An initiative to assess and improve the resources and patient care processes used among Chest Wall Injury Society collaborative centers study (CWIS-CC2).

BACKGROUND: Over the last two decades, the acute management of rib fractures has changed significantly. In 2021, the Chest Wall injury Society (CWIS) began recognizing centers that epitomize their mission as CWIS Collaborative Centers. The primary aim of this study was to determine the resources, surgical expertise, access to care, and institutional support that are present among centers. METHODS: A survey was performed including all CWIS Collaborative Centers evaluating the resources available at their hospital for the treatment of patients with chest wall injury. Data about each chest wall injury center care process, availability of resources, institutional support, research support, and educational offerings were recorded. RESULTS: Data were collected from 20 trauma centers resulting in an 80% response rate. These trauma centers were made up of 5 international and 15 US-based trauma centers. Eighty percent (16 of 20) have dedicated care team members for the evaluation and management of rib fractures. Twenty-five percent (5 of 20) have a dedicated rib fracture service with a separate call schedule. Staffing for chest wall injury clinics consists of a multidisciplinary team: with attending surgeons in all clinics, 80% (8 of 10) with advanced practice providers and 70% (7 of 10) with care coordinators. Forty percent (8 of 20) of centers have dedicated rib fracture research support, and 35% (7 of 20) have surgical stabilization of rib fracture (SSRF)-related grants. Forty percent (8 of 20) of centers have marketing support, and 30% (8 of 20) have a web page support to bring awareness to their center. At these trauma centers, a median of 4 (1-9) surgeons perform SSRFs. In the majority of trauma centers, the trauma surgeons perform SSRF. CONCLUSION: Considerable similarities and differences exist within these CWIS collaborative centers. These differences in resources are hypothesis generating in determining the optimal chest wall injury center. These findings may generate several patient care and team process questions to optimize patient care, patient experience, provider satisfaction, research productivity, education, and outreach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level V.

The evolution of a chest wall injury and reconstruction clinic during a pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, we sought to develop a chest wall injury and reconstruction clinic (CWIRC) to treat patients with chest wall pain and rib fractures. This initiative was fueled by the recognition of an unmet need and evolving research demonstrating improved patient care and experience. We will describe the evolution of this clinic program from an acute care surgery/general surgery (ACS/GS) clinic to a CWIRC. METHODS: We identified outpatient encounters generated from a general surgery clinic staffed by a physician and nurse practitioner team. A retrospective cohort review was performed to identify all outpatient encounters and surgeries associated with these encounters from January 1, 2017, to November 30, 2021. Outpatient and operative work relative value unit (wRVU) production as well as payer mix was compared as the primary outcome. RESULTS: Over this time period, the number of clinic interactions decreased (2017-284 vs. 2021-229). Clinic productivity increased however from 181 wRVUs in 2017 to 295 wRVUs in 2021. The CWIRC patient visits increased from 4% to 70%. In addition, telehealth visits increased from 0% to 23% of encounters. The operative wRVU productivity attributable to outpatient clinic visits increased (2017-253 vs. 2021-591). Combined, the CWIRC resulted in an overall growth of 104% in total wRVUs. The payer mixes for patients with rib diagnosis have a higher number of Blue Cross Blue Shield, Medicare, and Managed Care compared with ACS/GS. The most common diagnosis was rib fracture initial evaluation (37%), rib fracture subsequent encounter (25%), rib pain (24%), and flail chest initial evaluation (4%). CONCLUSION: The initiation of a CWIRC increased wRVU production despite a decrease in clinical encounters. These clinics may produce more wRVUs per encounter than ACS/GS clinics. An underserved population has been identified of chest wall pathology patients presenting for initial evaluation as outpatients. Further investigation into this concept is warranted to serve this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

The inversion of aragonite to calcite during the sampling of skeletal archives: implications for proxy interpretation.

RATIONALE: Understanding changes in Earth's oceans and climate requires the reliable application of paleo-proxies. However, inconsistencies between individual δ(18) O records within biogenic specimens commonly have significant impacts on environmental reconstructions. This study addresses the stable isotope variability associated with sample milling from aragonitic organisms commonly used for paleoclimate studies. METHODS: Aragonite samples were hand-ground and milled from sclerosponge, coral, and mollusc specimens using a computerized micromill. An X-ray diffractometer was used to analyze sample mineralogy prior to measurement of δ(18) O and δ(13) C values via isotope ratio mass spectrometry of CO2 gases provided from the samples by a Kiel III device. Possible influences on the Sr/Ca ratios were assessed on a sclerosponge through paired elemental analysis by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry. RESULTS: Analyses revealed up to 36% inversion to calcite in milled samples that correlated with a decrease in the δ(18) O value of 0.02 ‰ per 1% inversion. Replicate sclerosponge transects yielded similar trends in δ(13) C values and Sr/Ca ratios, although the δ(18) O values showed irregular variations consistent with those measured for the inversion of individual organisms during milling. CONCLUSIONS: While the δ(13) C values and Sr/Ca ratios of milled samples were largely consistent, the δ(18) O values co-varied with the inversion of aragonite to calcite suggesting significant implications for the resulting temperature and salinity reconstructions from aragonitic archives. The effect appears to be density-driven and, given that the skeletal density tends to vary seasonally in organisms such as corals, would subsequently mask temperature-induced changes in skeletal δ(18) O values.