Concurrent Validity of PROMIS and LD-SRS Scores in Pediatric Patients With Lower Limb Differences.

BACKGROUND: We sought to assess the concurrent validity of select Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains and Limb Deformity-Scoliosis Research Society (LD-SRS) scores. METHODS: We prospectively administered PROMIS - 25 (including anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain interference, peer relationships, and physical function) and LD-SRS questionnaires to 46 consecutive pediatric patients with lower limb differences, presenting to a single surgeon for reconstruction. Concurrent validity between various subdomains of the 2 outcome measures was assessed through Pearson's correlation, with significance defined as P <0.05. The strength of correlation was interpreted by Evans criteria: absolute r value <0.20 indicating very weak correlation; 0.20 to 0.39, weak; 0.40 to 0.59, moderate; 0.60 to 0.79, strong; and 0.8 or greater indicating very strong correlation. RESULTS: The LD-SRS Pain, Function, and Mental Health domains most strongly correlated with the PROMIS pain interference ( r =-0.79, P <0.001), physical function ( r =0.74, P <0.001), and anxiety ( r =-0.68, P <0.001) domains, respectively. In addition, LD-SRS pain strongly correlated with PROMIS physical function ( r =0.61, P <0.001) and LD-SRS function with PROMIS pain interference ( r =-0.72, P <0.001). All PROMIS domains significantly correlated with total LD-SRS scores. PROMIS pain interference ( r =-0.79, P <0.001), physical function ( r =0.67, P <0.001), and fatigue ( r =-0.60, P <0.001) domains demonstrated the strongest correlations with the total LD-SRS score. CONCLUSIONS: The significant concurrent validity between LD-SRS and multiple PROMIS domains suggests considerable overlap, and perhaps redundancy, between these 2 outcome measures. Given the high degree of concordance and the advantage of computer adaptive testing (CAT) in mitigating administrative burden and survey fatigue, along with the ability to compare outcomes across a wider group of children with a variety of underlying diagnoses, select PROMIS domains may be a viable alternative to LD-SRS score for assessing patient-reported outcomes when treating pediatric patients with lower limb deformities. A larger, multi-center study including pediatric patients with lower limb differences from a diverse background, including age, etiology, native language, and ethnicity, would be helpful to externally validate our findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-I.

Cardiovascular disease risk factors and lifestyle modification strategies after pediatric kidney transplantation: what are we dealing with, and what can we target?

Kidney transplantation in pediatric patients can lead to partial improvement of some of the cardiometabolic parameters that increase the risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with chronic kidney disease. However, even after restoration of kidney function, transplant recipients remain at risk for CVD due to the continual presence of traditional and non-traditional risk factors, including the side effects of immunosuppression and chronic inflammation. This educational review describes the prevalence of CVD risk factors in pediatric kidney transplant recipients and presents available evidence for therapeutic lifestyle changes and other non-pharmacologic strategies that can be used to improve traditional and modifiable CVD risk factors. Although trial-grade evidence for interventions that improve CVD in pediatric kidney transplant recipients is limited, potential strategies include lowering dietary sodium and saturated fat intake and increasing physical activity levels. Intensive follow-up may help patients achieve guideline-recommended goals for reducing their overall CVD risk.

Complex Orthopaedic Trauma Is Shifting Away From Level I to Non-Level I Trauma Centers: An Analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

INTRODUCTION: An increasing number of fellowship-trained orthopaedic trauma surgeons are working in non-Level I centers. This study aimed to examine trends of management of complex orthopaedic trauma in Level I centers versus non-Level I centers and its potential effect on patient outcomes. METHODS: Data from the National Trauma Data Bank from 2008 to 2017 were analyzed. Non-Level I to Level I center ratios for complex fractures and complication rates, median hours to procedure for time-sensitive fractures, and uninsured/underinsured rates of Level I and non-Level I centers were recorded. RESULTS: Three hundred one thousand patients were included. A statistically significant downward trend was identified in the percent of all complex orthopaedic trauma at Level I centers and per-hospital likelihood of seeing a complex orthopaedic fracture in a Level I versus non-Level I hospital. Per-hospital complication rates were consistently lower in non-Level I hospitals after controlling for injury severity and payer mix. Time-sensitive fractures were treated earlier in non-Level I centers. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates a reduction of complex trauma treatment in Level I centers that did not translate to adverse effects on patient outcomes. Policymakers should notice this trend to ensure the continued quality of orthopaedic trauma training and maintenance of expertise in complex fracture management.