Preinjury status: are orthopaedic trauma patients different than the general population?

Long-term functional outcomes in polytrauma: a fundamentally new approach is needed in prediction

PURPOSE

Modern trauma care has reduced mortality but poor long-term outcomes with low follow-up rates are common with limited recommendations for improvements. The aim of this study was to describe the impact of severe injury on the health-related quality of life, specifically characterise the non-responder population and to identify modifiable predictors of poorer outcomes.

METHODS

Five-year (2012-2016) prospective cohort study was performed at a level 1 trauma centre. Baseline Short-Form Health Survey (SF36) was collected at admission, and at 6 and 12 months postinjury together with demographics, injury mechanism and severity, psychosocial wellbeing, and return to work capacity.

RESULTS

Of the 306 consecutive patients [age 52 ± 17 years, male 72%, ISS 21 (17, 29), mortality 5%], 195 (64%) completed questionnaires at baseline, and at 12 months. Preinjury physical health scores were above the general population (53.1 vs. 50.3, p < 0.001) and mental health component was consistent with the population norms (51.7 vs. 52.9, p = 0.065). One year following injury, both physical health (13.2, 95% CI 14.8, 11.6) and mental health scores (6.0, 95% CI 8.1, 3.8) were significantly below age- and sex-adjusted preinjury baselines. Non-responders had similar ISS but with a lower admission GCS, and were more likely to be younger, and without comorbidities, employment, or university education.

CONCLUSION

Contrary to their better than population norm preinjury health status, polytrauma patients remain functionally impaired at least 1 year after injury. The identified high risk for non-responding group needs more focused efforts for follow-up. A fundamentally different approach is required in polytrauma research which identify modifiable predictors of poor long-term outcomes.

Agreement between the International Physical Activity Questionnaire and Accelerometry in Adults with Orthopaedic Injury

Orthopaedic injury can lead to decreased physical activity. Valid measures for assessing physical activity are therefore needed in this population. The aim of this study was to determine the agreement and concordance between the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form (IPAQ) and device-measured physical activity and sitting time in orthopaedic injury patients. Adults with isolated upper or lower limb fracture (n = 46; mean age of 40.5 years) wore two activity monitors (ActiGraph wGT3X-BT and activPAL) for 10 days, from 2 weeks post-discharge. The IPAQ was also completed for a concurrent 7-day period. Lin's concordance correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots were calculated to compare walking/stepping time, total METmins, and sitting time. The IPAQ overestimated device-derived walking time (mean difference = 2.34 ± 7.33 h/week) and total METmins (mean difference = 767 ± 1659 METmins/week) and underestimated sitting time (mean difference = -2.26 ± 3.87 h/day). There was fair concordance between IPAQ-reported and device-measured walking (ρ = 0.34) and sitting time (ρ = 0.38) and moderate concordance between IPAQ-reported and device-measured METmins (ρ = 0.43). In patients with orthopaedic injury, the IPAQ overestimates physical activity and underestimates sitting time. Higher agreement was observed in the forms of activity (walking, total PA and sitting) commonly performed by this patient group.

Can Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) from Population Surveys Provide Accurate Estimates of Pre-Admission Health Status of Emergency Hospital Admissions?

INTRODUCTION

The use of PROs for assessing the outcomes of emergency hospital admissions requires a means of estimating patients' pre-admission health status. A possible alternative to asking patients to recall how their health was before the incident causing admission is to use estimates derived from matched samples from population surveys. Our aims were to explore the impact of different methods of matching and to compare the results with estimates based on retrospective reporting.

METHODS

First, elective hip arthroplasty patients were matched to respondents to the General Practice Patient Survey using age, sex, socio-economic status and number of comorbidities. The impact of restricting matching for locality and specific co-morbidities was explored. Second, the best matching method was applied to emergency admissions for laparotomy and for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after acute myocardial infarction. Data were stratified by patient characteristics. Differences in mean EQ-5D scores between the patients and matched population respondents were tested using t tests.

RESULTS

Modifying the most basic form of matching by also taking locality and the specific comorbid conditions into account made no significant difference to the mean EQ-5D score for hip arthroplasty patients. Even using the most detailed matching possible, patients' mean EQ-5D score was significantly different to that of the general population for all three cohorts. The difference was greatest for elective hip arthroplasty (0.22 v 0.64), less so for emergency laparotomy (0.56 v 0.72) and least for PCI (0.79 v 0.71). This reflects hip arthroplasty patients having a long-standing condition characterised by pain and limited mobility, whereas the other two cohorts may have enjoyed reasonable health until an unexpected acute episode led to their emergency admission.

CONCLUSION

Routine PRO data acquired from population surveys cannot be used as an accurate alternative to retrospectively reported PROMs by patients during their emergency admission episode.

Pre-injury health status of major trauma patients with orthopaedic injuries

BACKGROUND

Pre-injury health status is an important determining factor of long-term outcomes after orthopaedic major trauma. Determining pre-injury health status of major trauma patients with orthopaedic injuries is also important for evaluating the change from pre to post-injury health status.

OBJECTIVES

Describe pre-injury health statuses reported at three different time points (6, 12 and 24 months) after injury and compare these with Australian normative values; determine the agreement between pre-injury health status collected at multiple time points post-injury; and identify factors associated with reporting better pre-injury health status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A registry-based cohort study was conducted. Major trauma patients with orthopaedic injuries captured by the Victorian State Trauma Registry with a date of injury from January 2009 to December 2016 were included. Pre-injury health status (measured using the EuroQol-Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS)), reported 6, 12 and 24 months post-injury, was compared against Australian population normative values. The Bland-Altman method of comparison was used to determine the agreement between pre-injury EQ-VAS scores reported 6 to 12 and 6 to 24 months post-injury. Mixed effects ordinal logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with reporting better pre-injury health status.

RESULTS

A total of 3,371 patients were eligible for the study. The median (IQR) pre-injury EQ-VAS score reported 6, 12 and 24 months post-injury was 90 (85-100) out of 100. Participants' pre-injury EQ-VAS scores reported 6, 12 and 24 months post-injury were significantly higher than Australian population normative values. Pre-injury EQ-VAS scores reported 6 months post-injury agreed with pre-injury EQ-VAS scores reported 12 and 24 months post-injury. A significant association exists between pre-injury health status and age, comorbidities, injury characteristics, socioeconomic status and pre-injury work status.

CONCLUSIONS

People with orthopaedic major trauma have better pre-injury health compared to the general Australian population. Therefore, population-specific values should be used as baseline measures to evaluate orthopaedic trauma outcomes. Pre-injury health status values reported at three different post-injury time points were comparable. If conducting a retrospective pre-injury health evaluation, researchers need be aware of factors that influence self-reporting of pre-injury health status and the response shift that may happen due to encountering injury.

Agreement between medical record and administrative coding of common comorbidities in orthopaedic trauma patients

OBJECTIVE

To i) quantify the agreement between comorbidities documented within medical records and an orthopaedic trauma dataset; and ii) compare agreement between these sources before and after the introduction of new comorbidity coding rules in Australian hospitals.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A random sample of adult (≥ 16 years) orthopaedic trauma patients (n = 400) were extracted from the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry (VOTOR). Diagnoses of obesity, arthritis, diabetes and cardiac conditions documented within patients' medical records were compared to ICD-10-AM comorbidity codes (provided by hospitals) for the same admission. Agreement was calculated (Cohen's kappa) before and after the introduction of new coding rules.

RESULTS

All comorbidities had the same or higher prevalence in medical record data compared to coded data. Kappa values ranged from <0.001 (poor agreement) for coronary artery disease to 0.94 (excellent agreement) for type 2 diabetes. There was improvement in agreement between sources for most conditions following the introduction of new coding rules.

CONCLUSION

There has been improvement in the coding of certain comorbidities since the introduction of new coding rules, suggesting that, since 2015, administrative data has improved capacity to capture patients' comorbidity profiles. Consideration must be taken when using the ICD-10-AM data due to its limitations.

Impact of comorbidity on health outcome after a transport-related injury

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the impact of comorbidity on health outcomes is important given that comorbidities can affect survival, morbidity, service delivery costs and healthcare utilisation. However, little is known about the types of comorbidities affecting specific health outcomes after minor to moderate road trauma.

METHODS

This study involved 1574 participants who claimed injury compensation following transport-related injury. Cross sectional data were collected. Health outcomes were assessed using the EQ-5D-3L specific domains and summary score. Twelve self-reported pre-existing chronic conditions were assessed using a multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for demographic and injury characteristics.

RESULTS

Out of 1574 participants, only 17 (1%) participants reported no pre-existing comorbidities, 72% reported one, 13% reported two and 14% reported three or more comorbidities. Hypertension (15%), depression (14%) and anxiety (14%) were the most commonly reported comorbidities, followed by arthritis (13%), chronic pain (11%) and asthma (11%). Participants with a history of arthritis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.90, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.91); chronic back pain (AOR 1.59, 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.43); other chronic pain (AOR 2.73, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.24); depression (AOR 2.55, 95% CI 1.60 to 4.05) and anxiety (AOR 2.08, 95% CI 1.32 to 3.26) were at increased risk of poorer health outcomes, after controlling for age, gender, type of injury and time since injury.

CONCLUSION

This study found that comorbidities such as arthritis, chronic back pain, other chronic pain, depression and anxiety significantly increase the odds of poorer health postinjury, regardless of the time since injury. Regular screening of comorbid conditions may help identify people likely to have poorer outcomes, thereby enabling the implementation of interventions to optimise health despite the presence of comorbidities.

Comparison of pre-injury recalled Health Status (HS) data of trauma patients and HS of the general population

PURPOSE

Significant differences exist between retrospectively collected pre-injury Health Status (HS) of trauma patients and the HS of the general population. Compared to the general population, the trauma population includes a larger proportion of individuals with a low level of socio-economic status. The aim was to compare retrospectively collected pre-injury HS with HS of a sample of Dutch individuals not only adjusted for age and gender, but also for educational level.

METHODS

Within three months post-trauma, pre-injury HS (n = 2987) was collected by using the EuroQol-five-dimension-3-level (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire. Data were abstracted from the Brabant Injury Outcome Surveillance. The reference cohort (n = 1839) included a sample of the Dutch general population. Multiple regression was used to compare HS of both cohorts.

RESULTS

A higher recalled pre-injury EQ-5D-3L score of the injury cohort was reported compared to the HS of the reference cohort after adjustment for age (β = 0.014 [95% CI: 0.001,0.027] for males and β = 0.018 [95% CI: -0.001, 0.036] for females). After adjustment for age and educational level, the Beta showed a ≥10% increasement: males; unadjusted β = 0.006 [95% CI: -0.007, 0.019] to β = 0.014 [95% CI: 0.001, 0.027] after age adjustment to β = 0.020 [95% CI: 0.007, 0.033] after adjustment for age and educational level, females; unadjusted β = -0.018 [95% CI: -0.035, -0.001] to β = 0.018 [95% CI: -0.001, 0.036] after age adjustments to β = 0.025 [95% CI: 0.007, 0.043] after adjustments for age and educational level. After adjustment for age, gender and educational level, the injury cohort reported prior to the trauma less problems on the 'pain/discomfort' (OR = 0.522 [95% CI: 0.454, 0.602]) and the 'anxiety/depression' (OR = 0.745 [95% CI: 0.619, 0.897]) dimensions, as compared to the reference cohort. In contrast, the injury cohort reported significantly more problems on the 'self-care' dimension (OR = 1.497 [95% CI: 0.1.112, 2.016]) prior to the trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

Injured patients report better recalled pre-injury HS compared to the HS of the reference cohort. After adjustment for educational level, the difference in HS between the injury cohort and the reference cohort increases, underlining that other confounders might also influence HS.

Health-related quality of life loss associated with first-time stroke

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to quantify health-related quality of life (HRQoL) loss associated with first episode of stroke by comparing patient-reported HRQoL before and after stroke onset. The impact of stroke in local population was also evaluated by comparing the pre- and post-stroke HRQoL with that of the general population.

METHODS

The HRQoL of stroke survivors was assessed with the EQ-5D-3L index score at recruitment, for recalled pre-stroke HRQoL, and at 3 and 12 month post-stroke. Change in HRQoL from pre-stroke to 3 and 12 month was self-reported by 285 and 238 patients, respectively. Mean EQ index score at each time point (baseline: 464 patients; 3 month post-stroke: 306 patients; 12 month post-stroke: 258 patients) was compared with published population norms for EQ-5D-3L.

RESULTS

There was a significant decrease in HRQoL at 3 (0.25) and 12 month (0.09) post-stroke when compared to the retrospectively recalled patients' mean pre-stroke HRQoL level (0.87). The reduction at 3 month was associated with the reduction in all EQ-5D-3L health dimensions; reductions remaining at 12 month were limited to dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, and anxiety/depression. Stroke patients had a lower mean EQ index than the general population by 0.07 points pre-stroke (0.87 vs. 0.94), 0.33 points at 3 month (0.61 vs. 0.94) and 0.18 points at 12 month (0.76 vs. 0.94) post-stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Stroke has a substantial impact on HRQoL in Singapore, especially in the first three months post-stroke. Compared to the general population, stroke survivors have lower HRQoL even before stroke onset. This pre-stroke deficit in HRQoL should be taken into account when quantifying health burden of stroke or setting goals for stroke rehabilitation.

Feasibility of collecting retrospective patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in emergency hospital admissions

INTRODUCTION

Outcome of emergency admissions is usually limited to mortality with little attempt to capture the views of health status of survivors. This is because of the challenge of determining patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for the period before their emergency admission. The aim was to assess the feasibility of collecting retrospective PROMs to capture the pre-admission health status of patients admitted as emergencies.

METHODS

Prospective study of two cohorts: patients undergoing primary coronary angioplasty for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in five hospitals and emergency laparotomy (EL) for gastro-intestinal conditions in 11 hospitals. Three rates were calculated: proportion of patients eligible for inclusion; proportion of eligible patients invited to participate; proportion of invitees who participated. Staff views were thematically analysed to understand factors that affected recruitment.

RESULTS

About 85% of patients were eligible of whom most were invited to participate (84% EL; 79% STEMI). The proportions of invitees agreeing to participate differed between STEMI (92%) and EL (72%), probably reflecting greater post-intervention morbidity in the latter. Variation between hospitals was observed in the proportion deemed eligible (EL 72-97%; STEMI 63-100%), proportion invited (EL 60-93%; STEMI 71-96%) and the proportion of invitees agreeing to participate (EL 55-92%; STEMI 67-100%). While this might reflect case-mix differences between hospitals, it suggests there is scope for less well performing hospitals to improve their recruitment processes. The extent to which this initial feasibility study was able to assess selection bias was limited to the age and sex of patients. There was no bias evident for EL patients but for STEMI, younger men were more likely to participate.

CONCLUSION

It appears to be feasible to collect retrospective PROMs from patients admitted unexpectedly as emergencies for the two conditions studied. The relevance of these findings to other causes of emergency admissions needs to be established. In addition, these findings justify the case for a large, multi-site study that could explore unresolved concerns about selection bias, particularly those arising from the clinical characteristics of patients. It would also enable estimates of the extent of variation in PROMs between hospitals to determine the usefulness of using PROMs in emergency admissions.

Pre-injury health status of injured patients: a prospective comparison with the Dutch population

Purpose

The aim of this study was to assess whether injured patients have a different pre-injury health status compared to the Dutch population.

Methods

A broad range of injured patients (age ≥ 18 and ≤ 75 years) completed the condition-specific Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA-NL) and generic health-related quality of life questionnaire EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), within 2 weeks after patients sustained an injury. Patients reported their health status of the week before their injury. Scores were compared to the Dutch normative data of the questionnaires. Gender, age, educational level, relationship status, and comorbidity adjusted differences were calculated for the SMFA-NL.

Results

A total of 596 injured patients completed the questionnaires (response rate: 43%). Unadjusted pre-injury SMFA-NL scores of injured patients were significantly better compared to the Dutch normative data (ranging from + 2.4 to + 8.6 points, p < 0.001 for all subscales and indices). The unadjusted EQ-5D difference score was 0.05 points (p < 0.001) higher in the group of injured patients. Adjusted pre-injury scores were higher than the SMFA-NL normative data. Function index: + 3.6, p < 0.001, bother index: + 3.0, p < 0.001 upper extremity dysfunction: + 0.8, p = 0.2, lower extremity dysfunction: + 3.7, p < 0.001. Problems with daily activities: + 2.8, p = 0.001. Mental and emotional problems: + 6.8, p < 0.001.

Conclusions

Injured patients reported a better pre-injury health status compared to the Dutch population. Patient characteristics explained an important part of the difference in health status between injured patients and the Dutch population.

Early risk factors for depression, anxiety and post-traumatic distress after hospital admission for unintentional injury: Multicentre cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To quantify psychological morbidity and identify baseline factors associated with depression, anxiety and post-traumatic distress symptoms up to 12 months post-injury.

METHODS

Multicentre cohort study of 668 adults, aged 16 to 70, admitted to 4 UK NHS hospital trusts. Data on injury, socio-demographic characteristics and health status was collected at recruitment. Depression, anxiety and post-traumatic distress were measured at 1, 2, 4 and 12 months post-injury. Multilevel linear regression assessed associations between patient and injury characteristics and psychological outcomes over 12 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Depression, anxiety and post-traumatic distress scores were highest 1 month post-injury, and remained above baseline at 2, 4 and 12 months post-injury. Moderate or severe injuries, previous psychiatric diagnoses, higher pre-injury depression and anxiety scores, middle age (45-64 years), greater deprivation and lower pre-injury quality of life (QoL) were associated with higher depression scores post-injury. Previous psychiatric diagnoses, higher pre-injury depression and anxiety scores, middle age, greater deprivation and lower pre-injury QoL were associated with higher anxiety scores post-injury. Traffic injuries or injuries from being struck by objects, multiple injures (≥3), being female, previous psychiatric diagnoses, higher pre-injury anxiety scores and greater deprivation were associated with higher post-traumatic distress scores post-injury.

CONCLUSION

A range of risk factors, identifiable shortly after injury, are associated with psychological morbidity occurring up to 12 months post-injury in a general trauma population. Further research is required to explore the utility of these, and other risk factors in predicting psychological morbidity on an individual patient basis.

Assessment of pre-injury health-related quality of life: a systematic review

Background

Insight into the change from pre- to post-injury health-related quality of life (HRQL) of trauma patients is important to derive estimates of the impact of injury on HRQL. Prospectively collected pre-injury HRQL data are, however, often not available due to the difficulty to collect these data before the injury. We performed a systematic review on the current methods used to assess pre-injury health status and to estimate the change from pre- to post-injury HRQL due to an injury.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and other databases. We identified studies that reported on the pre-injury HRQL of trauma patients. Articles were collated by type of injury and HRQL instrument used. Reported pre-injury HRQL scores were compared with general age- and gender-adjusted norms for the EQ-5D, SF-36, and SF-12.

Results

We retrieved results from 31 eligible studies, described in 41 publications. All but two studies used retrospective assessment and asked patients to recall their pre-injury HRQL, showing widely varying timings of assessments (soon after injury up to years after injury). These studies commonly applied the SF-36 (n = 13), EQ-5D (n = 9), or SF-12 (n = 3) using questionnaires (n = 14) or face-to-face interviews (n = 11). Two studies reported prospective pre-injury assessment, based on prospective longitudinal cohort studies from a sample of initially non-injured patients, and applied questionnaires using the SF-36 or SF-12. The recalled pre-injury HRQL scores of injury patients consistently exceeded age- and sex-adjusted population norms, except in a limited number of studies on injury types of higher severity (e.g., traumatic brain injury and hip fractures). All studies reported reduced post-injury HRQL compared to pre-injury HRQL. Both prospective studies reported that patients had recovered to their pre-injury levels of physical and mental health, while in all but one retrospective study patients did not regain the reported pre-injury levels of HRQL, even years after injury.

Conclusions

So far, primarily retrospective research has been conducted to assess pre-injury HRQL. This research shows consistently higher pre-injury HRQL scores than population norms and a recovery that lags behind that of prospective assessments, implying a systematic overestimation of the change in HRQL from pre- to post-injury due to an injury. More prospective research is necessary to examine the effect of recall bias and response shift. Researchers should be aware of the bias that may arise when pre-injury HRQL is assessed retrospectively or when population norms are applied, and should use prospectively derived HRQL scores wherever possible to estimate the impact of injury on HRQL.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12963-017-0127-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Retrospectively patient-reported pre-event health status showed strong association and agreement with contemporaneous reports

OBJECTIVE

The unpredictability of the occurrence of illnesses and injuries leading to most emergency admissions to hospital makes it impossible prospectively to collect preadmission patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Our aims were to review the evidence for using retrospective PROMs to determine pre-event health status and the validity of using general population norms instead of retrospective PROMs.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Searches of Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Global Health, and Health Management information. Six studies met the inclusion criteria for the first aim, and 11 studies addressed the second aim. Narrative syntheses were conducted.

RESULTS

Strong associations were found between retrospective and contemporary PROMs in 21 of 30 comparisons (correlation coefficients over 0.68) and 20 of 24 showed strong agreement for continuous measures (intraclass correlations over 0.75). Categorical measures revealed only fair to moderate levels of agreement (kappa 0.3-0.6). Associations were stronger for indices than for individual items and for shorter time intervals. The direction of differences was inconsistent. Retrospective PROMs reported by elderly patients were similar to the general population but younger adults had been healthier.

CONCLUSION

Retrospective collection offers a means of assessing PROMs in unexpected emergency admissions. However, further research is needed to establish the best policy for their use.

Health related quality of life and return to work after minor extremity injuries: A longitudinal study comparing upper versus lower extremity injuries

PURPOSE

To investigate the impact on health related quality of life (HRQL) during the first year after minor extremity injury and to determine whether there is a difference in recovery patterns and return to work between upper extremity injuries (UEI) and lower extremity injuries (LEI).

METHOD

A total of 181 adults' age 18 years or older randomly selected from patients admitted to an emergency department with minor injuries were studied. HRQL was measured using the Functional Status Questionnaire (FSQ) at 1-2 weeks, 3, 6, and 12-months post-injury. Pre-injury FSQ scores were measured retrospectively at admission. A quasi-least square (QLS) model was constructed to examine differences of FSQ scores at each measuring point for UEI and LEI.

RESULTS

Fractures of the knee/lower leg (25%) were the most frequently injured body area. Slips or falls (57%) and traffic-related events (22%) were the most common injury causes. The mean ISS was 4.2 (SD 0.86). Both groups had significant declines in the FSQ scores physical and social functioning at 1-2 weeks after injury. Patients with UEI made larger improvements in the first 3 months post-injury versus patients with LEI whose improvements extended over the first 6 months. None of the groups reached the pre-injury FSQ scores during the first post-injury year except in the subscale work performance where UEI exceeded the pre-injury scores. At 12 months post-injury, significant lower FSQ scores remained in the LEI group compared to the UEI group in intermediate activities of daily living (p=0.036, d 0.4) and work performance (p=0.004, d 0.7). The return to work at 3 months and 12 months were 76% and 88% for UEI and 58% and 77% for LEI. No significant differences were found between groups in the FSQ scale mental health and social interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

LEI had the highest impact on HRQL and return to work during the first year which exceeded the consequences of UEI. These findings contribute to the information about the consequences of injury in order to give sufficient prognostic information to patients and different stakeholders. Future investigations should aim to investigate specific minor extremity injuries and identify factors that facilitate recovery and return to work.

Comparison of measures of comorbidity for predicting disability 12-months post-injury

BACKGROUND

Understanding the factors that impact on disability is necessary to inform trauma care and enable adequate risk adjustment for benchmarking and monitoring. A key consideration is how to adjust for pre-existing conditions when assessing injury outcomes, and whether the inclusion of comorbidity is needed in addition to adjustment for age. This study compared different approaches to modelling the impact of comorbidity, collected as part of the routine hospital episode data, on disability outcomes following orthopaedic injury.

METHODS

12-month Glasgow Outcome Scale - Extended (GOS-E) outcomes for 13,519 survivors to discharge were drawn from the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry, a prospective cohort study of admitted orthopaedic injury patients. ICD-10-AM comorbidity codes were mapped to four comorbidity indices. Cases with a GOS-E score of 7-8 were considered "recovered". A split dataset approach was used with cases randomly assigned to development or test datasets. Logistic regression models were fitted with "recovery" as the outcome and the performance of the models based on each comorbidity index (adjusted for injury and age) measured using calibration (Hosmer-Lemshow (H-L) statistics and calibration curves) and discrimination (Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUC)) statistics.

RESULTS

All comorbidity indices improved model fit over models with age and injuries sustained alone. None of the models demonstrated acceptable model calibration (H-L statistic p < 0.05 for all models). There was little difference between the discrimination of the indices for predicting recovery: Charlson Comorbidity Index (AUC 0.70, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.71); number of ICD-10 chapters represented (AUC 0.70, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.72); number of six frequent chronic conditions represented (AUC 0.70, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.71); and the Functional Comorbidity Index (AUC 0.69, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of ICD-10 recorded comorbid conditions is an important predictor of long term functional outcome following orthopaedic injury and adjustment for comorbidity is indicated when assessing risk-adjusted functional outcomes over time or across jurisdictions.

Retrospective evaluation versus population norms for the measurement of baseline health status

Background

Patient recall or the application of population norms are commonly used methods to estimate (unobservable) health status prior to acute-onset illness or injury; however, both measures are potentially subject to bias. This article reports tests of the validity of both approaches, and discusses the implications for reporting changes in health-related quality of life following acute-onset illness or injury.

Methods

Recalled pre-injury health status and health status at 5- and 12-months post-injury were collected from participants in a prospective cohort study of people injured in New Zealand. Reported post-injury health status was compared with recalled pre-injury status and New Zealand norms for two groups: those who reported having fully recovered, and those who had not.

Results

There was a small but statistically significant difference between pre- and post-injury health state valuations for people who had fully recovered, with recalled pre-injury health status being higher than reported post-injury health. Perceived health status for those who had fully recovered was significantly higher than the population norm.

Conclusions

Retrospective evaluation of health status is more appropriate than the application of population norms to estimate health status prior to acute-onset injury or illness, although there may be a small upward bias in such measurements.

Longer term health of young and middle-aged adults following unintentional falls at home resulting in hospitalisation

Unintentional falls at home are a common cause of admissions to hospital amongst young and middle-aged adults. This population-based study investigated the longer-term health, physical and psychological outcomes following such injuries, and the predictors of these sequelae.

METHOD

Individuals aged 25-60 years admitted to hospital in the Auckland region between July 2005 and June 2006 following an unintentional fall at home were interviewed soon after the injury (baseline) and 15-months following the injury. Information collected at baseline on pre-injury status was analysed in relation to changes in general health and functioning, psychological outcomes, and role limitations at follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 328 participants eligible for study, 251 (77%) completed the follow-up interview. Reductions in general health and overall functioning (compared with pre-injury status) were reported by 25% and 43% of participants, respectively. In multivariate analyses, predictors of specific adverse outcomes at follow-up included increasing age (reduction in functioning), lower limb injuries (reductions in general health and functioning); female gender (psychological sequelae); injury severity score ≥9 (anxiety and depression); and length of hospital stay (fear of falling and post-traumatic stress symptoms).

CONCLUSIONS

The significant longer-term reductions in health and levels of functioning reveal the importance of strengthening efforts to prevent falls amongst young and middle-aged adults, and identifying groups at increased risk of longer-term disability who could benefit from targeted interventions.

Measuring the population burden of injuries--implications for global and national estimates: a multi-centre prospective UK longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Current methods of measuring the population burden of injuries rely on many assumptions and limited data available to the global burden of diseases (GBD) studies. The aim of this study was to compare the population burden of injuries using different approaches from the UK Burden of Injury (UKBOI) and GBD studies.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The UKBOI was a prospective cohort of 1,517 injured individuals that collected patient-reported outcomes. Extrapolated outcome data were combined with multiple sources of morbidity and mortality data to derive population metrics of the burden of injury in the UK. Participants were injured patients recruited from hospitals in four UK cities and towns: Swansea, Nottingham, Bristol, and Guildford, between September 2005 and April 2007. Patient-reported changes in quality of life using the EQ-5D at baseline, 1, 4, and 12 months after injury provided disability weights used to calculate the years lived with disability (YLDs) component of disability adjusted life years (DALYs). DALYs were calculated for the UK and extrapolated to global estimates using both UKBOI and GBD disability weights. Estimated numbers (and rates per 100,000) for UK population extrapolations were 750,999 (1,240) for hospital admissions, 7,982,947 (13,339) for emergency department (ED) attendances, and 22,185 (36.8) for injury-related deaths in 2005. Nonadmitted ED-treated injuries accounted for 67% of YLDs. Estimates for UK DALYs amounted to 1,771,486 (82% due to YLDs), compared with 669,822 (52% due to YLDs) using the GBD approach. Extrapolating patient-derived disability weights to GBD estimates would increase injury-related DALYs 2.6-fold.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of disability weights derived from patient experiences combined with additional morbidity data on ED-treated patients and inpatients suggests that the absolute burden of injury is higher than previously estimated. These findings have substantial implications for improving measurement of the national and global burden of injury.

Measuring the population burden of fatal and nonfatal injury

The value of measuring the population burden of fatal and nonfatal injury is well established. Population health metrics are important for assessing health status and health-related quality of life after injury and for integrating mortality, disability, and quality-of-life consequences. A frequently used population health metric is the disability-adjusted life-year. This metric was launched in 1996 in the original Global Burden of Disease and Injury study and has been widely adopted by countries and health development agencies alike to identify the relative magnitude of different health problems. Apart from its obvious advantages and wide adherence, a number of challenges are encountered when the disability-adjusted life-year is applied to injuries. Validation of disability-adjusted life-year estimates for injury has been largely absent. This paper provides an overview of methods and existing knowledge regarding the population burden of injury measurement. The review of studies that measured burden of injury shows that estimates of the population burden remain uncertain because of a weak epidemiologic foundation; limited information on incidence, outcomes, and duration of disability; and a range of methodological problems, including definition and selection of incident and fatal cases, choices in selection of assessment instruments and timings of use for nonfatal injury outcomes, and the underlying concepts of valuation of disability. Recommendations are given for methodological refinements to improve the validity and comparability of future burden of injury studies.

A systematic review of studies measuring health-related quality of life of general injury populations

Background

It is important to obtain greater insight into health-related quality of life (HRQL) of injury patients in order to document people's pathways to recovery and to quantify the impact of injury on population health over time. We performed a systematic review of studies measuring HRQL in general injury populations with a generic health state measure to summarize existing knowledge.

Methods

Injury studies (1995-2009) were identified with main inclusion criteria being the use of a generic health status measure and not being restricted to one specific type of injury. Articles were collated by study design, HRQL instrument used, timing of assessment(s), predictive variables and ability to detect change over time.

Results

Forty one studies met inclusion criteria, using 24 different generic HRQL and functional status measures (most used were SF-36, FIM, GOS, EQ-5D). The majority of the studies used a longitudinal design, but with different lengths and timings of follow-up (mostly 6, 12, and 24 months). Different generic health measures were able to discriminate between the health status of subgroups and picked up changes in health status between discharge and 12 month follow-up. Most studies reported high prevalences of health problems within the first year after injury. The twelve studies that reported HRQL utility scores showed considerable but incomplete recovery in the first year after discharge.

Conclusion

This systematic review demonstrates large variation in use of HRQL instruments, study populations, and assessment time points used in studies measuring HRQL of general injury populations. This variability impedes comparison of HRQL summary scores between studies and prevented formal meta-analyses aiming to quantify and improve precision of the impact of injury on population health over time.