of a new AED algorithm.

PURPOSE: Automated external defibrillators (AED) prompt the rescuer to stop chest compressions (CC) for ECG analysis during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We assessed the diagnostic accuracy and clinical benefit of a new AED algorithm (cprINSIGHT), which analyzes ECG and impedance signals during CC, allowing rhythm analysis with ongoing chest compressions. METHODS: Amsterdam Police and Fire Fighters used a conventional AED in 2016-2017 (control) and an AED with cprINSIGHT in 2018-2019 (intervention). In the intervention AED, cprINSIGHT was activated after the first (conventional) analysis. This algorithm classified the rhythm as "shockable" (S) and "non-shockable" (NS), or "pause needed". Sensitivity for S, specificity for NS with 90% lower confidence limit (LCL), chest compression fractions (CCF) and pre-shock pause were compared between control and intervention cases accounting for multiple observations per patient. RESULTS: Data from 465 control and 425 intervention cases were analyzed. cprINSIGHT reached a decision during CC in 70% of analyses. Sensitivity of the intervention AED was 96%, (LCL 93%) and specificity was 98% (LCL 97%), both not significantly different from control. Intervention cases had a shorter median pre-shock pause compared to control cases (8 s vs 22 s, p < 0.001) and higher median CCF (86% vs 80%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: AEDs with cprINSIGHT analyzed the ECG during chest compressions in 70% of analyses with 96% sensitivity and 98% specificity when it made a S or a NS decision. Compared to conventional AEDs, cprINSIGHT leads to a significantly shorter pre-shock pause and a significant increase in CCF.