Decline and decadence in Iraq and Syria after the age of Avicenna? : ʿAbd al-Laṭīf al-Baghdādī (1162–1231) between myth and history

‘Abd al-Laṭīf al-Baghdādī’s (d. 1231) work Book of the Two Pieces of Advice (Kitāb al Nasīḥatayn) challenges the idea that Islamic medicine declined after the twelfth century AD. Moreover, it offers some interesting insights into the social history of medicine. ‘Abd al-Laṭīf advocated using the framework of Greek medical epistemology to criticize the rationalist physicians of his day; he argued that female and itinerant practitioners, relying on experience, were superior to some rationalists. He lambasted contemporaneous medical education because it put too much faith in a restricted number of textbooks such as the Canon by Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna, d. 1037) or imperfect abridgments

Observation Versus Embolization in Patients with Blunt Splenic Injury after Trauma: A Propensity Score Analysis

Background: Non-operative management (NOM) is the standard of care in hemodynamically stable patients with blunt splenic injury after trauma. Splenic artery embolization (SAE) is reported to increase observation success rate. Studies demonstrating improved splenic salvage rates with SAE primarily compared SAE with historical controls. The aim of this study was to investigate whether SAE improves success rate compared to observation alone in contemporaneous patients with blunt splenic injury. Methods: We included adult patients with blunt splenic injury admitted to five Level 1 Trauma Centers between January 2009 and December 2012 and selected for NOM. Successful treatment was defined as splenic salvage and no splenic re-intervention. We calculated propensity scores, expressing the probability of undergoing SAE, using multivariable logistic regression and created five strata based on the quintiles of the propensity score distribution. A weighted relative risk (RR) was calculated across strata to express the chances of success with SAE. Results: Two hundred and six patients were included in the study. Treatment was successful in 180 patients: 134/146 (92 %) patients treated with observation and 48/57 (84 %) patients treated with SAE. The weighted RR for success with SAE was 1.17 (0.94-1.45); for complications, the weighted RR was 0.71 (0.41-1.22). The mean number of transfused blood products was 4.4 (SD 9.9) in the observation group versus 9.1 (SD 17.2) in the SAE group. Conclusions: After correction for confounders with propensity score stratification technique, there was no significant difference between embolization and observation alone with regard to successful treatment in patients with blunt splenic injury after trauma

Extramedullary versus intramedullary fixation of unstable trochanteric femoral fractures (AO type 31-A2):a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to compare extramedullary fixation and intramedullary fixation for AO type 31-A2 trochanteric fractures in the elderly, with regard to functional outcomes, complications, surgical outcomes, and costs. Methods: Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. Results are presented as weighted risk ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: Fourteen RCTs (2039 patients) and 13 observational studies (22,123 patients) were included. Statistically superior results in favor of intramedullary fixation were found for Harris Hip Score (MD 4.09, 95% CI 0.91–7.26, p = 0.04), Parker mobility score (MD − 0.67 95% CI − 1.2 to − 0.17, p = 0.009), lower extremity measure (MD − 4.07 95% CI − 7.4 to − 0.8, p = 0.02), time to full weight bearing (MD 1.14 weeks CI 0.92–1.35, p &lt; 0.001), superficial infection (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.18–3.58, p = 0.01), nonunion (RR 3.67, 95% CI 1.03–13.10, p = 0.05), fixation failure (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.16–4.44, p = 0.02), leg shortening (MD 2.23 mm, 95% CI 0.81–3.65, p = 0.002), time to radiological bone healing (MD 2.19 months, 95% CI 0.56–3.83, p = 0.009), surgery duration (MD 11.63 min, 95% CI 2.63–20.62, p = 0.01), operative blood loss (MD 134.5 mL, 95% CI 51–218, p = 0.002), and tip-apex distance &gt; 25 mm (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10–2.74, p = 0.02). No comparable cost/costs-effectiveness data were available.Conclusion: Current literature shows that several functional outcomes, complications, and surgical outcomes were statistically in favor of intramedullary fixation when compared with extramedullary fixation of AO/OTA 31-A2 fractures. However, as several of the differences found appear not to be clinically relevant and for many outcomes data remains sparse or heterogeneous, complete superiority of IM fixation for AO type 31-A2 fractures remains to be confirmed in a detailed cost-effectiveness analysis.</p

Extramedullary versus intramedullary fixation of unstable trochanteric femoral fractures (AO type 31-A2):a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to compare extramedullary fixation and intramedullary fixation for AO type 31-A2 trochanteric fractures in the elderly, with regard to functional outcomes, complications, surgical outcomes, and costs. Methods: Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. Results are presented as weighted risk ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: Fourteen RCTs (2039 patients) and 13 observational studies (22,123 patients) were included. Statistically superior results in favor of intramedullary fixation were found for Harris Hip Score (MD 4.09, 95% CI 0.91–7.26, p = 0.04), Parker mobility score (MD − 0.67 95% CI − 1.2 to − 0.17, p = 0.009), lower extremity measure (MD − 4.07 95% CI − 7.4 to − 0.8, p = 0.02), time to full weight bearing (MD 1.14 weeks CI 0.92–1.35, p &lt; 0.001), superficial infection (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.18–3.58, p = 0.01), nonunion (RR 3.67, 95% CI 1.03–13.10, p = 0.05), fixation failure (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.16–4.44, p = 0.02), leg shortening (MD 2.23 mm, 95% CI 0.81–3.65, p = 0.002), time to radiological bone healing (MD 2.19 months, 95% CI 0.56–3.83, p = 0.009), surgery duration (MD 11.63 min, 95% CI 2.63–20.62, p = 0.01), operative blood loss (MD 134.5 mL, 95% CI 51–218, p = 0.002), and tip-apex distance &gt; 25 mm (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10–2.74, p = 0.02). No comparable cost/costs-effectiveness data were available.Conclusion: Current literature shows that several functional outcomes, complications, and surgical outcomes were statistically in favor of intramedullary fixation when compared with extramedullary fixation of AO/OTA 31-A2 fractures. However, as several of the differences found appear not to be clinically relevant and for many outcomes data remains sparse or heterogeneous, complete superiority of IM fixation for AO type 31-A2 fractures remains to be confirmed in a detailed cost-effectiveness analysis.</p

The value of preoperative diagnostic testing and geriatric assessment in frail institutionalized elderly with a hip fracture; a secondary analysis of the FRAIL-HIP study

Purpose: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of (preoperative and geriatric) diagnostic testing, abnormal diagnostic tests and their subsequent interventions, and clinical relevance in frail older adults with a hip fracture. Methods: Data on clinical consultations, radiological, laboratory, and microbiological diagnostics were extracted from the medical files of all patients included in the FRAIL-HIP study (inclusion criteria: hip fracture, &gt; 70 years, living in a nursing home with malnourishment/cachexia and/or impaired mobility and/or severe co-morbidity). Data were evaluated until hospital discharge in nonoperatively treated patients and until surgery in operatively treated patients. Results: A total of 172 patients (88 nonoperative and 84 operative) were included, of whom 156 (91%) underwent laboratory diagnostics, 126 (73%) chest X-rays, and 23 (13%) CT-scans. In 153/156 (98%) patients at least one abnormal result was found in laboratory diagnostics. In 82/153 (50%) patients this did not result in any additional diagnostics or (pharmacological) intervention. Abnormal test results were mentioned as one of the deciding arguments for operative delay (&gt; 24 h) for 10/84 (12%) patients and as a factor in the decision between nonoperative and operative treatment in 7/172 (4%) patients. Conclusion: A large number and variety of diagnostics were performed in this patient population. Abnormal test results in laboratory diagnostics were found for almost all patients and, in majority, appear to have no direct clinical consequences. To prevent unnecessary diagnostics, prospective research is required to evaluate the clinical consequences and added value of the separate elements of preoperative diagnostic testing and geriatric assessment in frail hip fracture patients.</p

The Quality of Dying in Frail Institutionalized Older Patients After Nonoperative and Operative Management of a Proximal Femoral Fracture:An In-Depth Analysis

Proximal femoral fractures in frail patients have a poor prognosis. Despite the high mortality, little is known about the quality of dying (QoD) while this is an integral part of palliative care and could influence decision making on nonoperative- (NOM) or operative management (OM). To identify the QoD in frail patients with a proximal femoral fracture. Data from the prospective FRAIL-HIP study, that studied the outcomes of NOM and OM in institutionalized older patients ≥70 years with a limited life expectancy who sustained a proximal femoral fracture, was analyzed. This study included patients who died within the 6-month study period and whose proxies evaluated the QoD. The QoD was evaluated with the Quality of Dying and Death (QODD) questionnaire resulting in an overall score and 4 subcategory scores (Symptom control, Preparation, Connectedness, and Transcendence). In total 52 (64% of NOM) and 21 (53% of OM) of the proxies responded to the QODD. The overall QODD score was 6.8 (P25-P75 5.7-7.7) (intermediate), with 34 (47%) of the proxies rating the QODD ‘good to almost perfect’. Significant differences in the QODD scores between groups were not noted (NOM; 7.0 (P25-P75 5.7-7.8) vs OM; 6.6 (P25-P75 6.1-7.2), P =.73). Symptom control was the lowest rated subcategory in both groups. The QoD in frail older nursing home patients with a proximal femoral fracture is good and humane. QODD scores after NOM are at least as good as OM. Improving symptom control would further increase the QoD.</p

Comparison of the predictive performance of the BIG, TRISS, and PS09 score in an adult trauma population derived from multiple international trauma registries

The BIG score (Admission base deficit (B), International normalized ratio (I), and Glasgow Coma Scale (G)) has been shown to predict mortality on admission in pediatric trauma patients. The objective of this study was to assess its performance in predicting mortality in an adult trauma population, and to compare it with the existing Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) and probability of survival (PS09) score. A retrospective analysis using data collected between 2005 and 2010 from seven trauma centers and registries in Europe and the United States of America was performed. We compared the BIG score with TRISS and PS09 scores in a population of blunt and penetrating trauma patients. We then assessed the discrimination ability of all scores via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and compared the expected mortality rate (precision) of all scores with the observed mortality rate. In total, 12,206 datasets were retrieved to validate the BIG score. The mean ISS was 15 ± 11, and the mean 30-day mortality rate was 4.8%. With an AUROC of 0.892 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.879 to 0.906), the BIG score performed well in an adult population. TRISS had an area under ROC (AUROC) of 0.922 (0.913 to 0.932) and the PS09 score of 0.825 (0.915 to 0.934). On a penetrating-trauma population, the BIG score had an AUROC result of 0.920 (0.898 to 0.942) compared with the PS09 score (AUROC of 0.921; 0.902 to 0.939) and TRISS (0.929; 0.912 to 0.947). The BIG score is a good predictor of mortality in the adult trauma population. It performed well compared with TRISS and the PS09 score, although it has significantly less discriminative ability. In a penetrating-trauma population, the BIG score performed better than in a population with blunt trauma. The BIG score has the advantage of being available shortly after admission and may be used to predict clinical prognosis or as a research tool to risk stratify trauma patients into clinical trial

The value of nonoperative versus operative treatment of frail institutionalized elderly patients with a proximal femoral fracture in the shade of life (FRAIL-HIP); protocol for a multicenter observational cohort study

BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral fractures are strongly associated with morbidity and mortality in elderly patients. Mortality is highest among frail institutionalized elderly with both physical and cognitive comorbidities who consequently have a limited life expectancy. Evidence based guidelines on whether or not to operate on these patients in the case of a proximal femoral fracture are lacking. Practice variation occurs, and it remains unknown if nonoperative treatment would result in at least the same quality of life as operative treatment. This study aims to determine the effect of nonoperative management versus operative management of proximal femoral fractures in a selected group of frail institutionalized elderly on the quality of life, level of pain, rate of complications, time to death, satisfaction of the patient (or proxy) and the caregiver with the management strategy, and health care consumption. METHODS: This is a multicenter, observational cohort study. Frail institutionalized elderly (70 years or older with a body mass index < 18.5, a Functional Ambulation Category of 2 or lower pre-trauma, or an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 4 or 5), who sustained a proximal femoral fracture are eligible to participate. Patients with a pathological or periprosthetic fractures and known metastatic oncological disease will be excluded. Treatment decision will be reached following a structured shared decision process. The primary outcome is quality of life (Euro-QoL; EQ-5D-5 L). Secondary outcome measures are quality of life measured with the QUALIDEM, pain level (PACSLAC), pain medication use, treatment satisfaction of patient (or proxy) and caregivers, quality of dying (QODD), time to death, and direct medical costs. A cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis will be done, using the EQ-5D utility score and QUALIDEM score, respectively. Non-inferiority of nonoperative treatment is assumed with a limit of 0.15 on the EQ-5D score. Data will be acquired at 7, 14, and 30 days and at 3 and 6 months after trauma. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will provide insight into the true value of nonoperative treatment of proximal femoral fractures in frail elderly with a limited life expectancy. The results may be used for updating (inter)national treatment guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is re