Healthcare avoidance during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and all-cause mortality: a longitudinal community-based study.

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, global trends of reduced healthcare-seeking behaviour were observed. This raises concerns about the consequences of healthcare avoidance for population health. Aim To determine the association between healthcare avoidance during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and all-cause mortality. Design and setting 32-month follow-up within the population-based Rotterdam Study, after sending a COVID-19 questionnaire at the onset of the pandemic in April 2020 to all non-institutionalised participants (response rate 73%). Method Cox proportional hazards models assessed the risk of all-cause mortality among respondents who avoided healthcare because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mortality status was collected through municipality registries and medical records. Results Of 5656 respondents, one-fifth avoided healthcare due to the COVID-19 pandemic (N=1143). Compared to non-avoiders, those who avoided healthcare more often reported symptoms of depression (31.2% versus 12.3%) and anxiety (29.7% versus 12.2%), and more often valued their health as poor to fair (29.4% versus 10.1%). Healthcare avoiders had an increased adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.30; 95%CI 1.01-1.67), which remained nearly identical after adjustment for history of any non-communicable disease (1.20;0.93-1.54). However, this association attenuated after additional adjustment for mental and self-appreciated health factors (0.96;0.74-1.24). Conclusion We found an increased risk of all-cause mortality among individuals who avoided healthcare during COVID-19. These individuals were characterised by poor mental and physical self-appreciated health. Therefore, interventions should be targeted to these vulnerable individuals to safeguard their access to primary and specialist care in order to limit health disparities, inside and beyond healthcare crises.

The Rotterdam Study. Design update and major findings between 2020 and 2024.

The Rotterdam Study is a population-based cohort study, started in 1990 in the district of Ommoord in the city of Rotterdam, the Netherlands, with the aim to describe the prevalence and incidence, unravel the etiology, and identify targets for prediction, prevention or intervention of multifactorial diseases in mid-life and elderly. The study currently includes 17,931 participants (overall response rate 65%), aged 40 years and over, who are examined in-person every 3 to 5 years in a dedicated research facility, and who are followed-up continuously through automated linkage with health care providers, both regionally and nationally. Research within the Rotterdam Study is carried out along two axes. First, research lines are oriented around diseases and clinical conditions, which are reflective of medical specializations. Second, cross-cutting research lines transverse these clinical demarcations allowing for inter- and multidisciplinary research. These research lines generally reflect subdomains within epidemiology. This paper describes recent methodological updates and main findings from each of these research lines. Also, future perspective for coming years highlighted.

Sex-specific patterns and lifetime risk of multimorbidity in the general population: a 23-year prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity poses a major challenge for care coordination. However, data on what non-communicable diseases lead to multimorbidity, and whether the lifetime risk differs between men and women are lacking. We determined sex-specific differences in multimorbidity patterns and estimated sex-specific lifetime risk of multimorbidity in the general population. METHODS: We followed 6,094 participants from the Rotterdam Study aged 45 years and older for the occurrence of ten diseases (cancer, coronary heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, diabetes, dementia, asthma, heart failure, parkinsonism). We visualised participants' trajectories from a single disease to multimorbidity and the most frequent combinations of diseases. We calculated sex-specific lifetime risk of multimorbidity, considering multimorbidity involving only somatic diseases (1) affecting the same organ system, (2) affecting different organ systems, and (3) multimorbidity involving depression. RESULTS: Over the follow-up period (1993-2016, median years of follow-up 9.2), we observed 6334 disease events. Of the study population, 10.3% had three or more diseases, and 27.9% had two or more diseases. The most frequent pair of co-occurring diseases among men was COPD and cancer (12.5% of participants with multimorbidity), the most frequent pair of diseases among women was depression and dementia (14.9%). The lifetime risk of multimorbidity was similar among men (66.0%, 95% CI: 63.2-68.8%) and women (65.1%, 95% CI: 62.5-67.7%), yet the risk of multimorbidity with depression was higher for women (30.9%, 95% CI: 28.4-33.5%, vs. 17.5%, 95% CI: 15.2-20.1%). The risk of multimorbidity with two diseases affecting the same organ is relatively low for both sexes (4.2% (95% CI: 3.2-5.5%) for men and 4.5% (95% CI: 3.5-5.7%) for women). CONCLUSIONS: Two thirds of people over 45 will develop multimorbidity in their remaining lifetime, with women at nearly double the risk of multimorbidity involving depression than men. These findings call for programmes of integrated care to consider sex-specific differences to ensure men and women are served equally.

Prevalence and determinants of healthcare avoidance during the COVID-19 pandemic: A population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the number of consultations and diagnoses in primary care and referrals to specialist care declined substantially compared to prepandemic levels. Beyond deferral of elective non-COVID-19 care by healthcare providers, it is unclear to what extent healthcare avoidance by community-dwelling individuals contributed to this decline in routine healthcare utilisation. Moreover, it is uncertain which specific symptoms were left unheeded by patients and which determinants predispose to healthcare avoidance in the general population. In this cross-sectional study, we assessed prevalence of healthcare avoidance during the pandemic from a patient perspective, including symptoms that were left unheeded, as well as determinants of healthcare avoidance. METHODS AND FINDINGS: On April 20, 2020, a paper COVID-19 survey addressing healthcare utilisation, socioeconomic factors, mental and physical health, medication use, and COVID-19-specific symptoms was sent out to 8,732 participants from the population-based Rotterdam Study (response rate 73%). All questionnaires were returned before July 10, 2020. By hand, prevalence of healthcare avoidance was subsequently verified through free text analysis of medical records of general practitioners. Odds ratios (ORs) for avoidance were determined using logistic regression models, adjusted for age, sex, and history of chronic diseases. We found that 1,142 of 5,656 included participants (20.2%) reported having avoided healthcare. Of those, 414 participants (36.3%) reported symptoms that potentially warranted urgent evaluation, including limb weakness (13.6%), palpitations (10.8%), and chest pain (10.2%). Determinants related to avoidance were older age (adjusted OR 1.14 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.21]), female sex (1.58 [1.38 to 1.82]), low educational level (primary education versus higher vocational/university 1.21 [1.01 to 1.46), poor self-appreciated health (per level decrease 2.00 [1.80 to 2.22]), unemployment (versus employed 2.29 [1.54 to 3.39]), smoking (1.34 [1.08 to 1.65]), concern about contracting COVID-19 (per level increase 1.28 [1.19 to 1.38]) and symptoms of depression (per point increase 1.13 [1.11 to 1.14]) and anxiety (per point increase 1.16 [1.14 to 1.18]). Study limitations included uncertainty about (perceived) severity of the reported symptoms and potentially limited generalisability given the ethnically homogeneous study population. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based cross-sectional study, 1 in 5 individuals avoided healthcare during lockdown in the COVID-19 pandemic, often for potentially urgent symptoms. Healthcare avoidance was strongly associated with female sex, fragile self-appreciated health, and high levels of depression and anxiety. These results emphasise the need for targeted public education urging these vulnerable patients to timely seek medical care for their symptoms to mitigate major health consequences.

Design, implementation and initial findings of COVID-19 research in the Rotterdam Study: leveraging existing infrastructure for population-based investigations on an emerging disease.

The Rotterdam Study is an ongoing prospective, population-based cohort study that started in 1989 in the city of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The study aims to unravel etiology, preclinical course, natural history and potential targets for intervention for chronic diseases in mid-life and late-life. It focuses on cardiovascular, endocrine, hepatic, neurological, ophthalmic, psychiatric, dermatological, otolaryngological, locomotor, and respiratory diseases. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a substudy was designed and embedded within the Rotterdam Study. On the 20th of April, 2020, all living non-institutionalized participants of the Rotterdam Study (n = 8732) were invited to participate in this sub-study by filling out a series of questionnaires administered over a period of 8 months. These questionnaires included questions on COVID-19 related symptoms and risk factors, characterization of lifestyle and mental health changes, and determination of health care seeking and health care avoiding behavior during the pandemic. As of May 2021, the questionnaire had been sent out repeatedly for a total of six times with an overall response rate of 76%. This article provides an overview of the rationale, design, and implementation of this sub-study nested within the Rotterdam Study. Finally, initial results on participant characteristics and prevalence of COVID-19 in this community-dwelling population are shown.

Ethical Considerations in Screening for Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Behavior Disorder in the General Population.

Clinical studies have shown that up to 90% of patients with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (RBD) will eventually be diagnosed with a clinical α-synucleinopathy. Because of this high conversion rate, screening for RBD is often performed to identify eligible participants for studies aimed at elucidating the prodromal phase of α-synucleinopathies. However, screening for RBD, especially in the general population, raises many ethical dilemmas. In light of the existing ethical literature and our experience in establishing a screening approach for RBD in the Rotterdam Study, we discuss ethical dilemmas when screening for RBD in population-based studies. We conclude that informing study participants about the reason for invitation and the possible trajectory that lies ahead when participating is essential. However, participants should not be troubled unnecessarily by giving them detailed information about possible diagnoses or associated disease risks. © 2020 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Objectives, design and main findings until 2020 from the Rotterdam Study.

The Rotterdam Study is an ongoing prospective cohort study that started in 1990 in the city of Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The study aims to unravel etiology, preclinical course, natural history and potential targets for intervention for chronic diseases in mid-life and late-life. The study focuses on cardiovascular, endocrine, hepatic, neurological, ophthalmic, psychiatric, dermatological, otolaryngological, locomotor, and respiratory diseases. As of 2008, 14,926 subjects aged 45 years or over comprise the Rotterdam Study cohort. Since 2016, the cohort is being expanded by persons aged 40 years and over. The findings of the Rotterdam Study have been presented in over 1700 research articles and reports. This article provides an update on the rationale and design of the study. It also presents a summary of the major findings from the preceding 3 years and outlines developments for the coming period.

Serum magnesium, hepatocyte nuclear factor 1ß genotype and post-transplant diabetes mellitus: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies suggest that tacrolimus-induced hypomagnesaemia is a risk factor for post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM), but prospective studies are lacking. METHODS: This was a prospective study with measurements of serum magnesium and tacrolimus at pre-specified time points in the first year after living donor kidney transplantation (KT). The role of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in hepatocyte nuclear factor 1ß (HNF1ß) was also explored because HNF1ß regulates insulin secretion and renal magnesium handling. Repeated measurement and regression analyses were used to analyse associations with PTDM. RESULTS: In our cohort, 29 out of 167 kidney transplant recipients developed PTDM after 1 year (17%). Higher tacrolimus concentrations were significantly associated with lower serum magnesium and increased risk of hypomagnesaemia. Patients who developed PTDM had a significantly lower serum magnesium trajectory than patients who did not develop PTDM. In multivariate analysis, lower serum magnesium, age and body mass index were independent risk factors for PTDM. In recipients, the HNF1ß SNP rs752010 G > A significantly increased the risk of PTDM [odds ratio (OR) = 2.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-6.23] but not of hypomagnesaemia. This association lost significance after correction for age and sex (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 0.90-5.57). No association between HNF1ß SNPs and PTDM was found in corresponding donors. CONCLUSIONS: A lower serum magnesium in the first year after KT is an independent risk factor for PTDM. The HNF1ß SNP rs752010 G > A may add to this risk through an effect on insulin secretion rather than hypomagnesaemia, but its role requires further confirmation.

Thiazide but not loop diuretics is associated with hypomagnesaemia in the general population.

PURPOSE: Hypomagnesaemia has been associated with various adverse outcomes. Loop and thiazide diuretics promote urinary magnesium excretion. However, it is unknown if this links to hypomagnesaemia. We study if loop or thiazide diuretic use affects serum magnesium levels and if it associates with hypomagnesaemia. In addition, we study the effect of combining a potassium-sparing diuretic with a thiazide diuretic on the presence of hypomagnesaemia. METHODS: The study performed a cross-sectional analysis within 9820 participants from the prospective Rotterdam Study. Hypomagnesaemia was defined as a serum magnesium level ≤0.72 mmol/L. Participants were categorized by defined daily dose (DDD), and all analyses were adjusted for age, sex, BMI, eGFR, serum potassium levels, proton pump inhibitor use, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Loop diuretic use was associated with higher serum magnesium levels (<1 DDD: 0.004 mmol/L 95% CI: -0.008; 0.017; 1 DDD: 0.023 mmol/L 95% CI: 0.013; 0.032; >1 DDD: 0.043 mmol/L 95% CI: 0.028; 0.057). Thiazide diuretic use was associated with lower serum magnesium levels (<1 DDD: -0.013 mmol/L 95% CI: -0.023; -0.002; ≥1 DDD: -0.018 mmol/L 95% CI: -0.028; -0.010), resulting in an increased odds ratio of hypomagnesaemia of 3.14 (95% CI: 1.67; 5.92) and 2.74 (95% CI: 1.57; 4.77), respectively. These effects were predominantly seen in participants using diuretics for more than 390 days. Combining thiazide diuretics with a potassium-sparing agent was not associated with lower serum magnesium levels or hypomagnesaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Thiazide diuretic use is associated with lower serum magnesium levels and an increased risk of hypomagnesaemia. This increased risk is not seen in participants using a combination of thiazide diuretics with a potassium-sparing agent. The use of loop diuretics is not associated with an increased risk of hypomagnesaemia.

Fracture incidence and secular trends between 1989 and 2013 in a population based cohort: The Rotterdam Study.

Fracture incidence needs to be evaluated over time to assess the impact of the enlarging population burden of fractures (due to increase in lifespan) and the efficacy of fracture prevention strategies. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the association of femoral neck bone mineral density (FN-BMD) measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at baseline with fracture risk over a long follow-up time period. Incident non-vertebral fractures were assessed in 14,613 individuals participating in the Rotterdam Study with up to 20 years of follow-up. During a mean follow-up of 10.7 ±â€¯6.2 years, 2971 (20.3%) participants had at least one incident non-vertebral fracture. The risk for any non-vertebral fracture was 1.37 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.25-1.49) and 1.42 (95%CI: 1.35-1.50) for men and women, respectively. The majority (79% in men and 75% in women) of all fractures occurred among participants a normal or osteopenic T-score. The incidence rates per 1000 person-years for the most common fractures were 5.3 [95%CI: 5.0-5.7] for hip, 4.9 [95%CI: 4.6-5.3] for wrist and 2.3 [95%CI: 2.0-2.5] for humerus. To examine the predictive ability of BMD through follow-up time we determined fracture hazard ratios (HR) per standard deviation decrease in femoral neck BMD across five year bins. No differences were observed, with a HR of 2.5 (95%CI: 2.0-3.1) after the first 5 years, and of 1.9 (95%CI: 1.1-3.3) after 20 years. To assess secular trends in fracture incidence at all skeletal sites we compared participants at an age of 70-80 years across two time periods: 1989-2001 (n = 2481, 60% women) and 2001-2013 (n = 2936, 58% women) and found no statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between fracture incidence rates (i.e., incidence of non-vertebral fractures of 26.4 per 1000 PY [95%CI: 24.4-28.5]) between 1989 and 2001, and of 25.4 per 1000 PY [95%CI: 23.0-28.0] between 2001 and 2013. In conclusion, BMD is still predictive of future fracture over a long period of time. While no secular changes in fractures rates seem to be observed after a decade, the majority of fractures still occur above the osteoporosis threshold, emphasizing the need to improve the screening of osteopenic patients.

Serum magnesium is associated with the risk of dementia.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if serum magnesium levels are associated with the risk of all-cause dementia and Alzheimer disease. METHODS: Within the prospective population-based Rotterdam Study, we measured serum magnesium levels in 9,569 participants, free from dementia at baseline (1997-2008). Participants were subsequently followed up for incident dementia, determined according to the DSM-III-R criteria, until January 1, 2015. We used Cox proportional hazard regression models to associate quintiles of serum magnesium with incident all-cause dementia. We used the third quintile as a reference group and adjusted for age, sex, Rotterdam Study cohort, educational level, cardiovascular risk factors, kidney function, comorbidities, other electrolytes, and diuretic use. RESULTS: Our study population had a mean age of 64.9 years and 56.6% were women. During a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 823 participants were diagnosed with all-cause dementia. Both low serum magnesium levels (≤0.79 mmol/L) and high serum magnesium levels (≥0.90 mmol/L) were associated with an increased risk of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.69, and HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.02-1.67, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both low and high serum magnesium levels are associated with an increased risk of all-cause dementia. Our results warrant replication in other population-based studies.

Serum magnesium and the risk of prediabetes: a population-based cohort study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Previous studies have found an association between serum magnesium and incident diabetes; however, this association may be due to reverse causation, whereby diabetes may induce urinary magnesium loss. In contrast, in prediabetes (defined as impaired fasting glucose), serum glucose levels are below the threshold for urinary magnesium wasting and, hence, unlikely to influence serum magnesium levels. Thus, to study the directionality of the association between serum magnesium levels and diabetes, we investigated its association with prediabetes. We also investigated whether magnesium-regulating genes influence diabetes risk through serum magnesium levels. Additionally, we quantified the effect of insulin resistance in the association between serum magnesium levels and diabetes risk. METHODS: Within the population-based Rotterdam Study, we used Cox models, adjusted for age, sex, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, kidney function, serum levels of electrolytes and diuretic use, to study the association between serum magnesium and prediabetes/diabetes. In addition, we performed two mediation analyses: (1) to study if common genetic variation in eight magnesium-regulating genes influence diabetes risk through serum magnesium levels; and (2) to quantify the proportion of the effect of serum magnesium levels on diabetes that is mediated through insulin resistance (quantified by HOMA-IR). RESULTS: A total of 8555 participants (mean age, 64.7 years; median follow-up, 5.7 years) with normal glucose levels (mean ± SD: 5.46 ± 0.58 mmol/l) at baseline were included. A 0.1 mmol/l decrease in serum magnesium level was associated with an increase in diabetes risk (HR 1.18 [95% CI 1.04, 1.33]), confirming findings from previous studies. Of interest, a similar association was found between serum magnesium levels and prediabetes risk (HR 1.12 [95% CI 1.01, 1.25]). Genetic variation in CLDN19, CNNM2, FXYD2, SLC41A2, and TRPM6 significantly influenced diabetes risk (p < 0.05), and for CNNM2, FXYD2, SLC41A2 and TRPM6 this risk was completely mediated by serum magnesium levels. We found that 29.1% of the effect of serum magnesium levels on diabetes was mediated through insulin resistance, whereas for prediabetes 13.4% was mediated through insulin resistance. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Low serum magnesium levels are associated with an increased risk of prediabetes and this increased risk is similar to that of diabetes. Furthermore, common variants in magnesium-regulating genes modify diabetes risk through serum magnesium levels. Both findings support a potential causal role of magnesium in the development of diabetes, where the hypothesised pathway is partly mediated through insulin resistance.

Serum Magnesium and the Risk of Death From Coronary Heart Disease and Sudden Cardiac Death.

BACKGROUND: Low serum magnesium has been implicated in cardiovascular mortality, but results are conflicting and the pathway is unclear. We studied the association of serum magnesium with coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality and sudden cardiac death (SCD) within the prospective population-based Rotterdam Study, with adjudicated end points and long-term follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nine-thousand eight-hundred and twenty participants (mean age 65.1 years, 56.8% female) were included with a median follow-up of 8.7 years. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazard models and found that a 0.1 mmol/L increase in serum magnesium level was associated with a lower risk for CHD mortality (hazard ratio: 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.96). Furthermore, we divided serum magnesium in quartiles, with the second and third quartile combined as reference group (0.81-0.88 mmol/L). Low serum magnesium (≤0.80 mmol/L) was associated with an increased risk of CHD mortality (N=431, hazard ratio: 1.36, 95% CI 1.09-1.69) and SCD (N=217, hazard ratio: 1.54, 95% CI 1.12-2.11). Low serum magnesium was associated with accelerated subclinical atherosclerosis (expressed as increased carotid intima-media thickness: +0.013 mm, 95% CI 0.005-0.020) and increased QT-interval, mainly through an effect on heart rate (RR-interval: -7.1 ms, 95% CI -13.5 to -0.8). Additional adjustments for carotid intima-media thickness and heart rate did not change the associations with CHD mortality and SCD. CONCLUSIONS: Low serum magnesium is associated with an increased risk of CHD mortality and SCD. Although low magnesium was associated with both carotid intima-media thickness and heart rate, this did not explain the relationship between serum magnesium and CHD mortality or SCD. Future studies should focus on why magnesium associates with CHD mortality and SCD and whether intervention reduces these risks.

Proton pump inhibitors and hypomagnesemia in the general population: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use has been associated with hypomagnesemia in case reports and hospital-based cohort studies. Our objective was to determine whether PPI use is associated with hypomagnesemia in the general population and whether this is also found in histamine 2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) users. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 9,818 individuals from the general population (Rotterdam Study). PREDICTOR: PPI use and H2RA use compared to no use. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Serum magnesium and hypomagnesemia (serum magnesium ≤ 1.44 mEq/L). Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, kidney function, comorbid conditions, and alcohol and diuretic use. RESULTS: Serum magnesium level was 0.022 mEq/L lower in PPI users (n=724; 95% CI, -0.032 to -0.014 mEq/L) versus those with no use. PPI use was associated with increased risk of hypomagnesemia (n=36; OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.36-2.93) compared to no use. Effect modification was found between the use of PPIs and loop diuretics; in participants using loop diuretics (n=270), PPI use was associated with a further increased risk of hypomagnesemia (n=5; OR, 7.22; 95% CI, 1.69-30.83) compared to no use. The increased risk with PPIs was only seen after prolonged use (range, 182-2,618 days; OR, 2.99; 95% CI, 1.73-5.15). Including dietary magnesium intake into the model did not alter results (available for 2,504 participants, including 231 PPI users). H2RA users (n=250) also had a lower serum magnesium level (-0.016 [95% CI, -0.032 to -0.002] mEq/L) and increased risk of hypomagnesemia (n=12; OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.08-3.72) compared to those with no use, but no interaction with loop diuretics. LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional analysis with single serum magnesium measurement. CONCLUSIONS: PPI use is associated with hypomagnesemia in the general population. Prolonged PPI use and concomitant loop diuretic use are associated with a stronger risk increase. Similar but weaker associations were found in H2RA users, except for interaction with loop diuretics.

Pedobarographic analysis and quality of life after Lisfranc fracture dislocation.

BACKGROUND: Few studies on tarsometatarsal fracture dislocations report on plantar pressure analysis and quality of life. The primary aim of this study was to determine the added value of plantar pressure analysis. The secondary aim was to determine quality of life and functional outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With a median followup of 76 months, 26 patients with an isolated Lisfranc injury participated. The Short Form 36 (SF-36) was used to determine the health related quality of life. Functional outcome was assessed with the American Orthopaedic Foot Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). A Wilcoxon Signed Rank test was used to assess whether plantar pressure and foot position variables differed between the injured and uninjured foot. Correlations between outcome data were identified using Spearman Rank Correlation. RESULTS: With respect to the plantar pressure analysis, a reduced contact time of the forefoot was found for the injured foot compared with the contralateral side (p = 0.045). The injured side showed reduced contact surface of the forefoot (p = 0.048) and an increased contact surface for the midfoot (p = 0.019). The latter was paralleled by higher maximum pressures at the midfoot (p = 0.016). Patients reported a median score of 101 for the SF-36, 72 for the AOFAS midfoot score, and 7 for the VAS. CONCLUSION: Plantar pressure measurements showed an adjusted walking pattern. Despite a fair outcome score, the quality for life of patients following a Lisfranc fracture dislocation returned to normal compared with normative data for the general population.

Subtalar versus triple arthrodesis after intra-articular calcaneal fractures.

Depending upon initial treatment, between 2 and 30% of patients with a displaced intra-articular calcaneal fracture require a secondary arthrodesis. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of subtalar versus triple arthrodesis on functional outcome. A total of 33 patients with 37 secondary arthrodeses (17 subtalar and 20 triple) with a median follow-up of 116 months were asked to complete questionnaires regarding disease-specific functional outcome (Maryland Foot Score, MFS), quality of life (SF-36) and overall satisfaction with the treatment (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS). Patient groups were comparable considering median age at fracture, initial treatment (conservative or operative), time to arthrodesis, median follow-up, and post-arthrodesis radiographic angles. The MFS score was similar after subtalar versus triple arthrodesis (59 vs. 56 points; P = 0.79). No statistically significant difference was found for the SF-36 (84 vs. 83 points; P = 0.67) and the VAS (5 vs. 6; P = 0.21). Smoking was statistically significantly associated with a non-union (χ(2) = 6.60, P = 0.017). The current study suggests that there is no significant difference in functional outcome between an in situ subtalar or triple arthrodesis as a salvage technique for symptomatic arthrosis after an intra-articular calcaneal fracture. Smoking is a risk factor for non-union.