Diagnosis Documentation of Critically Ill Children at Admission to a PICU.

OBJECTIVES: Multidisciplinary PICU teams must effectively share information while caring for critically ill children. Clinical documentation helps clinicians develop a shared understanding of the patient's diagnosis, which informs decision-making. However, diagnosis-related documentation in the PICU is understudied, thus limiting insights into how pediatric intensivists convey their diagnostic reasoning. Our objective was to describe how pediatric critical care clinicians document patients' diagnoses at PICU admission. DESIGN: Retrospective mixed methods study describing diagnosis documentation in electronic health records. SETTING: Academic tertiary referral PICU. PATIENTS: Children 0-17 years old admitted nonelectively to a single PICU over 1 year. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred PICU admission notes for 96 unique patients were reviewed. In 87% of notes, both attending physicians and residents or advanced practice providers documented a primary diagnosis; in 13%, primary diagnoses were documented by residents or advanced practice providers alone. Most diagnoses (72%) were written as narrative free text, 11% were documented as problem lists/billing codes, and 17% used both formats. At least one rationale was documented to justify the primary diagnosis in 91% of notes. Diagnostic uncertainty was present in 52% of notes, most commonly suggested by clinicians' use of words indicating uncertainty (65%) and documentation of differential diagnoses (60%). Clinicians' integration and interpretation of information varied in terms of: 1) organization of diagnosis narratives, 2) use of contextual details to clarify the diagnosis, and 3) expression of diagnostic uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: In this descriptive study, most PICU admission notes documented a rationale for the primary diagnosis and expressed diagnostic uncertainty. Clinicians varied widely in how they organized diagnostic information, used contextual details to clarify the diagnosis, and expressed uncertainty. Future work is needed to determine how diagnosis narratives affect clinical decision-making, patient care, and outcomes.

Comparison between cotton test and tap test for the assessment of coronal syndesmotic instability: A cadaveric study.

INTRODUCTION: In surgically treated rotational malleolar fractures, residual syndesmotic instability is typically assessed following fixation with the widely used intraoperative Cotton test. However, due to its dynamic nature, there are inconsistencies of the magnitude and direction of the distraction force when attempting to pull the fibula away from the tibia using a bone hook. The novel Tap test advances a cortical tap through a drilled hole in the fibula with a stable, unidirectional distraction force applied to the tibia. The objective of this cadaveric study was to compare the Cotton and Tap tests as diagnostic tools for coronal plane syndesmotic instability. METHODS: Tibiofibular Clear Space (TFCS) of 10 cadaveric specimens was measured for: intact, non-stressed; intact, stressed; injured, non-stressed; and injured, stressed (Tap and Cotton tests). In injured conditions, the syndesmotic ligamentous complex was sectioned using an anterolateral longitudinal approach. Perfect fluoroscopic Mortise images were acquired for all conditions. Two independent and blinded Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgeons measured TFCS 1 cm proximal to the ankle joint line. Intra and interobserver reliabilities were assessed by Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. Syndesmotic TFCS values for all conditions were compared by paired Wilcoxon. Diagnostic performance of the Cotton and Tap tests was assessed using a relative increase of TFCS > 2 mm when comparing intact stressed and injured stressed conditions. P-values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient for intraobserver and interobserver reliability was respectively 0.96 and 0.79. TFCS measurements were similar in intact non-stressed, intact stressed (both Cotton and Tap tests) and injured non-stressed conditions, with mean values and 95% Confidence Intervals of: intact non-stressed, 3.5 mm; intact stressed, 3.6 mm (Cotton test) and 4.0 mm (Tap test); injured non-stressed, 3.8 mm. The Cotton test and Tap test had, respectively, 73.3% and 70% sensitivity, 100% and 90% specificity, 86.7% and 80% diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Our cadaveric study compared the Cotton and Tap tests for detection of coronal plane syndesmotic instability. Both tests demonstrated similar increases in the TFCS measurements in stressed injured conditions when compared to intact non-stressed and stressed conditions, as well as injured non-stressed conditions.