Repeat emergency room visits for hand and wrist injuries

Health Disparities in Hand and Upper Extremity Surgery: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are linked to poor health care outcomes across the different medical specialties. We conducted a scoping review to understand the existing literature and identify further areas of research to address disparities within hand surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane was conducted. Inclusion criteria were English studies examining health disparities in hand surgery. The following were assessed: the main SDOH, study design/phase/theme, and main disease/injury/procedure. A previously described health disparities research framework was used to determine study phase: detecting (identifying risk factors), understanding (analyzing risk factors), and reducing (assessing interventions). Studies were categorized according to themes outlined at the National Institute of Health and American College of Surgeons: Summit on Surgical Disparities.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 446 articles, with 49 articles included in final analysis. The majority were detecting-type (31/49, 63%) or understanding-type (12/49, 24%) studies, with few reducing-type studies (6/49, 12%). Patient factors (31/49, 63%) and systemic/access factors (16/49, 33%) were the most frequently studied themes, with few investigating clinical care/quality factors (4/49, 8%), clinician factors (3/49, 6%), and postoperative/rehabilitation factors (1/49, 2%). The most commonly studied SDOH include insurance status (13/49, 27%), health literacy (10/49, 20%), and social deprivation (6/49, 12%). Carpal tunnel syndrome (9/49, 18%), upper extremity trauma (9/49, 18%), and amputations (5/49, 10%) were frequently assessed. Most investigations involved retrospective or database designs (29/49, 59%), while few were prospective, cross-sectional, or mixed-methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an encouraging upward trend in health disparities research, existing studies are in the early phases of investigation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Most of the literature focuses on patient factors and systemic/access factors in regard to insurance status. Further work with prospective, cross-sectional, and mixed-method studies is needed to better understand health disparities in hand surgery, which will inform future interventions.

Access to Reconstructive Hand Surgery in the United States-Investigating the Obstacles: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Mechanisms that affect access to surgical hand care appear to be complex and multifaceted. This scoping review aims to investigate the available literature describing such mechanisms and provide direction for future investigation.

METHODS

The methodological framework outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews was used to guide this review. In November 2021, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched. A narrative summary of the characteristics and key findings of each paper is used to present the data to facilitate the integration of diverse evidence.

RESULTS

Of 471 initial studies, 49 were included in our final analysis. Of these, 33% were cohort studies; 27% reported that underinsured patients are less likely to get an appointment with a hand specialist or to receive treatment. Overburdened emergency departments accounted for the second-most reported reason (16%) for diminished access to surgical hand care. Elective procedure financial incentives, poor emergency surgical hand coverage, distance to treatment, race, and policy were also notably reported across the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes the vast mechanisms that hinder access to surgical hand care and highlights their complexity. Possible solutions and policy changes that may help improve access have been described.

Incidence and Reason for Readmission and Unscheduled Health Care Contact After Distal Radius Fracture

Background: Understanding risk factors for readmission may help decrease the rate of these costly events. The purpose of this study is to define the incidence of 30-day readmission and unscheduled health care contact (UHC) after distal radius fracture (DRF). In addition, we aim to define risk factors for readmission and UHC. Methods: A retrospective review of patients who sustained a DRF at our trauma center was performed. We recorded baseline demographics, fracture characteristics, and treatment. Any UHC or readmission (including emergency department [ED] visits) was documented. Reasons for readmission and UHC were stratified by cause. We utilized a case-control design comparing patients readmitted within 30 days after DRF versus those who were not, as well as patients with and without UHC. Results: About 353 patients were identified. The 30-day incidence of readmission after DRF was 7% with 2% of patients readmitted for reasons related to their fracture. Twenty percent of patients had UHC within 30 days, most frequently due to pain. Patients with anxiety or depression and those with open fractures were more likely to be readmitted. Patients with UHC were younger, more likely to have depression or anxiety, and more likely to have undergone operative treatment. Conclusions: For patients sustaining DRF, we report a 30-day readmission rate of 7% with 20% of patients having UHC. Patients with depression or anxiety were more likely to be both readmitted and have UHC. Identifying risk factors for readmission during initial presentation may help reduce readmissions. Improving pain relief strategies early may aid in decreasing the burden of UHC.

A Decade of Progress Toward Establishing Regional Hand Trauma Centers in the United States

Although upper extremity amputations have become less common in the workplace because of improvements in safety and equipment, the American health system's ability to provide emergent microvascular care for these injuries remains highly fragmented, inconsistent, overburdened, and at times unavailable. Over the past decade, hand surgeons have worked to improve this disparity within health systems. This article discusses the need for emergent microsurgical treatment, barriers encountered in improving access to care, and a description of current and future efforts of developing a sustainable network of highly specialized regional hand trauma centers.

Thirty-Day Reoperation and/or Admission After Elective Hand Surgery in Adults: A 10-Year Review

PURPOSE

Whereas acute complications following elective hand surgery have been assumed to be rare, the incidence of 30-day unplanned reoperation and/or admission for the most common elective procedures has not been well described. Our goal was to calculate the incidence and identify the risk factors associated with these complications in a busy academic practice.

METHODS

Our institution's quality assurance database was examined retrospectively for unplanned reoperations and/or admissions within 30 days in adults undergoing elective procedures with 2 senior attending surgeons from February 2006 to January 2016. Each event was categorized by causative factor and charts were reviewed to establish risk factors and cultured organisms. Our billing database was examined for the concomitant procedural volume.

RESULTS

In our cohort of 18,081 surgeries (57.6% carpal tunnel or trigger digit releases), 27 patients had an unplanned reoperation and/or admission within 30 days (0.15% total incidence; including carpal tunnel release, 0.10%; trigger digit release, 0.09%; major wrist surgery, 0.74%) including 17 infections (0.09%). These were unevenly distributed over time after surgery with 29.6% occurring within 7 days, 59.2% in 8 to 14 days, 11.1% in 15 to 21 days, and none between 22 and 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Reoperations and/or unplanned admission within 30 days after elective hand surgery are infrequent (15 per 10,000 cases) and are most commonly related to infections (63.0%). More invasive surgeries are associated with a higher incidence than simpler procedures, and these complications are most likely to occur within 3 weeks after surgery. These data in elective patients do not cover certain clinically relevant outcomes, such as chronic pain or limited function, and may not be generalizable to all practices.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Hand Surgeons and Orthopedic Trauma Surgeons Call Coverage of Acute Upper Extremity Injuries: Where Should the Line Be Drawn?

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consensus as to which subspecialty service should cover acute upper extremity injuries in the emergency department (ED). The purpose of the present study is to understand how upper extremity injuries are currently triaged to specialists and to assess the current opinion among hand and orthopedic trauma specialists as to how these injuries should be best triaged based on injury location and severity.

METHODS

The American Association for Hand Surgery (AAHS) membership and Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) membership were surveyed using a 28-item online questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 103 responses from the AAHS and 114 responses from the OTA were received. Nearly 50% of the respondents report no formal anatomic line as to how upper extremity injuries are triaged to specialists from the ED. Approximately 57% of the AAHS respondents feel that hand call should begin at the distal radius or proximal, while 71% of the OTA respondents feel that hand call should begin at the radiocarpal joint or distal. There was increasing agreement that more complex injuries be assigned to the hand surgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

There is agreement that proximal to the elbow, the trauma consultant should be called, and distal to the distal radius, the hand consultant should be called. However, there is a lack of agreement as to who should be responsible for call between the elbow and the hand. To optimize patient care, better allocate consultant resources, and minimize conflict between consultants, establishing anatomic guidelines for consultation should be considered.

Pediatric Orthopaedic Workforce in 2014: Current Workforce and Projections for the Future

BACKGROUND

The changing nature of the United States (US) health care system has prompted debate concerning the physician supply. The basic questions are: do we have an adequate number of surgeons to meet current demands and are we training the correct number of surgeons to meet future demands? The purpose of this analysis was to characterize the current pediatric orthopaedic workforce in terms of supply and demand, both present and future.

METHODS

Databases were searched (POSNA, SF Match, KID, MGMA) to determine the current pediatric orthopaedic workforce and workforce distribution, as well as pediatric orthopaedic demand.

RESULTS

The number of active Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) members increased over the past 20 years, from 410 in 1993 to 653 in 2014 (155% increase); however, the density of POSNA members is not equally distributed, but correlates to population density. The number of estimated pediatric discharges, orthopaedic and nonorthopaedic, has remained relatively stable from 6,348,537 in 1997 to 5,850,184 in 2012. Between 2003 and 2013, the number of pediatric orthopaedic fellows graduating from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and non-Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education programs increased from 39 to 50 (29%), with a peak of 67 fellows (71%) in 2009.

DISCUSSION

Although predicting the exact need for pediatric orthopaedic surgeons (POS) is impossible because of the complex interplay among macroeconomic, governmental, insurance, and local factors, some trends were identified: the supply of POS has increased, which may offset the expected numbers of experienced surgeons who will be leaving the workforce in the next 10 to 15 years; macroeconomic factors influencing demand for physician services, driven by gross domestic product and population growth, are expected to be stable in the near future; expansion of the scope of practice for POS is expected to continue; and further similar assessments are warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II-economic and decision analysis.

A Population-Based Study of Replantation After Traumatic Thumb Amputation, 2007-2012

PURPOSE

The recommended surgical treatment after thumb amputation is replantation. In the United States, fewer than 40% of thumb amputation injuries are replanted, and little is known about factors associated with the probability of replantation. We aimed to investigate recent trends and examine patient and hospital characteristics that are associated with increased probability of attempted thumb replantation. We hypothesized that higher-volume teaching hospitals and level-I trauma centers attempted more replantations.

METHODS

We used 2007-2012 data from the National Trauma Data Bank. Our final sample included 2,206 traumatic thumb amputation patients treated in 1 of 365 centers during the study period. First, we used a 2-level hierarchical logistic model to estimate the odds of replantation. In addition, we used a treatment effect estimation method, with the inverse propensity score weighting to examine the difference in thumb replantation if the only variation among patients was their presumptive payer.

RESULTS

There was a higher probability of attempted replantation at teaching hospitals than nonteaching hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 1.40). Patients were less likely to undergo replantation at a level II (OR, 0.53) or a level III (OR, 0.33) trauma center. The uninsured were less likely to undergo replantation (OR, 0.61) than those with private insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

Having insurance coverage and being treated in a high-volume, teaching, level-I trauma hospital increased the odds of replantation after traumatic thumb amputation. Regionalization may lead to a higher number of indicated cases of replantation actually being attempted.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic II.

Racial Variation in Treatment of Traumatic Finger/Thumb Amputation: A National Comparative Study of Replantation and Revision Amputation

BACKGROUND

Traumatic finger/thumb amputations are some of the most prevalent traumatic injuries affecting Americans each year. Rates of replantation after traumatic finger/thumb amputation, however, have been declining steadily across U.S. hospitals, which may make these procedures less accessible to minorities and vulnerable populations. The specific aim of this study was to examine racial variation in finger replantation after traumatic finger/thumb amputation.

METHODS

Using a two-level hierarchical model, the authors retrospectively compared replantation rates for African American patients with those of whites, adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. Patients younger than 65 years with traumatic finger/thumb amputation injuries who sought care at a U.S. trauma center between 2007 and 2012 were included in the study sample.

RESULTS

The authors analyzed 13,129 patients younger than 65 years with traumatic finger/thumb amputation. Replantation rates declined over time from 19 percent to 14 percent (p = 0.004). Adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, African Americans (OR, 0.81; 95 percent CI, 0.66 to 0.99; p = 0.049) were less likely to undergo replantation procedures than whites, and uninsured patients (OR, 0.73; 95 percent CI, 0.62 to 0.84; p < 0.0001) were less likely than those who were privately insured.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite advancements in microsurgical techniques and the increasing use of reconstructive surgery in other fields, finger/thumb replantation rates are declining in the United States and vulnerable populations are less likely to undergo replantation after amputation injuries. Regionalization of care for these injuries may not only provide a higher quality care but also reduce variations in treatment.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Hand Trauma Care in the United States: A Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Hand trauma is one of the most complex injuries treated in the emergency department. Hand trauma injuries are time sensitive and require highly specialized care. Patients may have difficulty accessing appropriate hand trauma care because of a variety of factors. The authors aimed to evaluate the state of the hand trauma system by examining articles that reported on access to hand trauma care.

METHODS

The authors conducted a literature review on hand trauma care using the PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase databases. The authors included English language articles from the United States that described access to hand trauma care in the emergency health system.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies met the authors' inclusion criteria. Ten studies evaluated access to hand trauma care on a patient level. Of these 10 studies, five reported on access to care for transferred patients and five reported on access to care for patients with amputation injuries. The other four studies evaluated access to hand trauma care at a hospital level.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of hand trauma guidelines at emergency departments and a severe shortage of on-call hand specialists at community hospitals and trauma centers have created a suboptimal system of hand emergency care in the United States. The current system of hand trauma care in the United States not only may drive up the cost of care but may also adversely affect patients' health and well-being.

Comparison of hand emergency triage before and after specialty templates (2007 vs. 2012)

BACKGROUND

Emergency hand service is a national problem both for civilian and veteran patients. The North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Health system began coordinating emergency hand coverage within the plastic surgery service in 2008. Consult templates were designed to facilitate access to the appropriate service. Trainees were taken out of transfer decisions. Clinic templates were designed to fast track urgent patients to 8 a.m. appointments. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of our templates and triage system.

METHODS

All consults completed by the plastic surgery service were reviewed retrospectively. Emergent and urgent hand consults were identified. Time from consult submission to the patient being seen by the plastic surgery provider was recorded. Time frames were categorized as same day, next day, within 2 days, less than or equal to 7 days, and greater than 7 days. Type of emergency (trauma or infection) and treatment plan were noted.

RESULTS

There were 1,090 consults in 2007 and 1,868 consults in 2012 that were completed by the plastic surgery service. We found the number of urgent and emergent hand consults increased by a factor of 6 (49 to 294). Furthermore, 16.3 % (8/49) of patients were seen greater than 1 week after consult submission in 2007, compared with 8.1 % (24/294) of patients in 2012. Only one patient from 2007 and two patients from 2012 went to the OR after regular operating room hours.

CONCLUSION

A well-coordinated effort to speed access for hand emergencies can minimize expenses and improve quality of care.