Clinical Practice Guidelines on Ordering Echocardiography Before Hip Fracture Repair Perform Differently from One Another

Background: Osteoporotic hip fractures typically occur in frail elderly patients with multiple comorbidities, and repair of the fracture within 48 h is recommended. Pre-operative evaluation sometimes involves transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) to screen for heart disease that would alter peri-operative management, yet TTE can delay surgery and is resource intensive. Evidence suggests that the use of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) can improve care. It is unclear which guidelines are most useful in hip fracture patients. Questions/Purposes: We sought to evaluate the performance of the five commonly used CPGs in determining which patients with acute fragility hip fracture require TTE and to identify common features among high-performing CPGs that could be incorporated into care pathways. Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective study of medical records taken from an institutional database of osteoporotic hip fracture patients to identify those who underwent pre-operative TTE. History and physical examination findings were recorded; listed indications for TTE were compared against those given in five commonly used CPGs: those from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA), the British Society of Echocardiography (BSE), the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Anaesthesiology(ESC/ESA), the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (AAGBI), and the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). We then calculated the performance (sensitivity and specificity) of the CPGs in identifying patients with TTE results that had the potential to change peri-operative management. Results: We identified 100 patients who underwent pre-operative TTE. Among those, the patients met criteria for TTE 32 to 66% of the time, depending on the CPG used. In 14% of those receiving TTE, the test revealed new information with the potential to change management. The sensitivity of the CPGs ranged from 71% (ESC/ESA and AAGBI) to 100% (ACC/AHA and SIGN). The CPGs\u27 specificity ranged from 37% (BSE) to 74% (ESC/ESA). The more sensitive guidelines focused on a change in clinical status in patients with known disease or clinical concern regarding new-onset disease. Conclusions: In patients requiring fixation of osteoporotic hip fractures, TTE can be useful for identifying pathologies that could directly change peri-operative management. Our data suggest that established CPGs can be safely used to identify which patients should undergo pre-operative TTE with low risk of missed pathology

Machine Learning Based Analytics for the Significance of Gait Analysis in Monitoring and Managing Lower Extremity Injuries

This study explored the potential of gait analysis as a tool for assessing post-injury complications, e.g., infection, malunion, or hardware irritation, in patients with lower extremity fractures. The research focused on the proficiency of supervised machine learning models predicting complications using consecutive gait datasets. We identified patients with lower extremity fractures at an academic center. Patients underwent gait analysis with a chest-mounted IMU device. Using software, raw gait data was preprocessed, emphasizing 12 essential gait variables. Machine learning models including XGBoost, Logistic Regression, SVM, LightGBM, and Random Forest were trained, tested, and evaluated. Attention was given to class imbalance, addressed using SMOTE. We introduced a methodology to compute the Rate of Change (ROC) for gait variables, independent of the time difference between gait analyses. XGBoost was the optimal model both before and after applying SMOTE. Prior to SMOTE, the model achieved an average test AUC of 0.90 (95% CI: [0.79, 1.00]) and test accuracy of 86% (95% CI: [75%, 97%]). Feature importance analysis attributed importance to the duration between injury and gait analysis. Data patterns showed early physiological compensations, followed by stabilization phases, emphasizing prompt gait analysis. This study underscores the potential of machine learning, particularly XGBoost, in gait analysis for orthopedic care. Predicting post-injury complications, early gait assessment becomes vital, revealing intervention points. The findings support a shift in orthopedics towards a data-informed approach, enhancing patient outcomes.Comment: 13 pages, 6 figure

Sonographic Evaluation of Lower Extremity Interosseous Membrane Injuries

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/135663/1/jum200322121369.pd

Correction to: Cluster identification, selection, and description in Cluster randomized crossover trials: the PREP-IT trials

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Preventing Fragility Fractures: A 3-Month Critical Window of Opportunity

Introduction: Low-energy falls are the leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the elderly. In the past, physicians focused on treating fractures resulting from falls rather than preventing them. The purpose of this study is to identify patients with a hospital encounter for fall prior to a fracture as an opportunity for pre-injury intervention when patients might be motivated to engage in falls prevention. Materials & Methods: A retrospective analysis of all emergency room and inpatient encounters in 2016 with an ICD10 diagnosis code including “fall” across a tri-state health system was performed. Subsequent encounters with diagnosis of fracture within 2 years were then identified. Data was collected for time to subsequent fracture, fracture type and location, and length of stay of initial encounter. Results: There were 12,382 encounters for falls among 10,589 patients. Of those patients, 1,040 (9.8%) sustained a subsequent fracture. Fractures were most commonly lower extremity fractures (661 fractures; 63.5%), including hip fractures (447 fractures; 45.87%). Median time from fall to fracture was 105 days (IQR 16-359 days). Discussion: Falls are an important, modifiable risk factor for fragility fracture. This study demonstrates that patients are presenting to the hospital with one of the main modifiable risk factors for fracture within a time window that allows for intervention. Conclusions: Presentation to the hospital for a fall is a vital opportunity to intervene and prevent subsequent fracture in a high-risk population

Nonoperative treatment of select LC-II pelvic ring injuries (OTA/AO 61B2.2) results in a low rate of radiographic displacement

Objectives: to quantify radiographic outcomes and identify predictors of late displacement in the nonoperative treatment of LC-2 pelvic ring injuries. DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Two level 1 trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Thirty eight patients \u3e /=18 years old with LC-2 pelvic ring injuries. INTERVENTION: Nonoperative treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Crescent fracture displacement measured on initial axial Computed Tomography. Change in pelvic ring alignment measured by the Deformity Index, Simple Ratio, Inlet and Outlet Ratios on successive plain radiographs. RESULTS: Patients in this study had minimally displaced LC-2 pelvic ring injuries, with median initial crescent fracture displacement of 2mm and median initial Deformity Index of 2%. No patient had a \u3e /=10 percentage point change in Deformity Index over the treatment period, but small amounts of displacement were seen on the other ratios. No patients initially selected for nonoperative treatment converted to operative treatment. No radiographic predictors of late displacement were identified. Bilateral pubic rami fractures and the presence of a complete sacral fracture ipsilateral to the crescent fracture were not associated with late displacement. CONCLUSIONS: A spectrum of injury severity and stability exists in the LC-2 pattern. Nonoperative treatment of LC-2 injuries with low initial deformity and crescent fracture displacement results in minimal subsequent displacement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

Effect of Aspirin Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Thromboprophylaxis on Medication Satisfaction and Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis after orthopaedic trauma. However, recent evidence suggests that aspirin is similar in efficacy and safety. To understand patients experiences with these medications, we compared patients satisfaction and out-of-pocket costs after thromboprophylaxis with aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the PREVENTion of CLots in Orthopaedic Trauma (PREVENT CLOT) trial, conducted at 21 trauma centers in the U.S. and Canada. We included adult patients with an operatively treated extremity fracture or a pelvic or acetabular fracture. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) twice daily or 81 mg of aspirin twice daily for thromboprophylaxis. The duration of the thromboprophylaxis, including post-discharge prescription, was based on hospital protocols. The study outcomes included patient satisfaction with and out-of-pocket costs for their thromboprophylactic medication measured on ordinal scales. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 12,211 patients (mean age and standard deviation [SD], 45 ± 18 years; 62% male), 9725 of whom completed the question regarding their satisfaction with the medication and 6723 of whom reported their out-of-pocket costs. The odds of greater satisfaction were 2.6 times higher for patients assigned to aspirin than those assigned to low-molecular-weight heparin (odds ratio [OR]: 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.39 to 2.80; p < 0.001). Overall, the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs for thromboprophylaxis medication were 51% higher for patients assigned to aspirin compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.37 to 1.66; p < 0.001). However, patients assigned to aspirin had substantially lower odds of out-of-pocket costs of at least $25 (OR: 0.15; 95$25, potentially improving health equity for thromboprophylaxis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence