Capacity for Hand-as-a-Holder Function of the Spastic Combination Hand: A Proof-of-Concept Study.

ABSTRACT: We call a hemiparetic hand with paralyzed finger extensors and volitional but spastic flexors a "spastic combination hand." Anecdotally, patients report hand-as-a-holder function with objects like pill bottles, motivating us to formally study spastic combination hand holding capacity using cylinders with different diameters. Nine participants with spastic hemiparesis and spastic combination hand more than 24 mos performed a standardized motor task with 10 cylinder diameters ranging between 1.3 and 9.5 cm and weighing 0.8 and 8.4 oz. Using the unaffected hand, participants attempted to insert a given cylinder into their spastic combination hand, holding it independently for 5 secs. Successful holds were counted during two sessions before and one session after botulinum toxin intervention of Ashworth 3 hand muscles. Findings revealed that a median capacity of six different cylinder diameters was successfully inserted into spastic combination hand at least once before block and a median capacity of 10 cylinders was inserted after block. A mixed-effect statistical model using fixed effects of cylinder diameter and session revealed that total number of successful holds was 43% higher after botulinum. We conclude that this proof-of-concept study does support the idea that spastic combination hand has holding capacity for cylindrical objects of specified diameter and weight and that botulinum neurotoxin offers potential for enlarging spastic combination hand capacity.

The public health burden of geriatric trauma: Analysis of 2,688,008 hospitalizations from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient claims.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric trauma care (GTC) represents an increasing proportion of injury care, but associated public health research on outcomes and expenditures is limited. The purpose of this study was to describe GTC characteristics, location, diagnoses, and expenditures. METHODS: Patients at short-term nonfederal hospitals, 65 years or older, with ≥1 injury International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, were selected from 2016 to 2019 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Inpatient Standard Analytical Files. Trauma center levels were linked to Inpatient Standard Analytical Files data via American Hospital Association Hospital ID and fuzzy string matching. Demographics, care location, diagnoses, and expenditures were compared across groups. RESULTS: A total of 2,688,008 hospitalizations (62% female; 90% White; 71% falls; mean Injury Severity Score, 6.5) from 3,286 hospitals were included, comprising 8.5% of all Medicare inpatient hospitalizations. Level I centers encompassed 7.2% of the institutions (n = 236) but 21.2% of hospitalizations, while nontrauma centers represented 58.5% of institutions (n = 1,923) and 37.7% of hospitalizations. Compared with nontrauma centers, patients at Level I centers had higher Elixhauser scores (9.0 vs. 8.8) and Injury Severity Score (7.4 vs. 6.0; p < 0.0001). The most frequent primary diagnosis at all centers was hip/femur fracture (28.3%), followed by traumatic brain injury (10.1%). Expenditures totaled $32.9 billion for trauma-related hospitalizations, or 9.1% of total Medicare hospitalization expenditures and approximately 1.1% of the annual Medicare budget. The overall mortality rate was 3.5%. CONCLUSION: Geriatric trauma care accounts for 8.5% of all inpatient GTC and a similar percentage of expenditures, the most common injury being hip/femur fractures. The largest proportion of GTC occurs at nontrauma centers, emphasizing their vital role in trauma care. Public health prevention programs and GTC guidelines should be implemented by all hospitals, not just trauma centers. Further research is required to determine the optimal role of trauma systems in GTC, establish data-driven triage guidelines, and define the impact of trauma centers and nontrauma centers on GTC mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, Level III.

Intra-operative Radiation Therapy versus Whole Breast External Beam Radiotherapy: A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: This project sought to compare patient-reported outcomes between patients who received intra-operative radiation therapy (IORT) and those who qualified for IORT but received whole-breast external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS: Three scales from the BREAST-Q Breast Cancer BCT Module Version 2.0 questionnaire were used to collect patient-reported outcomes regarding post-operative physical well-being of the chest, post-operative satisfaction with breast cosmesis, and post-operative adverse effects of radiation. RESULTS: Patients who received EBRT travelled farther on average than patients who received IORT to complete treatment. Respondents who received IORT reported better physical well-being of the chest than those who received EBRT. Regression revealed that the respondent's age was the determining factor in the difference between IORT and EBRT post-operative physical well-being scores, where younger patients report poorer well-being. There was no difference in patient-reported outcomes regarding post-operative satisfaction with breast cosmesis or adverse effects of radiation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received IORT reported better physical well-being of the chest than patients who received EBRT. There appeared to be a relationship between age and physical well-being of chest. This study suggested that there was no difference in patient-reported outcomes concerning post-operative satisfaction with breast cosmesis or post-operative adverse effects of radiation between patients who received IORT and those who received EBRT.

Treatment provider is most predictive of ED dismissal in minimally-injured trauma patients: a retrospective review.

BACKGROUND: Secondary triage protocols have been described in the literature as physiologic (first-tier) criteria and mechanism-related (second-tier) criteria to determine the level of trauma activation. There is debate as to the efficiency of triage decisions based on mechanism of injury which may result in overtriage and overuse of limited trauma resources. Our institution developed and implemented an advanced three-tier trauma alert system in which stable patients presenting with blunt traumatic mechanism of injury would be evaluated by the emergency department (ED) physician rather than the trauma surgeon. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT) requires that operational changes be monitored and evaluated for patient safety and performance. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the process, as well as outcomes, of patient care pre and post implementation of the new triage protocol. The secondary aim was to determine predictor variables that were associated with ED dismissal. METHODS: A retrospective blinded pre/post process change implementation explicit chart review was conducted to compare process and outcomes of minimally injured trauma patients who were field triaged by mechanism of injury. Generalized linear modeling was performed to determine which predictor variables were associated with ED dismissal. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in minutes to physician evaluation, CT scan, OR/ICU disposition, readmission rates, safety or quality. Significant differences only occurred in time to chest x-ray, length of stay in ED, and ED dismissal rates. Trauma surgeon and ED physician patient groups did not differ on ISS, age, or sex. The only significant predictor for ED dismissal was treatment provider, with ED physicians 3.6 times more likely to dismiss the patient from the emergency department. CONCLUSIONS: ED physicians provided compble care as measured by safety, timeliness, and quality in minimally-injured patients triaged to our trauma center based only on mechanism of injury. Moreover, ED physicians were more likely to dismiss patients from the ED. A three-tiered internal triaging protocol can redirect resource usage to reduce the burden on the trauma service. This may be increasingly beneficial in trauma models in which the trauma surgeons also serve as critical care intensivists.