Frequent Sural Nerve Injury with Posterior Approach for Ankle Fracture Fixation.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to report the incidence of iatrogenic sural nerve injury in a large, consecutive sample of surgically managed ankle fractures and to identify factors associated with sural nerve injury and subsequent recovery. We hypothesize that a direct posterior approach may be associated with higher risk of iatrogenic sural nerve injury. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 265 skeletally mature patients who sustained ankle fractures over a 2-year period was done. All were treated with open reduction and internal fixation of fractured malleoli. Patient, injury, and treatment features were documented. The presence (n = 26, 9.8%) of sural nerve injury and recovery of sural nerve function were noted. RESULTS: All 26 sural nerve injuries were iatrogenic, occurring postoperatively after open reduction and internal fixation. Patients who sustained sural nerve injuries had more ankle fractures secondary to motor vehicle collisions (23.1% versus 9.2%), more associated trimalleolar fractures (69.2% versus 33.9%), and more Orthopaedic Trauma Association/AO 44B3 fractures (57.7% versus 25.1%), all P < 0.05. A posterior approach to the posterior malleolus through the prone position was used in 20.4% of patients. All 26 of the sural nerve injuries (100%) occurred when the patient was placed prone for a posterior approach, P < 0.001. Therefore, 26 of the 54 patients (48%) treated with a posterior approach sustained an iatrogenic sural nerve injury. 62% of patients had full recovery of sural nerve function with no residual numbness, and patients with nerve recovery had fewer associated fracture-dislocations (23.1% versus 100%, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: A posterior approach for posterior malleolus fixation was associated with a 48% iatrogenic sural nerve injury rate, with 62% recovering full function within 6 months of injury. Morbidity of this approach should be considered, and surgeons should be cautious with nerve handling. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Therapeutic.

Fractures in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: Findings From a 20-year Registry at a Single Level 1 Trauma Center.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a risk factor of infection. Although DM has been associated with worse functional outcomes after acetabular fracture, literature regarding the effect of DM on surgical site infection and other early complications is lacking. METHODS: A 20-year registry from a level 1 trauma center was queried to identify 134 patients with DM and 345 nondiabetic patients with acetabular fractures. RESULTS: The diabetic patient population was older (57.2 versus 43.2; P < 0.001) and had higher average body mass index (33.6 versus 29.5; P < 0.001). Eighty-three patients with DM and 270 nondiabetics were treated surgically (62% versus 78%; P < 0.001). Diabetic patients who were younger (54.6 versus 61.4; P = 0.01) with fewer comorbidities (1.7 versus 2.2; P = 0.04) were more frequently managed surgically. On univariate analysis, patients with DM more commonly developed any early infection (28.4% versus 21%; P = 0.049) but were no more likely to develop surgical site infection, or other postoperative complications. Older patient age, length of stay, baseline pulmonary disease, and concurrent abdominal injury were independent predictors of postoperative infection other than surgical site infection. Diabetics that developed infection had more comorbidities (2.4 versus 1.5; P < 0.001) and higher Injury Severity Score (24.1 versus 15.8; P = 0.003), and were more frequently insulin-dependent (72.7% versus 41%; P = 0.01). DISCUSSION: Independent of management strategy, diabetic patients were more likely to develop an infection after acetabular fracture. Insulin dependence was associated with postoperative infection on univariate analysis. Optimal selection of surgical candidates among patients with DM may limit postoperative infections.

Research priorities for the management of major trauma: an international priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine research priorities for the management of major trauma, representing the shared priorities of patients, their families, carers and healthcare professionals. DESIGN/SETTING: An international research priority-setting partnership. PARTICIPANTS: People who have experienced major trauma, their carers and relatives, and healthcare professionals involved in treating patients after major trauma. The scope included chest, abdominal and pelvic injuries as well as major bleeding, multiple injuries and those that threaten life or limb. METHODS: A multiphase priority-setting exercise was conducted in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 24 months (November 2021-October 2023). An international survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties which were then combined into several indicative questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not already been sufficiently answered. A second international survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 19 questions was taken to a stakeholder workshop, where consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities. RESULTS: A total of 1572 uncertainties, submitted by 417 respondents (including 132 patients and carers), were received during the initial survey. These were refined into 53 unique indicative questions, of which all 53 were judged to be true uncertainties after reviewing the existing evidence. 373 people (including 115 patients and carers) responded to the interim prioritisation survey and 19 questions were taken to a final consensus workshop between patients, carers and healthcare professionals. At the final workshop, a consensus was reached for the ranking of the top 10 questions. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 research priorities for major trauma include patient-centred questions regarding pain relief and prehospital management, multidisciplinary working, novel technologies, rehabilitation and holistic support. These shared priorities will now be used to guide funders and teams wishing to research major trauma around the globe.

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.

Hip Fracture Repair by the Post-Call Surgeon: A Multicenter Retrospective Review.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate surgeons' ability to perform or supervise a standard operation with agreed-upon radiologic parameters after being on call. METHODS: We reviewed a consecutive series of patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with a fixed angle device at 9 centers and compared corrected tip-apex distance and reduction quality for post-call surgeons versus those who were not. Subgroup analyses included surgeons who operated the night before versus not and attending-only versus resident involved cases. Secondary outcomes included union and perioperative complications. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred fourteen patients were of average age 77 years. Post-call surgeons treated 823 patients and control surgeons treated 891. Surgical corrected tip-apex distance did not differ between groups: on-call 18 mm versus control 18 mm (P = 0.59). The Garden indices were 160° on the AP and 179° on the lateral in both groups. In 66 cases performed by surgeons who operated the night before, the TAD was 17 mm. No difference was noted in corrected tip-apex distance with and without resident involvement (P = 0.101). No difference was observed in pooled fracture-related complications (P = 0.23). CONCLUSION: Post-call surgeons demonstrated no difference in quality and no increase in complications when performing hip fracture repair the next day compared with surgeons who were not on call.

Complications and Outcomes After Fixation of Lisfranc Injuries at an Urban Level 1 Trauma Center.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patients with tarsometatarsal fractures and dislocations and describe complications and secondary operations. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Consecutive adults treated acutely for Lisfranc injuries with reduction and fixation using standard techniques of rigid medial fixation and flexible lateral fixation. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Complications include infections, wound healing problems, nonunion, malunion, and posttraumatic arthrosis (PTA), and secondary unplanned procedures after a minimum of 2-year radiographic follow-up. RESULTS: Mean age of the included 118 patients was 40 years (range, 18-73 years) and 96 (74%) were male. Comorbidities included obesity (n = 32; 40%), diabetes mellitus (n = 12; 9%), and tobacco use (n = 67; 52%). Thirty (23%) were open injuries, and concomitant forefoot injuries were present in 47% and hindfoot injuries in 12%. Unplanned secondary procedures, including implant removals, were performed on 39 patients (33%), most often for removal of painful implants (26%) or infectious debridement (9%). Sixty-seven complications occurred, with PTA most frequent (37%). Deep infections occurred in 8%. On multivariate analysis, open injury ( P = 0.028, CI = 1.22-30.63, OR = 6.12) and concomitant forefoot injury ( P = 0.03, CI = 1.12-9.76, OR = 3.31) were independent risk factors for complication. CONCLUSIONS: Open Lisfranc injuries were associated with complications, with deep infections occurring in 9%. Secondary procedures were most often performed for pain relief; the most common late complication was PTA, warranting counseling of patients about potential long-term sequelae of injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

Associations of musculoskeletal dysfunction, time to brake, and patient reported outcomes following lower extremity trauma.

INTRODUCTION: Inability to drive a motor vehicle due to lower extremity injury is a major inconvenience. Timing of safe return to driving has not been much studied. Objective measurements such as time to brake (TTB) have been proposed; however, utility and concordance of functional outcome measurements have not been previously evaluated. The purpose of this project is to measure these parameters and to assess for associations with ability to safely return to driving, improving the ability of clinicians to assess for measurements of driving readiness without specifically measuring TTB. METHODS: A prospective, cohort study of 232 patients with complex lower extremity injuries to the pelvis, acetabulum, hip, femur, knee, tibia, ankle, and foot was performed. Time to brake (TTB) was measured once weightbearing was allowed. Function was assessed by the Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (MFA) questionnaire, and pain, mobility, and physical functions, via patient reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) surveys. RESULTS: Patients with longer TTB had significantly elevated MFA scores indicating increased musculoskeletal dysfunction post-injury. As the MFA score increased by 1 point, TTB increased by 0.013 s (p<0.001). PROMIS metrics were also significantly associated with patients experiencing more pain and worse mobility as TTB increased. DISCUSSION: Many patients continue to exhibit musculoskeletal dysfunction several months post-treatment for complex lower extremity injuries. Patients with better PROMIS metrics and MFA scores, and shorter TTB are more appropriate to return to driving. Surgeons may be better informed about safe driving ability by considering these measurements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Identifying Risk Factors for Osteonecrosis After Talar Fracture.

OBJECTIVE: To identify patient, injury, and treatment factors associated with the development of avascular necrosis (AVN) after talar fractures, with particular interest in modifiable factors. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: 21 US trauma centers and 1 UK trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients with talar neck and/or body fractures from 2008 through 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Only patients who were at least 18 years of age with fractures of the talar neck or body and minimum 12 months follow-up or earlier diagnosis of AVN were included. Further exclusion criteria included non-operatively treated fractures, pathologic fractures, pantalar dislocations, and fractures treated with primary arthrodesis or primary amputation. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND COMPARISONS: The primary outcome measure was development of AVN. Infection, nonunion, and arthritis were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 798 patients (409 men; 389 women; age 18-81 years, average 38.6 years) with 798 (532 right; 264 left) fractures were included and were classified as Hawkins I (51), IIA (71), IIB (113), III (158), IV (40), neck plus body (177), and body (188). In total, 336 of 798 developed AVN (42%), more commonly after any neck fracture (47.0%) versus isolated body fracture (26.1%, P < 0.001). More severe Hawkins classification, combined neck and body fractures, body mass index, tobacco smoking, right-sided fractures, open fracture, dual anteromedial and anterolateral surgical approaches, and associated medial malleolus fracture were associated with AVN ( P < 0.05). After multivariate regression, fracture type, tobacco smoking, open fractures, dual approaches, age, and body mass index remained significant ( P < 0.05). Excluding late cases (>7 days), time to joint reduction for Hawkins type IIB-IV neck injuries was no different for those who developed AVN or not. AVN rates for reduction of dislocations within 6 hours of injury versus >6 hours were 48.8% and 57.5%, respectively. Complications included 60 (7.5%) infections and 70 (8.8%) nonunions. CONCLUSIONS: Forty-two percent of all talar fracture patients developed AVN, with talar neck fractures, more displaced fractures, and open injuries having higher rates. Injury-related factors are most prognostic of AVN risk. Surgical technique to emphasize anatomic reduction, without iatrogenic damage to remaining blood supply appears to be prudent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Postmobilization Plain Radiography After Lateral Compression Type 1 Pelvic Ring Injury Does Not Affect Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to describe the practice of postmobilization radiography after lateral compression type 1 pelvis ring injury. We hypothesized that postmobilization radiographs would be more frequent over time and would not influence treatment. METHODS: Displacement of pelvis ring injury on initial and final plain radiographs was measured. Frequency of postmobilization radiography was determined, and the impact on treatment and final radiographical outcome were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 156 patients reviewed, 98 (62.8%) were women and mean age was 60.1 years. Thirty-three of 156 patients (21.2%) had a postmobilization radiograph. Over 5 years, radiographs increased to 67% of presenting patients. None of the patients who received postmobilization plain radiographs (n = 33) had any change in clinical plan afterward; all continued with nonsurgical care. Initial fracture characteristics and alignment were no different for patients with postmobilization radiographs. Final alignment was unchanged in nearly 70%. Overall, 74% of all nonsurgical patients experienced no change in alignment, with similar rates among the patients with postmobilization radiographs. DISCUSSION: Patients with an lateral compression type 1 fracture demonstrated no changes in care after receiving postmobilization radiographs. However, the frequency of postmobilization radiographs increased over time, denoting opportunities to reduce costs and to improve efficiency and safety.

Acetabular fractures in elderly patients are associated with high rates of complications during the initial admission.

Background: Acetabular fractures among the elderly are common. Identification of risk factors predisposing elderly patients to in-hospital complications is critical to mitigating morbidity and mortality. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed including 195 patients ≥60 years old who sustained acetabulum fractures treated at a single level 1 trauma center. Operative (n=110, 56.4%) or non-operative management was undertaken, and complications during the index hospitalization were defined. Results: Seventy-three patients (37%) developed a complication during their hospitalization. Most common complications were acute respiratory failure: 13.3%, pneumonia: 10.3%, urinary tract infection: 10.3%, cardiac dysrhythmia: 9.7%, and acute kidney injury: 6.2%. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with in-hospital complications were increased age (adjusted OR (AOR): 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.11, p=0.013), more comorbidities (AOR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.65, p=0.024), operative management (AOR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.76, p=0.011), and increased length of stay (AOR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.2 to 1.51, p<0.001). Conclusions: Acetabular fractures in the elderly are associated with high rates of in-hospital complications. Advanced age, more medical comorbidities and longer lengths of stay predicted higher risk of developing complications. Whereas operative management was associated with lower risk of developing complications during the initial admission, it is important to note the selection bias in which healthier patients with improved baseline functionality may be more likely to undergo operative management. Level of evidence: Level III therapeutic.

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.

Appointment wait times for surgical care in the Veterans Health Administration and Community Care Program.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration has been criticized for long wait times; however, studies indicate that Veterans Health Administration wait times are shorter than those for the Veterans Health Administration's Community Care Program. Previous studies have analyzed primary care wait times, but few have compared surgical specialties. METHODS: Using a publicly available data set of veteran appointments compiled from the Veterans Health Administration's Corporate Data Warehouse, a nationally representative database containing 623,868 surgical consults from January 1 to June 30, 2021, mean differences in wait times between the Veterans Health Administration and the Community Care Program were calculated across surgical specialties. RESULTS: In total, 49.6% of the surgical consults placed during the study period were for the Community Care Program. Across all surgical specialties, wait times were shorter in the Veterans Health Administration. Cardiothoracic surgery had the shortest mean wait times (23.1 days Veterans Health Administration; 30.0 days Community Care Program). The greatest difference in wait times was observed in plastic surgery, with Community Care Program appointments occurring 15.8 days later than Veterans Health Administration appointments on average. CONCLUSION: Across all surgical specialties, the Veterans Health Administration had shorter wait times than the Community Care Program during the study period.

Comparisons of Procedures Performed in Training vs in Early Practice by Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: The Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) has maintained an accreditation process of orthopaedic trauma fellowships with various requirements including an annually reviewed list of qualifying trauma cases in the form of American Medical Association Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. The correlation between these established and monitored CPTs and the actual practices of orthopaedic trauma surgeons has not been studied. METHODS: American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery part II case logs (trauma subspecialty) (2012 to 2018) were compared with OTA fellowship case logs (2015 to 2019). Case logs from 447 surgeons and 166 trauma fellowship programs were compared. Four CPT code categories were defined: complex trauma (OTA required CPT codes, excluding Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education [ACGME] orthopaedic residency requirements), general trauma (ACGME residency required trauma codes), general orthopaedics (nontrauma ACGME residency requirements), and others (codes not included in residency or trauma fellowship requirements). RESULTS: OTA fellows performed a higher median percentage of complex trauma compared with American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery candidates (34% vs. 21%, P < 0.001): Both cohorts performed a similar percentage of general trauma (23%). OTA fellows performed more general orthopaedics (40% vs. 1%, P < 0.001). Several OTA required codes were performed infrequently (0 to 3 during board collection) by most surgeons, and several procedures are being performed that are not included in current CPT code requirements. DISCUSSION: Early-career traumatologists are performing orthopaedic trauma procedures they were trained on during residency and fellowship, with varying complexity. Trauma fellows perform a higher percentage of complex trauma compared with early-career trauma surgeons. Continued surveillance is necessary such that educational improvements can be made to maximize the quality of trauma fellowship education. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

Education via a mobile application improves health literacy after orthopaedic trauma.

OBJECTIVES: Health literacy is often poor among trauma patients. We introduced an educational mobile application to newly injured patients. We hypothesized that patients who utilized the app would be more informed about their injury and treatment recommendations, and that app users would demonstrate greater adherence to treatment recommendations. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma centerPatients/participants: Adult patients with acute orthopaedic injury. INTERVENTION: App with educational information about injuries, treatment, and recovery. bit.ly/traumaapp. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Survey regarding knowledge about injury and treatment, and adherence to recommendations. RESULTS: 339 patients were enrolled: 187 received information about the app; 105 of them used the app. Another 234 patients had no prior knowledge about the app. App users were more often female (56.2% vs. 37.6%, p=0.002). App users were more likely to have completed college (34.3% vs. 13.7%, p<0.0001). Better health literacy was noted among app users in all measurements, including knowledge of: fracture location (69% vs. 39%, p<0.0001), treatment (100% vs. 93%, p=0.002), weightbearing status (96% vs. 88%, p=0.001), estimated healing time (63% vs. 26%, p<0.0001), and DVT prophylaxis (93% vs. 81%, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who used the app were more likely to have accurate knowledge in all assessed categories, with over 99% reporting adherence to weightbearing recommendations. It is probable that this level of knowledge and engagement will enhance various outcomes after injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Functional Outcomes After High-Energy Lisfranc Injuries.

BACKGROUND: Midfoot fractures and dislocations are infrequent and functional outcomes following Lisfranc injuries have not been well described. The purpose of this project was to explore functional outcomes following operative treatment of high-energy Lisfranc injury. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 46 adults with tarsometatarsal fractures and dislocations treated at a single Level 1 trauma center were reviewed. Demographic, medical, social, and injury features of these patients and their injuries were recorded. Foot Function Index (FFI) and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) surveys were collected after mean 8.7 years' follow-up. Multiple linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of outcome. RESULTS: Forty-six patients with mean age 39.7 years completed functional outcome surveys. Mean SMFA scores were 29.3 (dysfunction) and 32.6 (bothersome). Mean FFI scores were 43.1 (pain), 43.0 (disability), and 21.7 (activity), with a mean total score of 35.9. FFI pain scores were worse than published values for fractures of the plafond (33, P = .04), distal tibia (33, P = .04), and talus (25.3, P = .001). Lisfranc injury patients reported worse disability (43.0 vs 29, P = .008) and total FFI scores (35.9 vs 26, P = .02) compared with distal tibia fractures. Tobacco smoking was an independent predictor of worse FFI (P < .05) and SMFA emotion and bothersome scores (P < .04). Chronic renal disease was a predictor of worse FFI disability (P = .04) and SMFA subcategory scores (P < .04). Male sex was associated with better scores in all SMFA categories (P < .04). Age, obesity, or open injury did not affect functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients reported worse pain by FFI after Lisfranc injury compared to other injuries about the foot and ankle. Tobacco smoking, female sex, and preexisting chronic renal disease are predictive of worse functional outcome scores, warranting further study in a larger sample, as well as counseling of long-term consequences of this injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective, 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.