Keeping casts dry: A comparison of commercially available cast protectors using a mechanized short arm cast model.

BACKGROUND: Upper extremity fractures requiring cast immobilization are exceedingly common, especially in the pediatric population. Studies have shown improved outcomes when patients can participate in water-based activities while casted. However, waterproof cast material is not feasible in all clinical settings and wet cast complications remain a source of morbidity and expense. External cast protectors play an important role in preventing wet casts, but the efficacy of various commercially available brands during relevant water-based activity remains unknown. PURPOSES: To determine if there are differences in the rate and extent of moisture exposure for four commercially available cast protectors using a mechanized cast arm model and human volunteers. METHODS: A mechanized arm model was developed with four implanted humidity sensors. Cast protectors were applied over the arm, the model was submerged in water, and moved back and forth, simulating cast-wearers' motion. Data regarding humidity was recorded for successive 10-minute trials. Trials were analyzed using a mixed effects linear model to determine change in humidity over time. The top and bottom performing cast protectors were then applied to four adult volunteers prior to thirty minutes of swimming. Questionnaires regarding comfort and a qualitative assessment of cast wetness using a chemical color indicator were completed. RESULTS: 372 instances of sensor data from 96 10-minute trials was collected. The CVS, SealTight and Walgreens brands showed significant increases in humidity beginning at 10, 20 and 20 minutes, respectively. DryPro showed no significant increase in moisture level up to 50 minutes. In successive trials up to 120 minutes, DryPro showed only a 2% increase in moisture. In human subjects testing, 3/4 casts underneath CVS protectors had some degree of wetness-related color change that would require cast change as compared to 0/4 casts underneath DryPro protectors. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist between commercially available cast protectors. Vacuum-sealed protectors performed best in both mechanical and human subject portions of this study and allowed minimal change in humidity for extended periods of sequential water immersion. Their cost is notably less than management of a wet cast. Lower-performing products may expose cast-wearers to an increased risk of wet cast complications.

The Effect of an Orthopaedic Surgeon's Attire on Patient Perceptions of Surgeon Traits and Identity: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

INTRODUCTION: In orthopaedic surgery, limited research is available addressing how attire, including white coats (WC) and feminine attire such as skirts, affects patient perceptions. It is unknown how surgeon appearance is associated with identification as a surgeon and perception of clinical skills, nor whether this differs between male and female surgeons. METHODS: An image-based survey was offered to all adult patients in four orthopaedic surgeons' sport medicine or foot and ankle clinics. Respondents viewed 10 photos of male and female models in varying attire and identified that individual's most likely role on the healthcare team. Then, in 10 photos pairs, respondents selected which surgeon showed more competence, ability to excel in performing the physical components of surgery, likelihood to provide a good surgical outcome, and trustworthiness. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-eight patients participated in the survey. Men were identified as surgeons significantly more frequently than women in similar clothing (P < 0.05) for all attire except a business attire without a WC (men: 18.2% vs women: 11.2%; P = 0.252). Patients ranked physicians wearing a WC with any attire as more competent and more likely to give a good surgical outcome than those without (all P < 0.005). Patients found women in feminine attire significantly less likely to excel in performing the physical parts of surgery than women in scrubs (P = 0.001). DISCUSSION: Women surgeons who wear feminine business attire instead of scrubs may be perceived less able to perform the physical work of operating, but are otherwise rated comparably with their peers, both male and female. Surgeons wearing WC are generally perceived more favorably than those without WC, an effect that is magnified for perceptions of competence for female surgeons. Men are more readily identified as surgeons than women when wearing a similar attire, except for a business attire without WC. There are continuing differences in how patients perceive male and female orthopaedic surgeons based on their attire.