Search

Previous research suggests that the care provided to trauma patients could be improved by including early screening and management of emotional distress and psychological comorbidity. The Trauma Collaborative Care (TCC) program, which is based on the principles of well-established models of collaborative care, was designed to address this gap in trauma center care. This article describes the TCC program and the design of a multicenter study to evaluate its effectiveness for improving patient outcomes after major, high-energy orthopaedic trauma at level 1 trauma centers. The TCC program was evaluated by comparing outcomes of patients treated at 6 intervention sites (n = 481) with 6 trauma centers where care was delivered as usual (control sites, n = 419). Compared with standard treatment alone, it is hypothesized that access to the TCC program plus standard treatment will result in lower rates of poor patient-reported function, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder.

Traumatic injury frequently leads to an abrupt change in physical and psychological functioning; informal caregivers play a significant role in the recovery process in the hospital and at home. The purpose of this study was to describe the range of stressors and burdens experienced by orthopedic trauma family caregivers in the acute care setting, as well as responses and strategies employed. Qualitative, in-depth interviews were conducted in the hospital with 12 family caregivers of severely injured orthopedic trauma patients. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed to identify the range of experiences and common themes. Data were organized into 4 categories: stressors and needs; barriers; resources; and response. Stressors and barriers included the confusion and turmoil of life in the hospital, exposure to tragedy, difficulty obtaining and understanding information, and a sense that the family was not considered an integral part of the care plan. Factors influencing caregiver coping included access to the patient, provider communication, caregiver internal and external resources, and the presence of staff assisting in negotiation of the complex and unfamiliar hospital system. Understanding the caregiver experience enables nursing providers to build trust and offer effective support and guidance; caregiver-centered systems of information from admission to discharge may facilitate adaptation and improved caregiving. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The development of a deep wound infection in the presence of hardware after open reduction and internal fixation presents a clinical dilemma, and there is scant literature to aid in decision-making. The purpose of the present study was to determine the prevalence of osseous union with maintenance of hardware after the development of postoperative infection within six weeks after internal fixation of a fracture. Methods: The present study included 121 patients from three level-I trauma centers, retrospectively identified from billing and trauma registries, in whom 123 postoperative wound infections with positive intraoperative cultures had developed within six weeks after internal fixation of acute fractures. The incidence of fracture union without hardware removal was calculated, and the parameters that predicted success or failure were evaluated. Results: Eighty-six patients (eighty-seven fractures; 71%) had fracture union with operative débridement, retention of hardware, and culture-specific antibiotic treatment and suppression. Predictors of treatment failure were open fracture (p = 0.03) and the presence of an intramedullary nail (p = 0.01). Several variables were not significant but trended toward an association with failure, including smoking, infection with Pseudomonas species, and involvement of the femur, tibia, ankle, or foot. Conclusions: Deep infection after internal fixation of a fracture can be treated successfully with operative débridement, antibiotic suppression, and retention of hardware until fracture union occurs. These results may be improved by patient selection based on certain risk factors and the specific bacteria and implants involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Given the tremendous medical, social and financial costs of surgical site infections, the pressure to minimize these complications has been mounting. There remains a substantial gap in evidence-based practice for postoperative wound care after orthopaedic trauma surgery. The purpose of this study is to determine what standards are currently in practice for postoperative wound management.Methods: A 16-question web-based survey was published on the Orthopaedic Trauma Association website and disseminated to members through the association's quarterly email. The survey gathered data on postoperative wound care practices; specifically, when wound checks are performed, and when providers allow patients to get the incisions wet.Results: 102 Orthopaedic surgeons completed the survey. Ninety-one percent were trauma fellowship trained, and 95% worked at either a Level I (76%) or Level II (19%) trauma center. There were over 100 different proposed protocols captured by the survey. The majority of surgeons (54%) perform a wound check within the first three days after surgery. Additionally, half of surgeons (50%) do not permit patients to get their incisions wet until sutures and staples are removed.Conclusion: Wound care routines following surgical management of orthopaedic trauma injuries are highly variable. Diverse protocols are performed at the discretion of the treating surgeon without scientific basis. This study defines immense variability in one aspect of peri-operative care that could play an important role in surgical site infections and provides a foundation for future studies to explore the potential influence of standardized wound care routines on post-operative infections and wound healing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]