Cross-Border Antibiotic Resistance Patterns in Burn Patients.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing problem worldwide, with differences in regional resistance patterns partially driven by local variance in antibiotic stewardship. Trauma patients transferring from Mexico have more AMR than those injured in the United States; we hypothesized a similar pattern would be present for burn patients. Patients and Methods: The registry of an American Burn Association (ABA)-verified burn center was queried for all admissions for burn injury January 2015 through December 2019 with hospital length-of-stay (LOS) longer than seven days. Patients were divided into two groups based upon burn location: United States (USA) or Mexico (MEX). All bacterial infections were analyzed. Results: A total of 73 MEX and 826 USA patients were included. Patients had a similar mean age (40.4 years MEX vs. 42.2 USA) and gender distribution (69.6% male vs. 64.4%). The MEX patients had larger median percent total body surface area burned (%TBSA; 11.1% vs. 4.3%; p ≤ 0.001) and longer hospital LOS (18.0 vs. 13.0 days; p = 0.028). The MEX patients more often had respiratory infections (16.4% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.046), whereas rates of other infections were similar. The MEX patients had higher rates of any resistant organism (47.2% of organisms MEX vs. 28.1% USA; p = 0.013), and were more likely to have resistant infections on univariable analysis; however, on multivariable analysis country of burn was no longer significant. Conclusions: Antimicrobial resistance is more common in burn patients initially burned in Mexico than those burned in the United States, but location was not a predictor of resistance compared to other traditional burn-related factors. Continuing to monitor for AMR regardless of country of burn remains critical.

Risk Factors Associated With Complications After Treatment of Mandible Fractures.

IMPORTANCE: Complications that arise after treatment of mandible fractures can result in significant morbidity. Identifying modifiable risk factors associated with these complications is valuable in guiding clinical practice for improved patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To describe the risk factors associated with complications in patients undergoing treatment for mandible fracture. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective review was conducted of 137 patients presenting to a tertiary care, level 1 trauma center with mandible fractures between January 1, 2014, and January 1, 2017. Outcomes and demographic characteristics for patients with at least 3 weeks of follow-up were compared using multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 137 patients meeting inclusion criteria, there were 113 males (82.5%) and 24 females (17.5%), with a mean (SD) age at presentation of 32.3 (15.7) years. Median follow-up was 71 days (range, 22-1189 days). Postoperative complications were identified in 29 patients (21.2%); complications included wound dehiscence or surgical site infection (n = 17), bony nonunion (n = 5), and hardware exposure (n = 13). Complications were managed surgically in 19 patients and nonsurgically in 10 patients. On univariate analysis, the initial surgery was completed later (mean [SD], 5.9 [6.6] days after injury) in patients who developed complications than in those who did not (mean [SD], 3.8 [4.0] days). On multivariate analysis, complications were associated with increased time from injury to treatment (odds ratio [OR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.02-2.53; P = .04), tobacco use (OR, 8.10; 95% CI, 1.26-52.00; P = .03), and dental extraction (OR, 93.00; 95% CI, 1.19 to >999.00; P = .04). Residence in the same city as the medical center was associated with fewer complications (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.69; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a 3-year review of mandible fractures managed at a single academic center, complications were associated with an increased time to treatment, tobacco use, dental extraction, and living farther from the treatment facility. On a systems level, the results of this study suggest that expediting intervention for mandible fractures may improve outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Spanish Linguistic Validation of the Velopharyngeal Insufficiency Effects on Life Outcomes: VELO-Spanish.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QOL) assessments are useful tools that measure a patient's health status and monitor patient-reported outcome measures. This study highlights the process of linguistic validation of a QOL assessment to serve Spanish-speaking families and ultimately help decrease language barriers in the treatment of velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI). METHODS: The standardized linguistic validation process included forward and backward translation, reconciliation, and cognitive interviews with patients and families. Preliminary instrument test-retest measurement was assessed. Eligibility for cognitive interviews included families with familiarity of velopharyngeal insufficiency. Exclusion criteria included illiteracy and parent and child respondents who do not speak Spanish. Reliability was tested by intraclass correlation (ICC) on VPI Effects on Life Outcomes (VELO)-Spanish instruments completion on 2 measurements from the medical record. RESULTS: The instrument was optimized through a standardized forward and backward translation process. Further problematic language was identified during cognitive interviews with families and their children. In the second interview, only minimal changes were needed. Twenty-one patients (8 males and 13 females) were included. Mean (SD) age was 8.0 (5.3) years (range, 3-21 years). The mean (SD) Velo-Spanish score was 65 (22.1); range 32.7-100. The VELO-Spanish instrument demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability [ICC = 0.91; n = 21 and internal consistency (α = 0.96)]. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish VELO has been developed and refined for use in Spanish-speaking populations as a VPI-specific QOL instrument. The linguistic validation process including cognitive interviews and initial reliability testing. The instrument may improve the understanding of patient-reported outcomes and potential disparities from linguistic and cultural barriers in VPI treatment.