Confronting the opioid crisis: Practical pain management and strategies: AOA 2018 critical issues symposium

The United States is in the midst of an opioid crisis. Clinicians have been part of the problem because of overprescribing of narcotics for perioperative pain management. Clinicians need to understand the pathophysiology and science of addiction to improve perioperative management of pain for their patients. Multiple modalities for pain management exist that decrease the use of narcotics. Physical strategies, cognitive strategies, and multimodal medication can all provide improved pain relief and decrease the use of narcotics. National medical societies are developing clinical practice guidelines for pain management that incorporate multimodal strategies and multimodal medication. Changes to policy that improve provider education, access to naloxone, and treatment for addiction can decrease narcotic misuse and the risk of addiction

Duration of Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Open Fractures:A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal

Fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a serious complication in open fracture care. Adequate surgical treatment and perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) are key factors influencing the outcome. However, data concerning the optimal duration of PAP is scarce. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of current evidence on the association between PAP duration and FRI in open fractures. A comprehensive search on 13 January 2022, in Embase, Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science and Google Scholar revealed six articles. Most studies compared either 1 day versus 5 days of PAP or included a cut-off at 72 h. Although prolonged PAP was not beneficial in the majority of patients, the variety of antibiotic regimens, short follow-up periods and unclear description of outcome parameters were important limitations that were encountered in most studies. This systematic review demonstrates a lack of well-constructed studies investigating the effect of PAP duration on FRI. Based on the available studies, prolonged PAP does not appear to be beneficial in the prevention of FRI in open fractures. However, these results should be interpreted with caution since all included studies had limitations. Future randomized trials are necessary to answer this research question definitively

What is the diagnostic value of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for surgical site infection in fracture-related infection?

Background: Fracture-related infection (FRI) remains one of the most challenging complications in orthopaedic trauma surgery. An early diagnosis is of paramount importance to guide treatment. The primary aim of this study was to compare the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria for the diagnosis of organ/space surgical site infection (SSI) to the recently developed diagnostic criteria of the FRI consensus definition in operatively treated fracture patients.   Methods: This international multicenter retrospective cohort study evaluated 257 patients with 261 infections after operative fracture treatment. All patients included in this study were considered to have an FRI and treated accordingly (‘intention to treat’). The minimum follow-up was one year. Infections were scored according to the CDC criteria for organ/space SSI and the diagnostic criteria of the FRI consensus definition.   Results: Overall, 130 (49.8%) FRIs were captured when applying the CDC criteria for organ/space SSI, whereas 258 (98.9%) FRIs were captured when applying the FRI consensus criteria. Patients could not be classified as having an infection according to the CDC criteria mainly due to a lack of symptoms within 90 days after the surgical procedure (n = 96; 36.8%) and due to the fact that the surgery was performed at an anatomical localization not listed in the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) operative procedure code mapping (n = 37; 14.2%).    Conclusion: This study confirms the importance of standardization with respect to the diagnosis of FRI. The results endorse the recently developed FRI consensus definition. When applying these diagnostic criteria, 98.9% of the infections that occured after operative fracture treatment could be captured. The CDC criteria for organ/space SSI captured less than half of the patients with an FRI requiring treatment, and seemed to have less diagnostic value in this patient population

Diagnosis of fracture-related infection in patients without clinical confirmatory criteria:an international retrospective cohort study

Background: fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a serious complication in orthopedic trauma. To standardize daily clinical practice, a consensus definition was established, based on confirmatory and suggestive criteria. In the presence of clinical confirmatory criteria, the diagnosis of an FRI is evident, and treatment can be started. However, if these criteria are absent, the decision to surgically collect deep tissue cultures can only be based on suggestive criteria. The primary study aim was to characterize the subpopulation of FRI patients presenting without clinical confirmatory criteria (fistula, sinus, wound breakdown, purulent wound drainage or presence of pus during surgery). The secondary aims were to describe the prevalence of the diagnostic criteria for FRI and present the microbiological characteristics, both for the entire FRI population. Methods: a multicenter, retrospective cohort study was performed, reporting the demographic, clinical and microbiological characteristics of 609 patients (with 613 fractures) who were treated for FRI based on the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team. Patients were divided in three groups, including the total population and two subgroups of patients presenting with or without clinical confirmatory criteria. Results: clinical and microbiological confirmatory criteria were present in 77g and 87g of the included fractures, respectively. Of patients, 23g presented without clinical confirmatory criteria, and they mostly displayed one (31g) or two (23g) suggestive clinical criteria (redness, swelling, warmth, pain, fever, new-onset joint effusion, persisting/increasing/new-onset wound drainage). The prevalence of any suggestive clinical, radiological or laboratory criteria in this subgroup was 85g, 55g and 97g, respectively. Most infections were monomicrobial (64g) and caused by Staphylococcus aureus. Conclusion: clinical confirmatory criteria were absent in 23g of the FRIs. In these cases, the decision to operatively collect deep tissue cultures was based on clinical, radiological and laboratory suggestive criteria. The combined use of these criteria should guide physicians in the management pathway of FRI. Further research is needed to provide guidelines on the decision to proceed with surgery when only these suggestive criteria are present.</p

Efficacy and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the treatment of acute pain after orthopedic trauma: a practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma and the Orthopedic Trauma Association

OBJECTIVES: Fracture is a common injury after a traumatic event. The efficacy and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat acute pain related to fractures is not well established. METHODS: Clinically relevant questions were determined regarding NSAID use in the setting of trauma-induced fractures with clearly defined patient populations, interventions, comparisons and appropriately selected outcomes (PICO). These questions centered around efficacy (pain control, reduction in opioid use) and safety (non-union, kidney injury). A systematic review including literature search and meta-analysis was performed, and the quality of evidence was graded per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The working group reached consensus on the final evidence-based recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies were identified for analysis. Not all outcomes identified as critically important were reported in all studies, and the outcome of pain control was too heterogenous to perform a meta-analysis. Nine studies reported on non-union (three randomized control trials), six of which reported no association with NSAIDs. The overall incidence of non-union in patients receiving NSAIDs compared with patients not receiving NSAIDs was 2.99% and 2.19% (p=0.04), respectively. Of studies reporting on pain control and reduction of opioids, the use of NSAIDs reduced pain and the need for opioids after traumatic fracture. One study reported on the outcome of acute kidney injury and found no association with NSAID use. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with traumatic fractures, NSAIDs appear to reduce post-trauma pain, reduce the need for opioids and have a small effect on non-union. We conditionally recommend the use of NSAIDs in patients suffering from traumatic fractures as the benefit appears to outweigh the small potential risks

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\u27 experiences with these medications, we compared patients\u27 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 \u3c 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 \u3c 0.001). However, patients assigned to aspirin had substantially lower odds of out-of-pocket costs of at least $25 (OR: 0.15; 95CONCLUSIONS: Use of aspirin substantially improved patients\u27 satisfaction with their medication after orthopaedic trauma. While aspirin use increased the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs, it protected against costs of ≥$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

Evidence-Based Recommendations for Local Antimicrobial Strategies and Dead Space Management in Fracture-Related Infection

Summary:Fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a challenging complication that imposes a heavy burden on orthopaedic trauma patients. The surgical management eradicates the local infectious focus and if necessary facilitates bone healing. Treatment success is associated with debridement of all dead and poorly vascularized tissue. However, debridement is often associated with the formation of a dead space, which provides an ideal environment for bacteria and is a potential site for recurrent infection. Dead space management is therefore of critical importance. For this reason, the use of locally delivered antimicrobials has gained attention not only for local antimicrobial activity but also for dead space management. Local antimicrobial therapy has been widely studied in periprosthetic joint infection, without addressing the specific problems of FRI. Furthermore, the literature presents a wide array of methods and guidelines with respect to the use of local antimicrobials. The present review describes the scientific evidence related to dead space management with a focus on the currently available local antimicrobial strategies in the management of FRI.Level of Evidence:Therapeutic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

Diagnosing Fracture-Related Infection: Current Concepts and Recommendations

Summary:Fracture-related infection (FRI) is a severe complication after bone injury and can pose a serious diagnostic challenge. Overall, there is a limited amount of scientific evidence regarding diagnostic criteria for FRI. For this reason, the AO Foundation and the European Bone and Joint Infection Society proposed a consensus definition for FRI to standardize the diagnostic criteria and improve the quality of patient care and applicability of future studies regarding this condition. The aim of this article was to summarize the available evidence and provide recommendations for the diagnosis of FRI. For this purpose, the FRI consensus definition will be discussed together with a proposal for an update based on the available evidence relating to the diagnostic value of clinical parameters, serum inflammatory markers, imaging modalities, tissue and sonication fluid sampling, molecular biology techniques, and histopathological examination. Second, recommendations on microbiology specimen sampling and laboratory operating procedures relevant to FRI will be provided.Level of Evidence:Diagnostic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

Character, Incidence, and Predictors of Knee Pain and Activity after Infrapatellar Intramedullary Nailing of an Isolated Tibia Fracture

© Copyright 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Objective: To study the activity and incidence of knee pain after sustaining an isolated tibia fracture treated with an infrapatellar intramedullary nail at 1 year. Design: Retrospective review of prospective cohort. Setting: Multicenter Academic and Community hospitals. Patients: Four hundred thirty-seven patients with an isolated tibia fracture completed a 12-month assessment on pain and self-reported activity. Intervention: Infrapatellar intramedullary nail. Outcomes: Demographic information, comorbid conditions, injury characteristics, and surgical technique were recorded. Knee pain was defined on a 1-7 scale with 1 being no pain and 7 being a very great deal of pain. Knee pain \u3e4 was considered clinically significant. Patients reported if they were able, able with difficulty, or unable to perform the following activities: kneel, run, climb stairs, and walk prolonged. Variables were tested in multilevel multivariable regression analyses. Results: In knee pain, 11% of patients reported a good deal to a very great deal of pain (\u3e4), and 52% of patients reported no or very little pain at 12 months. In activity at 12 months, 26% and 29% of patients were unable to kneel or run, respectively, and 31% and 35% of patients, respectively, stated they were able with difficulty or unable to use stairs or walk. Conclusions: Clinically significant knee pain (\u3e4/7) was present in 11% of patients 1 year after a tibia fracture. Of note, 31%-71% of patients had difficulty performing or were unable to perform routine daily activities of kneeling, running, and stair climbing, or walking prolonged distances

General treatment principles for fracture-related infection: recommendations from an international expert group

Fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a challenging complication that creates a heavy burden for orthopaedic trauma patients, their families and treating physicians, as well as for healthcare systems. Standardization of the diagnosis of FRI has been poor, which made the undertaking and comparison of studies difficult. Recently, a consensus definition based on diagnostic criteria for FRI was published. As a well-established diagnosis is the first step in the treatment process of FRI, such a definition should not only improve the quality of published reports but also daily clinical practice. The FRI consensus group recently developed guidelines to standardize treatment pathways and outcome measures. At the center of these recommendations was the implementation of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach. If such a team is not available, it is recommended to refer complex cases to specialized centers where a MDT is available and physicians are experienced with the treatment of FRI. This should lead to appropriate use of antimicrobials and standardization of surgical strategies. Furthermore, an MDT could play an important role in host optimization. Overall two main surgical concepts are considered, based on the fact that fracture fixation devices primarily target fracture consolidation and can be removed after healing, in contrast to periprosthetic joint infection were the implant is permanent. The first concept consists of implant retention and the second consists of implant removal (healed fracture) or implant exchange (unhealed fracture). In both cases, deep tissue sampling for microbiological examination is mandatory. Key aspects of the surgical management of FRI are a thorough debridement, irrigation with normal saline, fracture stability, dead space management and adequate soft tissue coverage. The use of local antimicrobials needs to be strongly considered. In case of FRI, empiric broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy should be started after tissue sampling. Thereafter, this needs to be adapted according to culture results as soon as possible. Finally, a minimum follow-up of 12 months after cessation of therapy is recommended. Standardized patient outcome measures purely focusing on FRI are currently not available but the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) seems to be the preferred tool to assess the patients’ short and long-term outcome. This review summarizes the current general principles which should be considered during the whole treatment process of patients with FRI based on recommendations from the FRI Consensus Group. Level of evidence: Level V