Search

Background: Blue light therapy (BLT) is a Food and Drug Administration cleared modality used in dermatology as an effective treatment of acne. The primary purpose of this study is to determine if there are dose-dependent antimicrobial effects of BLT against Cutibacterium acnes (C. acnes). Methods: A known strain of C. acnes was grown on chocolate agar in a controlled laboratory environment under anaerobic conditions for 1 week. After 1 week, 2-3 colonies of C. acnes were isolated and transferred to broth medium to incubate for 2 or 7 days. Broth vials (treatment arm) then underwent 1 of 6 different blue light dosing treatment regimens and a duplicate broth vial served as a control left open to the same environment. The BLT regimens were a single treatment of 25 J/cm2, 50 J/cm2, 75 J/cm2, 100 J/cm2, 2 serial treatments of 50 J/cm2 separated by 24 hours, or 2 serial treatments of 75 J/cm2 separated by 24 hours. The Omnilux Blue device (415 nm wavelength) was used for all BLT treatments and delivered, on average, 1.68 ± 0.004 J/min. Following treatment, the control and treatment broth samples were plated on chocolate agar and allowed to grow for 7 days. After 7 days, plates were counted and colony forming units (CFUs) were calculated. Six trials were completed for each BLT dosing regimen based on an a priori power analysis of 6 individual 2-sided t-tests. Comparisons in the primary outcome were made via mixed-effects analysis of variance with replicate as a random effect. Results: All BLT treatment regimens resulted in significantly fewer CFUs than their aggregate control plate CFUs (P

Abstract. Objective:. To explore patient and treatment factors explaining the association between spine injury and opioid misuse. Design:. Prospective cohort study. Setting:. Level I trauma center in a Midwestern city. Participants:. English speaking patients aged 18 to 75 on Trauma and Orthopedic Surgical Services receiving opioids during hospitalization and prescribed at discharge. Exposure:. Spine injury on the Abbreviated Injury Scale. Main outcome measures:. Opioid misuse was defined by using opioids: in a larger dose, more often, or longer than prescribed; via a non-prescribed route; from someone other than a prescriber; and/or use of heroin or opium. Exploratory factor groups included demographic, psychiatric, pain, and treatment factors. Multivariable logistic regression estimated the association between spine injury and opioid misuse when adjusting for each factor group. Results:. Two hundred eighty-five eligible participants consented of which 258 had baseline injury location data and 224 had follow up opioid misuse data. Most participants were male (67.8%), white (85.3%) and on average 43.1 years old. One-quarter had a spine injury (25.2%). Of those completing follow-up measures, 14 (6.3%) developed misuse. Treatment factors (injury severity, intubation, and hospital length of stay) were significantly associated with spine injury. Spine injury significantly predicted opioid misuse [odds ratio [OR] 3.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] (1.05, 9.78)]. In multivariable models, adjusting for treatment factors attenuated the association between spine injury and opioid misuse, primarily explained by length of stay. Conclusion:. Spine injury exhibits a complex association with opioid misuse that predominantly operates through treatment factors. Spine injury patients may represent a subpopulation requiring early intervention to prevent opioid misuse.

Introduction A minority of geriatric hip fracture patients pursue non-operative treatment. Compared with surgical patients, non-operative patients have higher mortality rates. However, patient satisfaction following non-operative vs operative treatment has not been investigated extensively. The purpose of this study was to compare satisfaction among non-operatively vs operatively treated hip fracture patients. Methods We identified patients aged 60+ years with proximal femur fractures treated over a 10-year period. Excluded were patients with isolated greater/lesser trochanteric fractures. Patients or relatives were asked to complete a 6-question survey about their treatment satisfaction. Results Survey responses from 56 operative and 28 non-operative patients were recorded. Overall, 91.1% of operative and 82.1% of non-operative patients were satisfied with their treatment course ( P = 0.260). However, only 71.4% of non-operative patients were satisfied with treatment option explanations vs 83.9% of operative patients ( P = 0.014). While only 64.3% of non-operative respondents were satisfied with the ultimate treatment outcome (vs 85.7% of operative patients, P = 0.025), 89.3% of patients in each cohort would choose the same treatment plan again. Discussion Our findings highlight the complexity of defining patient satisfaction, particularly in a geriatric hip fracture population. Unlike previous studies, we chose a direct approach to quantifying patient satisfaction by asking participants specifically about satisfaction with treatment outcome and the overall treatment course. Additional survey questions were then included to assess factors considered important in treatment satisfaction, such as health care provider treatment explanations, post-treatment mobility, and palliative care service involvement. Conclusions We identified significant differences between non-operatively and operatively treated geriatric hip fracture patients regarding satisfaction with the explanation of treatment options, and ultimate treatment outcomes. There was no significant difference in overall satisfaction with the treatment course or likelihood of choosing the same treatment again. Further research investigating patient satisfaction following geriatric hip fracture treatment is warranted.