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

Post-Fasciotomy Classification System for Acute Compartment Syndrome of the Leg

Objective: Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) is a true emergency. Even with urgent fasciotomy there is often muscle damage and need for further surgery. Although ACS is not uncommon, no validated classification system exists to aid in efficient and clear communication. The aim of this study was to establish and validate a classification system for the consequences of ACS treated with fasciotomy. Methods: Using a modified Delphi method, an international panel of ACS experts was assembled to both establish a grading scheme for the disease and then validate the classification system. The goal was to articulate discrete grades of ACS related to fasciotomy findings and associated costs. A pilot analysis was used to determine questions that were clear to the respondents. Discussion of this analysis resulted in another round of cases used for 24 other raters. The twenty-four individuals implemented the classification system two separate times to compare outcomes for 32 clinical cases. The accuracy and reproducibility of the classification system were subsequently calculated based on the providers' responses. Results: The Fleiss’ Kappa of all raters was at 0.711 showing a strong agreement between the 24 raters. Secondary validation was performed for paired 276 raters and correlation was tested using the Kendall coefficient. The median correlation coefficient was 0.855. All 276 pairs had statistically significant correlation. Correlation coefficient between the first and second rating sessions was strong with the median pair scoring at 0.867. All surgeons had statistically significant internal consistency. Conclusion: This new ACS classification system may be applied to better understand the impact of ACS on patient outcomes and economic costs for leg ACS. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved

Fracture-related outcome study for operatively treated tibia shaft fractures (F.R.O.S.T.): registry rationale and design

Background: Tibial shaft fractures (TSFs) are among the most common long bone injuries often resulting from high-energy trauma. To date, musculoskeletal complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI) and compromised fracture healing following fracture fixation of these injuries are still prevalent. The relatively high complication rates prove that, despite advances in modern fracture care, the management of TSFs remains a challenge even in the hands of experienced surgeons. Therefore, the Fracture-Related Outcome Study for operatively treated Tibia shaft fractures (F.R.O.S.T.) aims at creating a registry that enables data mining to gather detailed information to support future clinical decision-making regarding the management of TSF’s. Methods: This prospective, international, multicenter, observational registry for TSFs was recently developed. Recruitment started in 2019 and is planned to take 36 months, seeking to enroll a minimum of 1000 patients. The study protocol does not influence the clinical decision-making procedure, implant choice, or surgical/imaging techniques; these are being performed as per local hospital standard of care. Data collected in this registry include injury specifics, treatment details, clinical outcomes (e.g., FRI), patient-reported outcomes, and procedure- or implant-related adverse events. The minimum follow up is 12 months. Discussion: Although over the past decades, multiple high-quality studies have addressed individual research questions related to the outcome of TSFs, knowledge gaps remain. The scarcity of data calls for an international high-quality, population-based registry. Creating such a database could optimize strategies intended to prevent severe musculoskeletal complications. The main purpose of the F.R.O.S.T registry is to evaluate the association between different treatment strategies and patient outcomes. It will address not only operative techniques and implant materials but also perioperative preventive measures. For the first time, data concerning systemic perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, the influence of local antimicrobials, and timing of soft-tissue coverage will be collected at an international level and correlated with standardized outcome measures in a large prospective, multicenter, observational registry for global accessibility. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03598530

Factors Associated with Revision Surgery after Internal Fixation of Hip Fractures

Background: Femoral neck fractures are associated with high rates of revision surgery after management with internal fixation. Using data from the Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trial evaluating methods of internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures, we investigated associations between baseline and surgical factors and the need for revision surgery to promote healing, relieve pain, treat infection or improve function over 24 months postsurgery. Additionally, we investigated factors associated with (1) hardware removal and (2) implant exchange from cancellous screws (CS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) to total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, or another internal fixation device. Methods: We identified 15 potential factors a priori that may be associated with revision surgery, 7 with hardware removal, and 14 with implant exchange. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses in our investigation. Results: Factors associated with increased risk of revision surgery included: female sex, [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.50; P = 0.001], higher body mass index (fo