Mental health is strongly associated with capability after lower extremity injury treated with free flap limb salvage or amputation

Background: Knowledge about factors associated with long-term outcomes, after severe traumatic injury to the lower extremity, can aid with the difficult decision whether to salvage or amputate the leg and improve outcome. We therefore studied factors independently associated with capability at a minimum of 1 year after amputation or free flap limb salvage. Methods: We included 135 subjects with a free flap lower extremity reconstruction and 41 subjects with amputation, between 1991 and 2021 at two urban-level 1 trauma centers with a mean follow-up of 11 ± 7 years. Long-term physical functioning was assessed using the Physical Component Score (PCS) of the Short-Form 36 (SF36) and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) questionnaires. Independent variables included demographics, injury characteristics, and the Mental Component Score (MCS) of the SF36. Results: Greater mental health was independently and strongly associated with greater capability, independent of amputation or limb reconstruction. Mental health explained 33% of the variation in PCS and 57% of the variation in LEFS. Injury location at the knee or leg was associated with greater capability, compared to the foot or ankle. Amputation or limb reconstruction was not associated with capability.Discussion: This study adds to the growing body of knowledge that physical health is best regarded through the lens of the bio-psycho-social model in which mental health is a strong determinant. This study supports making mental health an important aspect of rehabilitation after major lower extremity injury, regardless of amputation or limb salvage.</p

Mental health is strongly associated with capability after lower extremity injury treated with free flap limb salvage or amputation

Background: Knowledge about factors associated with long-term outcomes, after severe traumatic injury to the lower extremity, can aid with the difficult decision whether to salvage or amputate the leg and improve outcome. We therefore studied factors independently associated with capability at a minimum of 1 year after amputation or free flap limb salvage. Methods: We included 135 subjects with a free flap lower extremity reconstruction and 41 subjects with amputation, between 1991 and 2021 at two urban-level 1 trauma centers with a mean follow-up of 11 ± 7 years. Long-term physical functioning was assessed using the Physical Component Score (PCS) of the Short-Form 36 (SF36) and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) questionnaires. Independent variables included demographics, injury characteristics, and the Mental Component Score (MCS) of the SF36. Results: Greater mental health was independently and strongly associated with greater capability, independent of amputation or limb reconstruction. Mental health explained 33% of the variation in PCS and 57% of the variation in LEFS. Injury location at the knee or leg was associated with greater capability, compared to the foot or ankle. Amputation or limb reconstruction was not associated with capability.Discussion: This study adds to the growing body of knowledge that physical health is best regarded through the lens of the bio-psycho-social model in which mental health is a strong determinant. This study supports making mental health an important aspect of rehabilitation after major lower extremity injury, regardless of amputation or limb salvage.</p

A Dorsal Approach for Ulnar Shortening Osteotomy

Aim  This study aims to evaluate the long-term complications, results, and patient satisfaction rates of a dorsally approached ulnar shortening osteotomy for ulnar impaction syndrome. Methods  A retrospective chart review of 20 patients was performed. Primary outcomes of interest were subjective, measured using the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score, Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, and the third questionnaire about patient satisfaction, composed by the authors. Secondary outcomes included hardware removal due to irritation and other complications. Results  Mean postoperative functional score of PRWE was 28 (standard deviation [SD], 30) and DASH 20 (SD, 26), respectively. Fifteen patients were satisfied with the operation. Removal of hardware was noted in six patients. In one patient plate breakage occurred. Conclusion  Similar postoperative functional scores and complications were seen in patients undergoing an ulnar shortening osteotomy with a dorsally placed plate for ulnar impaction syndrome, compared with other plate placement localizations. The incidence of plate removal is also comparable to previously described results. As the dorsally placed plate and freehand technique, are relatively easy, we feel that it has a place in the treatment of ulnar impaction syndrome. Level of Evidence  Level IV, retrospective cohort study

A Dorsal Approach for Ulnar Shortening Osteotomy

Aim  This study aims to evaluate the long-term complications, results, and patient satisfaction rates of a dorsally approached ulnar shortening osteotomy for ulnar impaction syndrome. Methods  A retrospective chart review of 20 patients was performed. Primary outcomes of interest were subjective, measured using the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score, Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, and the third questionnaire about patient satisfaction, composed by the authors. Secondary outcomes included hardware removal due to irritation and other complications. Results  Mean postoperative functional score of PRWE was 28 (standard deviation [SD], 30) and DASH 20 (SD, 26), respectively. Fifteen patients were satisfied with the operation. Removal of hardware was noted in six patients. In one patient plate breakage occurred. Conclusion  Similar postoperative functional scores and complications were seen in patients undergoing an ulnar shortening osteotomy with a dorsally placed plate for ulnar impaction syndrome, compared with other plate placement localizations. The incidence of plate removal is also comparable to previously described results. As the dorsally placed plate and freehand technique, are relatively easy, we feel that it has a place in the treatment of ulnar impaction syndrome. Level of Evidence  Level IV, retrospective cohort study

Is dangling of the lower leg after a free flap reconstruction necessary? Study protocol for a large multicenter randomized controlled study

textabstractBACKGROUND: Within the field of plastic surgery, free tissue transfer is common practice for knee and lower leg defects. Usually, after such free flap reconstruction, patients undergo a dangling protocol in the postoperative phase. A dangling protocol is designed to gradually subject the free flap to increased venous pressure resulting from gravitational forces. Worldwide there are multiple variations of dangling protocols. However, there is no evidence available in the literature that supports the use of a dangling protocol. METHODS: This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial that includes patients with a free flap lower leg reconstruction. The primary outcome is to assess whether a no-dangling protocol is not inferior to a dangling protocol, in terms of proportion of partial flap loss, 6 months after surgery. Secondary objectives are to identify differences in major and minor complications, length of stay, and costs, and to objectify blood gaseous changes during dangling. Furthermore, at 2 years we will assess difference in physical function, infection rates, and osseous union rates. DISCUSSION: The primary outcome of this study will give a more decisive answer to the question of whether a dangling protocol is necessary after a free flap reconstruction of the lower leg. The secondary outcomes of this study will provide a better insight into the physical functions, infection rates, and union rates in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO), NL63146.041.17. Registered on 11 July 2018. Netherlands Trial Register, NTR7545 . Registered on 10 October 2018

Physical and mental health of breast cancer patients and survivors before and during successive SARS-CoV-2-infection waves

Purpose: During the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave, a deterioration in emotional well-being and increased need for mental health care were observed among patients treated or being treated for breast cancer. In this follow-up study, we assessed patient-reported quality of life (QoL), physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave in a large, representative cohort. Methods: This longitudinal cohort study was conducted within the prospective, multicenter UMBRELLA breast cancer cohort. To assess patient-reported QoL, physical functioning and psychosocial well-being, COVID-19-specific surveys were completed by patients during the first and second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves (April and November 2020, respectively). An identical survey was completed by a comparable reference population during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves. All surveys included the validated EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23, HADS and “De Jong-Gierveld Loneliness” questionnaires. Pre-COVID-19 EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23 and HADS outcomes were available from UMBRELLA. Response rates were 69.3% (n = 1106/1595) during the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave and 50.9% (n = 822/1614) during the second wave. A total of 696 patients responded during both SARS-CoV-2-infection waves and were included in the analysis comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave to PROs during the first wave. Moreover, PROs reported by all patients during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave (n = 822) were compared to PROs of a similar non-cancer reference population (n = 241) and to their pre-COVID-19 PROs. Results: Patient-reported QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer remained stable or improved from the first to the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. The proportion of emotional loneliness reduced from 37.6 to 29.9% of patients. Compared to a similar non-cancer reference population, physical, emotional, and cognitive functioning, future perspectives and symptoms of dyspnea and insomnia were worse in patients treated or being treated for breast cancer during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. PROs in the second wave were similar to pre-COVID-19 PROs. Conclusion: Although patients scored overall worse than individuals without breast cancer, QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being did not deteriorate between the first and second wave. During the second wave, PROs were similar to pre-COVID-19 values. Overall, current findings are cautiously reassuring for future mental health of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patient-Reported Outcomes of Breast Cancer Patients and Survivors

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (officially declared on the March 11, 2020), and the resulting measures, are impacting daily life and medical management of breast cancer patients and survivors. We evaluated to what extent these changes have affected quality of life, physical, and psychosocial well-being of patients previously or currently being treated for breast cancer. Methods: This study was conducted within a prospective, multicenter cohort of breast cancer patients and survivors (Utrecht cohort for Multiple BREast cancer intervention studies and Long-term evaLuAtion). Shortly after the implementation of COVID-19 measures, an extra survey was sent to 1595 participants, including the validated European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core (C30) and breast cancer- specific (BR23) Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared with the most recent PROs collected within UMBRELLA pre-COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19 on PROs was assessed using mixed model analysis, adjusting for potential confounders. Results: 1051 patients and survivors (65.9%) completed the survey; 31.1% (n = 327) reported a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A statistically significant deterioration in emotional functioning was observed (mean = 82.6 [SD = 18.7] to 77.9 [SD = 17.3]; P <. 001), and 505 (48.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 45.0% to 51.1%) patients and survivors reported moderate to severe loneliness. Small improvements were observed in quality of life and physical, social, and role functioning. In the subgroup of 51 patients under active treatment, social functioning strongly deteriorated (77.3 [95% CI = 69.4 to 85.2] to 61.3 [95% CI = 52.6 to 70.1]; P =. 002). Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic, breast cancer patients and survivors were less likely to contact physicians and experienced a deterioration in their emotional functioning. Patients undergoing active treatment reported a substantial drop in social functioning. One in 2 reported loneliness that was moderate or severe. Online interventions supporting mental health and social interaction are needed during times of social distancing and lockdowns