Obstetric anal sphincter injuries and other delivery trauma: a US national survey of obstetrician-gynecologists.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Obstetric lacerations complicate the majority of deliveries. The application of standardized guidelines for assessing delivery trauma has not been assessed thoroughly in the United States. We recently identified gaps in US midwives' clinical assessment of delivery trauma. We conducted a cross-sectional national survey of practicing obstetricians in the USA to characterize their classification of obstetric lacerations. We hypothesized that attending obstetricians' identification and diagnosis of delivery trauma would be similar to our findings for midwives with frequent inaccuracy. METHODS: We recruited clinically active obstetricians through the Pregnancy-Related Care Research Network. We asked participants to classify (from written definitions) and diagnose (from standard illustrations) common forms of vaginal delivery trauma using the widely employed perineal laceration degree system. We performed bivariate analysis of high- and low-scoring respondents and logistic regression to model characteristics associated with higher diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Of the 162 respondents who started the survey, 76% (123) were included for analysis (22% of solicited emails). Overall, we found wide variation in response accuracy with as few as 62% of respondents correctly classifying certain types of lacerations. Only 49 out of 123 (40%) use the Sultan third-degree subclassification system and 67 out of 123 (52%) continue to use the midline/median approach for episiotomies. Providers reporting fewer deliveries per month and fewer publicly insured patients earned higher scores. CONCLUSIONS: Obstetricians in a nationally representative US perinatal provider network inconsistently identify perineal and nonperineal lacerations. We found important clinical knowledge gaps, suggesting that vaginal delivery diagnoses in obstetric quality studies and pelvic floor research might be inaccurate.

Gallstone ileus in a patient with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A case report.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Gallstone ileus is a rare disease that most commonly occurs in elderly females with a history of cholelithiasis. It has not been previously associated with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS); a neurodegenerative disease that primarily affects the motor neurons at the spinal and bulbar levels. Autonomic malfunction, in particular, gastrointestinal dysfunction has been documented in ALS patients which may predispose this population to the development of gallstones and gut dysmotility. CASE PRESENTATION: In this paper, we report a case of gallstone ileus in a patient with diagnosed ALS. We performed an exploratory laparotomy, enterolithotomy, and an open cholecystectomy with takedown/closure of a cholecystoduodenal fistula. The patient had a relatively uncomplicated postoperative course and was discharged from the hospital on postoperative day nine. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Delays in gastric emptying and colonic transit times in ALS patients may pose a risk for the development of gallstones and the potential impaction of a gallstone ileus in patients who are left untreated. Multifactorial evaluation of this patient population is necessary when assessing a potential causal pattern of gallstone ileus in patients with significant comorbidities. CONCLUSION: We present an unusual pathology without an established incidence, which has pertinent multidisciplinary implications. The suspicion of ALS as a potential cause for the development of a gallstone ileus is relevant and essential in the diagnostic workup for an elderly patient who develops a small bowel obstruction with multi-comorbidities.

Accuracy of obstetric laceration diagnoses in the electronic medical record.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Patient safety data including rates of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) are often derived from hospital discharge codes. With the transition to electronic medical records (EMRs), we hypothesized that electronic provider-entered delivery data would more accurately document obstetric perineal injury than traditional billing/diagnostic codes. METHODS: We evaluated the accuracy of perineal laceration diagnoses after singleton vaginal deliveries during one calendar year at an American tertiary academic medical center. We reviewed the entire hospital chart to determine the most likely laceration diagnosis and compared that expert review diagnosis (ExpRD) with documentation in the EMR delivery summary (EDS) and ICD-9 diagnostic codes (IDCs). RESULTS: We retrospectively selected 354 total delivery records. OASI complicated 56 of those. 303 records (86%) were coded identically by the EDS and IDCs. Diagnoses from the IDCs and the EDS were mostly correct compared with ExpRD (sensitivity = 96%, specificity = 100%). There was no systematic over- or under-diagnosis of OASI for either the EDS (p = 0.070) or the IDCs (p = 0.447). When considering all laceration types the EDS was correct for 21 (5.9%) lacerations that were incorrect according to the IDCs. Overall, the EDS was more accurate (p < 0.05) owing to errors in IDC minor laceration diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic medical record delivery summary data and EMR-derived diagnostic codes similarly characterize OASI. The EDS does not improve OASI reporting, but may be more accurate when considering all perineal lacerations. This assumes that providers have correctly identified and categorized the lacerations that they record in the EMR.

Identification of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) and other lacerations: a national survey of nurse-midwives.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Clinical quality improvement relies on accurate understanding of current practice. We performed a cross-sectional national survey of certified nurse-midwives (CNMs) assessing classification and identification of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) and other delivery lacerations. We hypothesized laceration diagnoses are frequently inaccurate, and delivery records for obstetric lacerations may be of questionable quality. METHODS: We emailed 6909 American College of Nurse Midwives members an internet-based survey link. Of respondents, we included clinically active CNMs who perform at least one delivery per month. We evaluated laceration knowledge and application using standard descriptive text and images and asked about processes for recording lacerations in the delivery record. RESULTS: We received 1070 (15.5%) completed surveys and 832 (77.8%) met inclusion criteria. Over 50% characterized their OASI training and ability to identify OASI as good/excellent. Most (79%) had never attended education review on OASI. The overall accuracy for classification and identification of perineal lacerations ranged from 49 to 99%. Non-perineal lacerations were frequently categorized using the perineal/OASI system. Half of respondents (51%) document their deliveries in an electronic medical record but a quarter (28%) are not personally responsible for approving delivery data. Younger participants without a doctoral degree, with self-assessed good/excellent laceration training, and caring for < 50% publicly insured patients had higher accuracy for laceration identification and diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: We found high rates of inaccurate laceration diagnosis and inappropriate application of the perineal OASI degree system, suggesting education and training are needed. Clinical studies that rely on delivery diagnosis of OASI may not be reliable.

Prevention and Management of Severe Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries (OASIs): a National Survey of Nurse- Midwives.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: There are no data on midwives' knowledge and management of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) in the USA. We performed a cross-sectional national survey characterizing OASI practice by certified nurse midwives (CNMs), hypothesizing that few midwives personally repair OASIs and that there are gaps in CNM OASI training/education. METHODS: We emailed a REDCap internet-based survey to 6909 American College of Nurse Midwives members (ACNM). We analyzed responses from active clinicians performing at least one delivery per month, asking about OASI risks, prevention, repair, and management. We summarized descriptive data then evaluated OASI knowledge by patient and provider characteristics. RESULTS: We received 1070 (15.5%) completed surveys, and 832 (77.8%) met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Participants were similar to ACNM membership. Respondents most frequently identified prior OASI (87%) and nutrition (71%) as antepartum OASI risk factors and, less frequently, nulliparity (36%) and race (22%). Identified intrapartum risks included forceps delivery (94%) and midline episiotomy (88%). When obstetric laceration is suspected, 13.6% of respondents perform a rectal examination routinely. Only 15% of participants personally perform OASI repair. Overall, participants matched 64% of evidence-based answers. OASI education/training courses were attended by 30% of respondents, and 44% knew of OASI protocols within their group/institution. Of all factors evaluated, the percent of evidence-based responses was only different for respondent education/CME and protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Quality initiatives regarding OASI prevention and management may improve care. Our data suggest OASI training for midwives may improve delivery care in the US. Further studies of other obstetric providers are needed.

Contribution of mechanical unloading to trabecular bone loss following non-invasive knee injury in mice.

Development of osteoarthritis commonly involves degeneration of epiphyseal trabecular bone. In previous studies, we observed 30-44% loss of epiphyseal trabecular bone (BV/TV) from the distal femur within 1 week following non-invasive knee injury in mice. Mechanical unloading (disuse) may contribute to this bone loss; however, it is unclear to what extent the injured limb is unloaded following injury, and whether disuse can fully account for the observed magnitude of bone loss. In this study, we investigated the contribution of mechanical unloading to trabecular bone changes observed following non-invasive knee injury in mice (female C57BL/6N). We investigated changes in gait during treadmill walking, and changes in voluntary activity level using Open Field analysis at 4, 14, 28, and 42 days post-injury. We also quantified epiphyseal trabecular bone using µCT and weighed lower-limb muscles to quantify atrophy following knee injury in both ground control and hindlimb unloaded (HLU) mice. Gait analysis revealed a slightly altered stride pattern in the injured limb, with a decreased stance phase and increased swing phase. However, Open Field analysis revealed no differences in voluntary movement between injured and sham mice at any time point. Both knee injury and HLU resulted in comparable magnitudes of trabecular bone loss; however, HLU resulted in considerably more muscle loss than knee injury, suggesting another mechanism contributing to bone loss following injury. Altogether, these data suggest that mechanical unloading likely contributes to trabecular bone loss following non-invasive knee injury, but the magnitude of this bone loss cannot be fully explained by disuse. © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 34:1680-1687, 2016.

Effect of alendronate on post-traumatic osteoarthritis induced by anterior cruciate ligament rupture in mice.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies in animal models of osteoarthritis suggest that alendronate (ALN) has antiresorptive and chondroprotective effects, and can reduce osteophyte formation. However, these studies used non-physiologic injury methods, and did not investigate early time points during which bone is rapidly remodeled prior to cartilage degeneration. The current study utilized a non-invasive model of knee injury in mice to investigate the effect of ALN treatment on subchondral bone changes, articular cartilage degeneration, and osteophyte formation following injury. METHODS: Non-invasive knee injury via tibial compression overload or sham injury was performed on a total of 90 mice. Mice were treated with twice weekly subcutaneous injections of low-dose ALN (40 µg/kg/dose), high-dose ALN (1,000 µg/kg/dose), or vehicle, starting immediately after injury until sacrifice at 7, 14 or 56 days. Trabecular bone of the femoral epiphysis, subchondral cortical bone, and osteophyte volume were quantified using micro-computed tomography (µCT). Whole-joint histology was performed at all time points to analyze articular cartilage and joint degeneration. Blood was collected at sacrifice, and serum was analyzed for biomarkers of bone formation and resorption. RESULTS: µCT analysis revealed significant loss of trabecular bone from the femoral epiphysis 7 and 14 days post-injury, which was effectively prevented by high-dose ALN treatment. High-dose ALN treatment was also able to reduce subchondral bone thickening 56 days post-injury, and was able to partially preserve articular cartilage 14 days post-injury. However, ALN treatment was not able to reduce osteophyte formation at 56 days post-injury, nor was it able to prevent articular cartilage and joint degeneration at this time point. Analysis of serum biomarkers revealed an increase in bone resorption at 7 and 14 days post-injury, with no change in bone formation at any time points. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose ALN treatment was able to prevent early trabecular bone loss and cartilage degeneration following non-invasive knee injury, but was not able to mitigate long-term joint degeneration. These data contribute to understanding the effect of bisphosphonates on the development of osteoarthritis, and may support the use of anti-resorptive drugs to prevent joint degeneration following injury, although further investigation is warranted.