Disparities in follow-up care for ballistic and non-ballistic long bone lower extremity fractures

Ankle fracture surgery in patients experiencing homelessness: a national evaluation of one-year rates of reoperation

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of homelessness on surgical outcomes following ankle fracture surgery.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Mariner claims database.

Patients/Participants

Patients older than 18 years who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of ankle fractures between 2010 and 2021. A total of 345,759 patients were included in the study.

Intervention

Study patients were divided into two cohorts (homeless and nonhomeless) based on whether their patient record contained International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9 or ICD-10 codes for homelessness/inadequate housing.

Main Outcome Measures

One-year rates of reoperation for amputation, irrigation and debridement, repeat ORIF, repair of nonunion/malunion, and implant removal in isolation.

Results

Homeless patients had significantly higher odds of undergoing amputation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-2.27, P = 0.014), irrigation and debridement (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.37, P < 0.001), and repeat ORIF (aOR 1.16, 95% CI 1.00-1.35, P = 0.045). Implant removal was less common in homeless patients (aOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.59-0.72, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between homeless and nonhomeless patients in the rate of nonunion/malunion repair (aOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63-1.18, P = 0.41).

Conclusions

Homelessness is a significant risk factor for worse surgical outcomes following ankle fracture surgery. The findings of this study warrant future research to identify gaps in surgical fracture care for patients with housing insecurity and underscore the importance of developing interventions to advance health equity for this vulnerable patient population.

Level of Evidence

Prognostic Level III.

Provider perceptions of challenges and facilitators to surgical care in unhoused patients: A qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Unhoused patients have worse surgical outcomes than the general population. However, the drivers of this inequity have not been studied.

METHODS

We conducted 26 semi-structured interviews of clinicians who care for patients with surgical disease, using a purposive sampling strategy to intentionally recruit participants with significant experience caring for unhoused patients across different roles. We used thematic analysis to analyze the resulting data.

RESULTS

We conducted 26 interviews: 11 with surgeons (42%), 8 with internal medicine physicians (30%), 2 with surgical advanced practice providers (8%), 3 with social workers or case managers (11%), and 2 with registered nurses (8%). One-third of the participants worked in either medical respite or street medicine programs. We identified 5 themes, each of which was most relevant at a distinct point along the spectrum of surgical care: (1) patients and clinicians face multiple challenges meeting preoperative requirements, (2) although surgeons do not make major operative decisions based on housing status, some take it into consideration for minor care decisions, (3) clinicians perceive that unhoused patients have negative postoperative experiences in the hospital, (4) discharge options for unhoused patients are commonly imperfect, which can lead to inadequate postoperative care, (5) challenges with formal communication between surgeons and non-surgeons are amplified when caring for unhoused patients.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians who care for unhoused patients with surgical disease relayed multiple challenges throughout all phases of surgical care and relied on both formal and informal mechanisms to mitigate these challenges. There may be opportunities to intervene and improve access to surgical care for this vulnerable group.

AOA Critical Issues Symposium: Gun Violence as a Public Health Crisis

ABSTRACT

Gun violence is an epidemic throughout the United States and is increasing around the world-it is a public health crisis. The impact of gun violence is not limited to the victims (our patients); it also extends to the physicians and caregivers who are taking care of these patients every day. Even more broadly, gun violence affects those living and going to work in potentially dangerous environments. The "vicarious trauma" that is experienced in these situations can have long-term effects on physicians, nurses, and communities. Importantly, socioeconomic disparities and community deprivation strongly correlate with gun violence. Systemic factors that are deeply ingrained in our society can increase concerns for these underrepresented patient populations and cause increased stressors with substantial health consequences, including delayed fracture-healing and poorer overall health outcomes. It is incumbent on us as physicians to take an active role in speaking up for our patients. The importance of advocacy efforts to change policy (not politics) and continue to push for improvement in the increasingly challenging environments in which patients and physicians find themselves cannot be overstated. Multiple national organizations, including many orthopaedic and general surgery associations, have made statements advocating for change. The American College of Surgeons, in collaboration with many other medical organizations, has supported background checks, registration, licensure, firearm education and training, safe storage practices, red flag laws, addressing mental health issues, and more research to better inform an approach going forward and to address the root causes of violence. We encourage the orthopaedic surgery community to stand together to protect each other and our patients, both physically and mentally, with agreement on these principles.

Socioeconomic status is associated with greater hazard of post-discharge mortality than race, gender, and ballistic injury mechanism in a young, healthy, orthopedic trauma population

OBJECTIVES

To explore the utility of legacy demographic factors and ballistic injury mechanism relative to popular markers of socioeconomic status as prognostic indicators of 10-year mortality following hospital discharge in a young, healthy patient population with isolated orthopedic trauma injuries.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed to evaluate patients treated at an urban Level I trauma center from January 1, 2003, through December 31, 2016. Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify upper and lower extremity fracture patients undergoing operative fixation. Exclusion criteria were selected to yield a patient population of isolated extremity trauma in young, otherwise healthy individuals between the ages of 18 and 65 years. Variables collected included injury mechanism, age, race, gender, behavior risk factors, Area Deprivation Index (ADI), and insurance status. The primary outcome was post-discharge mortality, occurring at any point during the study period.

RESULTS

We identified 2539 patients with operatively treated isolated extremity fractures. The lowest two quartiles of socioeconomic status (SES) were associated with higher hazard of mortality than the highest SES quartile in multivariable analysis (Quartile 3 HR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.2-4.1, p = 0.01; Quartile 4 HR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.1-4.3, p = 0.02). Not having private insurance was associated with higher mortality hazard in multivariable analysis (HR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.3-3.2, p = 0.002). The presence of any behavioral risk factor was associated with higher mortality hazard in univariable analysis (HR: 1.8, p < 0.05), but this difference did not reach statistical significance in multivariable analysis (HR: 1.4, 95%: 0.8-2.3, p = 0.20). Injury mechanism (ballistic versus blunt), gender, and race were not associated with increased hazard of mortality (p > 0.20).

CONCLUSION

Low SES is associated with a greater hazard of long-term mortality than ballistic injury mechanism, race, gender, and medically diagnosable behavioral risk factors in a young, healthy orthopedic trauma population with isolated extremity injury.

Civilian Ballistic Arthrotomies: Infection Rates and Operative Versus Nonoperative Management

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant difference existed in the rate of infection after ballistic traumatic arthrotomy managed operatively compared with those managed without surgery.

METHODS

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic Level I Trauma Center.

PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA

Patients with ballistic traumatic arthrotomies of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, or ankle who received operative or nonoperative management.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS

The rates of infection and septic arthritis in those who received operative or nonoperative management.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-five patients were studied. Eighty patients were treated nonoperatively (Non-Op group), 16 patients were treated with formal irrigation and debridement in the operating room (I&D group), and 99 patients were treated with formal I&D and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) (I&D + ORIF group). Patients in all 3 groups received local wound care and systemic antibiotics. No patients in the Non-Op or I&D group developed an infection. Six patients in the I&D + ORIF group developed extra-articular postoperative infections requiring additional interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The infection rate in the I&D + ORIF group was consistent with the infection rates reported in orthopaedic literature after fixation alone. In addition, none of the infections were cases of septic arthritis. This suggests that traumatic arthrotomy does not increase the risk for infection beyond what is expected after fixation alone. Importantly, the Non-Op group represented a series of 80 patients who were treated nonoperatively without developing an infection, indicating that I&D may not be necessary to prevent infection after ballistic arthrotomy. The results suggest that septic arthritis after civilian ballistic arthrotomy is a rare complication regardless of the choice of treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Association of Housing Status With Types of Operations and Postoperative Health Care Utilization

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the association between housing status and the nature of surgical care provided, health care utilization, and operational outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Unhoused patients have worse outcomes and higher health care utilization across multiple clinical domains. However, little has been published describing the burden of surgical disease in unhoused patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 111,267 operations from 2013 to 2022 with housing status documented at a single, tertiary care institution. We conducted unadjusted bivariate and multivariate analyses adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 998 operations (0.8%) were performed for unhoused patients, with a higher proportion of emergent operations than housed patients (56% vs 22%). In unadjusted analysis, unhoused patients had longer length of stay (18.7 vs 8.7 days), higher readmissions (9.5% vs 7.5%), higher in-hospital (2.9% vs 1.8%) and 1-year mortality (10.1% vs 8.2%), more in-hospital reoperations (34.6% vs 15.9%), and higher utilization of social work, physical therapy, and occupational therapy services. After adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, insurance status, and indication for operation, as well as stratifying by emergent versus elective operation, these differences went away for emergent operations.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective cohort analysis, unhoused patients more commonly underwent emergent operations than their housed counterparts and had more complex hospitalizations on an unadjusted basis that largely disappeared after adjustment for patient and operative characteristics. These findings suggest issues with upstream access to surgical care that, when unaddressed, may predispose this vulnerable population to more complex hospitalizations and worse longer term outcomes.

Health disparities in orthopedic trauma: a qualitative study examining providers' perspectives on barriers to care and recovery outcomes

Social workers involved in interdisciplinary orthopedic trauma care can benefit from the knowledge of providers' perspectives on healthcare disparities in this field. Using qualitative data from focus groups conducted on 79 orthopedic care providers at three Level 1 trauma centers, we assessed their perspectives on orthopedic trauma healthcare disparities and discussed potential solutions. Focus groups originally aimed to detect barriers and facilitators of the implementation of a trial of a live video mind-body intervention to aid in recovery in orthopedic trauma care settings (Toolkit for Optimal Recovery-TOR). We used the Socio-Ecological Model to analyze an emerging code of "health disparities" during data analysis to determine at which levels of care these disparities occurred. We identified factors related to health disparities in orthopedic trauma care and outcomes at the Individual (Education- comprehension, health-literacy; Language Barriers; Psychological Health- emotional distress, alcohol/drug use, learned helplessness; Physical Health- obesity, smoking; and Access to Technology), Relationship (Social Support Network), Community (Transportation and Employment Security), and Societal level (Access- safe/clean housing, insurance, mental health resources; Culture). We discuss the implications of the findings and provide recommendations to address these issues, with a specific focus on their relevance to the field of social work in health care.

Risk factors for loss to follow up of pelvis and acetabular fractures

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic and acetabular fracture incidence is increasing worldwide for more than four decades. There is currently no evidence examining risk factors for loss to follow up in patients with these injuries.

METHODS

Patients presenting with pelvic and/or acetabular fractures at our institution between 2015 and 2020 were included. Demographic, injury, treatment, and follow up information was included. Excluded patients were those who sustained a pathologic fracture, has a course of treatment prior to transfer to our centre, or expired prior to discharge.

RESULTS

446 patients, 263 with a pelvic ring injury, 172 with an acetabular fracture, and 11 with combined injuries were identified. 271 (61%) of patients in our cohort followed up in Orthopaedic clinic (p = 0.016). With an odds ratio of 2.134, gunshot wound mechanism of injury was the largest risk factor for loss to follow up (p = 0.031) followed by male sex (OR= 1.859) and surgery with general trauma surgery (OR=1.841). The most protective risk factors for follow up with Orthopaedic surgery were operatively treated pelvic and acetabular fractures (OR=0.239) and Orthopaedic Surgery as the discharging service (OR=0.372).

DISCUSSION

Numerous risk factors exist for loss to follow up including male sex, ballistic mechanism, and discharging service. Investigation into interventions to improve follow up in these patients are warranted.

Surgical Care of Patients Experiencing Homelessness: A Scoping Review Using a Phases of Care Conceptual Framework

Homelessness is a growing concern across the world, particularly as individuals experiencing homelessness age and face an increasing burden of chronic health conditions. Although substantial research has focused on the medical and psychiatric care of patients experiencing homelessness, literature about the surgical care of these patients is sparse. Our objective was to review the literature to identify areas of concern unique to patients experiencing homelessness with surgical disease. A scoping review was conducted using a comprehensive database for studies from 1990 to September 1, 2020. Studies that included patients who were unhoused and discussed surgical care were included. The inclusion criteria were designed to identify evidence that directly affected surgical care, systems management, and policy making. Findings were organized within a Phases of Surgical Care framework: preoperative care, intraoperative care, postoperative care, and global use. Our search strategy yielded 553 unique studies, of which 23 met inclusion criteria. Most studies were performed at public and/or safety-net hospitals or via administrative datasets, and surgical specialties that were represented included orthopedic, cardiac, plastic surgery trauma, and vascular surgery. Using the Surgical Phases of Care framework, we identified studies that described the impact of housing status in pre- and postoperative phases as well as global use. There was limited identification of barriers to surgical and anesthetic best practices in the intraoperative phase. More than half of studies (52.2%) lacked a clear definition of homelessness. Thus, there is a marked gap in the surgical literature regarding the impact of housing status on optimal surgical care, with the largest area for improvement in the intraoperative phase of surgical and anesthetic decision making. Consistent use of clear definitions of homelessness is lacking. To promote improved care, a standardized approach to recording housing status is needed, and studies must explore vulnerabilities in surgical care unique to this population.

Definitive surgical femur fracture fixation in Northern Tanzania: implications of cost, payment method and payment status

Introduction

Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre (KCMC) covers major orthopaedic trauma for a catchment population of 12.5 million people in northern Tanzania. Femur fractures, the most common traumatic orthopaedic injury at KCMC (39%), require open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for definitive treatment. It is unclear whether payment affects care. This study sought to explore associations of payment method with episodes of care for femur fracture ORIFs at KCMC.

Methods

we performed a retrospective review of orthopaedic records between February 2018 and July 2018. Patients with femur fracture ORIF were eligible; patients without charts were excluded. Ethical clearance was obtained from the KCMC ethics committee. Statistical analysis utilized descriptive statistics, Chi-squared and Fisher’s exact Tests, and Student´s t-tests where appropriate.

Results

of 76 included patients, 17% (n=13) were insured, 83% (n=63) paid out-of-pocket, 11% (n=8) had unpaid balance, and 89% (n=68) fully paid. Average patient charge ($417) was 42% of per capita GDP ($998). Uninsured patients had higher bills ($429 vs $356; p=0.27) and were significantly more likely to pay an advance payment (95.2% vs 7.7%; p<0.001). Inpatient care was equivalent regardless of payment. Unpaid patients were less likely to receive follow-up (76.5% vs. 25%; p=0.006) and waited longer from injury to admission (31.5 vs 13.3 days; p<0.001), from admission to surgery (30.1 vs 11.1 days; p<0.001), and from surgery to discharge (18.4 vs 7.1 days; p<0.001).

Conclusion

equal standard of care is provided to all patients. However, future efforts may decrease disparities in advance payment, timeliness, and follow-up.

Epidemiology and risk factors for loss to follow-up following operatively treated femur ballistic fractures

INTRODUCTION

Evidence regarding recommendations for treatment of ballistic fractures remains limited. This paucity of literature has largely been attributed to gunshot wound victims being a difficult population to study secondary to loss to follow-up. The purpose of this study was to examine the epidemiology of operatively treated ballistic femur fractures at our institution, the frequency of outpatient follow-up and risk factors for loss to follow-up.

METHODS

Inpatient consults from 2013-2018 were queried for femoral gunshot wounds treated operatively. Cases without internal or external fixation were excluded from the study. Postoperative visits where a patient was hospitalized or had expired were excluded from the analysis. Demographic information, length of hospital stay, and operative characteristics were compared for different fixation methods and examined as risk factors for loss to follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 194 patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 27 years old and 94% of the patients were male. Patient's stayed a median of 5 days post-operatively with patients treated with external fixation staying longer than internal fixation (14 days vs 5 days p=0.01). 9.3% of ballistic fractures had a concomitant vascular injury necessitating repair. 70.4% of patients attended their 2-week postoperative visit, 55.7% of patients attended their 6 week follow-up visit and 31.3% attended their 3 month follow-up visit. Risk factors for loss to follow-up at 3 month visit included younger age (p=0.028), decreased hospital length of stay (p=0.025) and intramedullary fixation (p=0.00015).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This study reinforces the difficulty of studying ballistic fractures secondary to loss to follow-up. Younger age, shorter hospital stays and intramedullary fixation increased the risk for loss to follow-up at 3 months.

The impact of retained bullet fragments on outcomes in patients with gunshot wounds

BACKGROUND

Nationally, 115,000 non-fatal firearm injuries occurred in 2017, with many such victims possessing retained bullet fragments (RBFs); however, the impact of RBFs has not been well studied.

METHODS

An institutional trauma database from an urban, level one trauma center was queried for patients presenting with gunshot wounds (GSWs) to the ED in 2017. GSWs were stratified by the presence or absence of RBFs. Groups were compared using t-tests, chi-squared, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 674 patients with GSWs who met inclusion criteria, 394 had RBFs versus 280 with no RBFs. Patients with RBFs were more likely admitted from the ED (57.4% vs. 41.8%, p < 0.001), had significantly higher rates of return to the ED within six months (30.7% vs. 18.6%, p < 0.001), and higher rates of subsequent GSW in the next year (5.1% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.03). On return to ED, 17.6% of those with a RBF had symptoms associated with their RBF.

CONCLUSION

RBFs may represent an unrecognized risk factor for both repeat ED visits and subsequent bullet injury.

Gunshot injuries to the lower extremities: Issues, controversies and algorithm of management

Civilian gunshot violence is common and concentrated in specific geographic regions of the world, consuming a significant proportion of trauma practice in those particular regions. Unfortunately, the state of clinical evidence is scarce, and it is fair to emphasize that the field is scientifically under-represented. In the current review, the authors point out key aspects and principles requiring attention when treating low energy gunshot wounds to the lower extremity. These treatment principles include the following management concepts: 1) Conservative management of soft tissue injuries if the projectile causes no discomfort. 2) Conservative management of non-complete fractures of the tibia or femoral shaft. 3) Prophylactic fixation of non-complete peri-trochanteric fractures. 4) Fixation of allcomplete fractures. 5) Removal of all intra-articular projectiles. 6) Treating as septic arthritis if the missile passes through large bowel (not small bowel) prior to penetrating a joint capsule. The proposed concepts are based on available evidence from the literature and expert opinion. The authors also highlight challenges with conducting clinical studies in the field, given the high rate of 'loss to follow-up' and compliance issues in this particular group of patients.