[Infections of the hand and forearm]

Infections of the hand and forearm are a frequently seen surgical emergency of the hand. Patients of all age groups are affected and underlying systemic diseases are risk factors. Posttraumatic causes are the leading cause of infections. This includes cuts and stab wounds, animal and human bites but often also minor injuries. Due to the anatomical peculiarities of the hand, rapid progression of initially inconspicuous infections can occur resulting in functional limitations. If an infection is suspected, a symptom-oriented evaluation by a hand surgeon should be performed. This includes a detailed patient history, clinical examination, laboratory analyses and imaging. This is followed by the development of an individualized and interdisciplinary treatment concept with the aim of achieving the shortest possible rehabilitation period. The treatment includes surgical cleansing of the infection, accompanied by antibiotic treatment taking the expected possible spectrum of pathogens into account. Cephalosporins and aminopenicillins in combination with beta-lactamase inhibitors are the antibiotics of first choice. Follow-up treatment includes early functional exercise under the guidance of a hand therapist to minimize postinfectious restrictions in the range of motion and to enable occupational rehabilitation. In rare cases, fulminant necrotizing infections with resulting skin and soft tissue defects can occur. In these cases, secondary plastic reconstruction is usually required after cleansing of the infection.

Review of Risks and Complications of Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF)

Background

Extreme lateral interbody fusions (XLIF) and Minimally Invasive (MIS) XLIF were developed to limit the vascular injuries associated with anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), and minimize the muscular/ soft tissue trauma attributed to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF).

Methods

Nevertheless, XLIF/MIS XLIF pose significant additional risks and complications that include; multiple nerve injuries (e.g. lumbar plexus, ilioinguinal, iliohypogastric, genitofemoral, lateral femoral cutaneous, and subcostals (to the anterior abdominal muscles: abdominal oblique), and sympathectomy), major vascular injuries, bowel perforations/postoperative ileus, seromas, pseudarthrosis, subsidence, and reoperations.

Results

The risks of neural injury with XLIF/MIS XLIF (up to 30-40%) are substantially higher than for TLIF, PLIF, PLF, and ALIF. These neural injuries included: lumbar plexus injuries (13.28%); new sensory deficits (0-75% (21.7%-40%); permanent 62.5%); motor deficits (0.7-33.6%-40%); iliopsoas weakness (9%-31%: permanent 5%), anterior thigh/groin pain (12.5-34%), and sympathectomy (4%-12%). Additional non-neurological complications included; subsidence (10.3%-13.8%), major vascular injuries (0.4%), bowel perforations, recurrent seroma, malpositioning of the XLIF cages, a 45% risk of cage-overhang, pseudarthrosis (7.5%), and failure to adequately decompress stenosis. In one study, reviewing 20 publications and involving 1080 XLIF patients, the authors observed "Most (XLIF) studies are limited by study design, sample size, and potential conflicts of interest."

Conclusion

Many new neurological deficits and other adverse events/complications are attributed to MIS XLIF/ XLIF. Shouldn't these significant risk factors be carefully taken into consideration before choosing to perform MIS XLIF/XLIF?

Many Intraoperative Monitoring Modalities Have Been Developed To Limit Injury During Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF/MIS XLIF): Does That Mean XLIF/MIS XLIF Are Unsafe?

Background:

Extreme lateral interbody fusions (XLIF) and Minimally Invasive (MIS) XLIF pose significant risks of neural injury to the; lumbar plexus, ilioinguinal, iliohypogastric, genitofemoral, lateral femoral cutaneous, and subcostal nerves. To limit these injuries, many intraoperative neural monitoring (IONM) modalities have been proposed.

Methods:

Multiple studies document various frequencies of neural injuries occurring during MIS XLIF/XLIF: plexus injuries (13.28%); sensory deficits (0-75%; permanent 62.5%); motor deficits (0.7-33.6%; most typically iliopsoas weakness (14.3%-31%)), and anterior thigh/groin pain (12.5-25%.-34%). To avoid/limit these injuries, multiple IONM techniques have been proposed. These include; using finger electrodes during operative dissection, employing motor evoked potentials (MEP), eliminating (no) muscle relaxants (NMR), and using “triggered” EMGs.

Results:

In one study, finger electrodes for XLIF at L4-L5 level for degenerative spondylolisthesis reduced transient postoperative neurological symptoms from 7 [38%] of 18 cases (e.g. without IONM) to 5 [14%] of 36 cases (with IONM). Two series showed that motor evoked potential monitoring (MEP) for XLIF reduced postoperative motor deficits; they, therefore, recommended their routine use for XLIF. Another study demonstrated that eliminating muscle relaxants during XLIF markedly reduced postoperative neurological deficits/thigh pain by allowing for better continuous EMG monitoring (e.g. NMR no muscle relaxants). Finally, a “triggered” EMG study” reduced postoperative motor neuropraxia, largely by limiting retraction time.

Conclusion:

Multiple studies have offered different IONM techniques to avert neurological injuries following MIS XLIF/XLIF. Does this mean that these procedures (e.g. XLIF/MIS XLIF) are unsafe?

An interprofessional learning experience for trainee general practitioners in an academic urban minor injuries unit with advanced nurse practitioners (Emergency)

BACKGROUND

There is a body of empirical literature indicating that interprofessional education (IPE) not only enriches students' understanding of their own discipline but of other disciplines. However, giving the on-going emphasis on the importance of IPE to healthcare processes and outcomes, on-going attention is needed to advancing the research evidence related to the emergency department setting. The aim of this qualitative descriptive study was to determine the clinical learning experiences of GPs who rotated through an academic urban minor injuries unit as part of their training, led by advanced nurse practitioners (emergency).

METHODS

Data were drawn from semi-structured interviews of sixty to ninety minutes duration with 5 general practitioners (GPs) who completed the trainee rotation practicum in an academic urban minor injuries unit led by advanced nurse practitioners (ANPs) emergency.

STUDY FINDINGS

The GPs indicated that their knowledge translation of minor injuries to practice was connected to their utilisation of algorithm rules and case management processes modelled by ANPs (emergency). The outcome of this process reported by GPs brought notable reductions to their referral of patients with minor injuries to emergency departments.

CONCLUSION

Interprofessional learning in clinical practice with ANPs (emergency) was seen as a valuable role making model for the trainee GPs who are now employed in primary care.

Overview of findings from a 2-year study of claimants who had sustained a mild or moderate injury in a road traffic crash: prospective study

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that in people injured in a road traffic crash, persistent symptoms are common and can lead to significant ongoing personal impact. Hence, elucidating factors associated with the human costs are key to reducing the socio-economic burden of road traffic injuries. Therefore, in this study we aimed to track the experience and key outcomes of persons who had sustained mild/moderate injuries as they returned to health (and work, where relevant) following a road traffic crash.

RESULTS

It is an inception study cohort of adults who had sustained mild to moderate injuries (that is, except serious injuries) in motor vehicle crashes in New South Wales, Australia, who were recruited and interviewed at baseline (within 3 months of the crash) and at 6, 12 and 24 months post-injury. We found that minor injuries had major impacts on pain ratings, physical and mental well-being, health-related quality of life and return to work and pre-injury participation during the 24 months post-injury phase. Further, for mild to moderately severe injuries, biopsychosocial factors appear to be prognostic indicators of recovery (not the location or type of injury). Examples of key biopsychosocial factors are: age; preinjury health; quality of life; reactions to injury (catastrophising, and pain); social support and the third party insurance compensation system.

DISCUSSION

This study highlights the considerable impact of apparently "minor" road traffic crash injuries at a population level and suggests targeted approaches to the tertiary prevention of long-term morbidity and disability. Study findings have also reiterated the importance of looking beyond the injury to the 'whole person'.

National survey of family physicians to define functional decline in elderly patients with minor trauma

Background

Failing to assess elderly patients for functional decline at the time around a minor injury may result in adverse health outcomes. This study was conducted to define what constitutes clinically significant functional decline and the sensitivity required for a clinical decision instrument to identify such functional decline after an injury in previously independent elderly patients.

Methods

After a thorough development process, a survey questionnaire was administered to a random sample of 178 family physicians. The surveys were distributed using a modified Dillman technique.

Results

From 143 eligible surveys, we received 67 completed surveys (response rate, 46.9 %). Respondents indicated that a drop of at least 3 points on the 28-point Older Americans Resources and Services (OARS) ADL Scale was considered clinically significant by 90 % of physicians. Ninety percent (90 %) of physicians would be satisfied with a sensitivity of 90 % or more for a clinical decision instrument to detect patients at risk of functional decline at 6 months following an injury. The majority of family physicians do not routinely assess the majority of the tasks on the OARS scale for injured elderly patients.

Conclusions

A high proportion of physicians (90 %) would consider a drop of 3 points on the OARS ADL Scale as significant to define functional decline and would be satisfied with a sensitivity of 90 % for a clinical decision instrument to detect such a decline. Any instrument to identify patients at elevated risk for subsequent decline should consider these outcome measures to be clinically useful.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0520-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Minor injuries in older adults have different characteristics, injury patterns, and outcomes when compared with younger adults: an emergency department correlation study

AIM

To examine the injury patterns, characteristics, and outcomes of older adults presenting with minor injuries compared with younger adults.

BACKGROUND

Sustaining a minor injury is one of the most common reasons people present to an Emergency Department. Many presentations involve older Australians and greater than 50% of older adults are discharged from the Emergency Department. However, little is known about the characteristics, injury patterns, and outcomes of minor injuries in older adults compared to younger adults.

METHODS

A 12-month exploratory correlational study was conducted using Emergency Department electronic medical record data from a single metropolitan hospital located in Sydney, Australia. Older adults were defined as ≥65 years with younger adults defined as 18-64 years. Minor injuries were classified by diagnoses as fractures/dislocations, sprains/strains, wounds/burns/infections, minor head injuries, eye/ear/nose/oral injuries. Exclusion criteria included: triage category 1 or 2, major trauma, critical care admission, or injuries and fractures to the hip or neck of femur.

RESULTS

There were 36,671 Emergency Department presentations of which 7582 (21%) were for older adults and 19,234 (52%) were younger adults (aged 18-64). Injuries represented 21% (n = 7754) of all Emergency Department presentations with 1294 (17%) occurring in those aged 65 years and older and 3937 (20%) in younger adults. Of the minor injuries (n = 3594; 10%), the most common presentation in younger adults was sprains/strains (n = 1045; 36%) but in older adults it was fractures (n = 229; 32%). There was a statistical (Pearson's χ(2) test 63.4, df = 4, P < 0.001) difference with injury pattern when comparing age groups. Older adults were allocated proportionately higher triage categories when compared with younger adults (Pearson's χ(2) test 26.3, df = 2, P < 0.001). Older adults with minor injuries had a longer mean stay (315 min; SD 238.9 min; younger adults 198 min, SD 132.3 min) and this difference was statistically (P ≤ 0.001) and clinically significant. Fewer older adults were discharged home (n = 531, 73%; n = 2648, 92%; P < 0.001) and more were admitted for minor injuries (n = 179, 25%; n = 156, 5%; P < 0.001) when compared with younger adults.

CONCLUSION

Older adults with minor injuries have different injury patterns, higher acuity, longer length of stay, and lower discharge rates compared with younger adults. Clinicians may need to modify their approach and differential diagnoses when treating older adults with minor injuries. Further research is needed to explore the reasons for these differences and whether older adults have different service needs compared with younger adults with minor injuries.