Search

The authors reflect on the factors that need to be considered with the utilization of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for the diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (TB). They stress that based on the result of the studies conducted on extrapulmonary diseases, NAAT shows a higher level of specificity and positive results than negative outcomes for TB. The author asserts that simplification of NAAT should be considered for the easy adoption of NAAT in developing countries.

Background: Health disparities related to concussions have been reported in the literature for certain minority populations. Given the significant impact of concussions on long- and short-term function, the mitigation of barriers to accessing care is an important public health objective., Objective: To determine if racial and ethnic disparities exist in patients who seek care for concussions compared to a control group with orthopedic ankle injuries (sprains and fractures) to minimize confounding factors that predispose to injury., Design: Cohort study., Setting: Single institution between February 2016 and December 2020., Patients: A retrospective review of electronic medical records was completed for patients with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes for concussion, ankle sprain, and ankle fracture. A total of 10,312 patients were identified: 1568 (15.2%) with concussion, 4871 (47.3%) with ankle sprain, and 3863 (37.5%) with ankle fracture., Interventions: Patients were stratified by demographic factors, including sex, ethnicity, race, and insurance type., Main Outcome Measures: Diagnosis of concussion., Results: The concussion group was the youngest (28.3 years ± 18.0) and had the fewest females (53.1%) compared to the ankle sprain (35.1 years ± 19.7; 58.7%) and fracture groups (44.1 years ± 21.3; 57.3%). The concussion group had a smaller proportion of Hispanic patients than the ankle sprain group (odds ratio [OR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.92, p = .010) and fracture group (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44-0.75, p = <.001). In addition, the concussion group was less likely to be Asian (OR 0.70, CI 0.52-0.95, p = .023) than the sprain group and less likely to be Black/African American than both sprain (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46-0.93, p = .017) and fracture groups (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.89, p = .010). There were no differences across racial groups between ankle sprains and fractures. Patients with Medicaid/Medicare and self-pay had a higher likelihood of being in the concussion group than those with private insurance., Conclusion: Differences in concussion diagnosis may exist between certain demographic groups compared to those with ankle injuries. Efforts to mitigate disparities in concussion care are worthwhile with a focus on patient and caregiver education., (© 2022 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.)

Recall bias is a systematic error caused by inaccuracy in reporting past health status and can be a substantial methodological flaw in the retrospective collection of data. Little is known about recall bias following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients' recall bias regarding preinjury knee function at 2 years after ACLR., Methods: Patients undergoing ACLR were enrolled in an institutional ACL registry. Preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively, patients quantified their preinjury knee function on a scale of 0 to 10 (10 = best). Recall bias was quantified as the difference in the reported preinjury function between the 2 time points. The clinical result of ACLR was evaluated according to the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation score. Patients meeting the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in the IKDC score were considered to have had a good outcome, while patients who did not reach the MCID were considered to have had failure of treatment. Recall bias was compared between the 2 groups., Results: Of 2,109 patients enrolled in the registry, 1,219 were included in the study. Patients with a good outcome remembered their preinjury knee function on a 0-to-10 scale to be better than what they reported at baseline, by a mean difference of 0.40 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22 to 0.58 points). The recall bias was stronger for patients with a poor outcome, who remembered their knee function to be worse than reported at baseline, by a mean difference of -0.81 (95% CI, -1.4 to -0.26). The mean difference in recall between the 2 groups was -1.21 (95% CI, -1.74 to -0.67) (p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: The recall bias of preinjury knee function following ACLR was small and not clinically meaningful for the majority of patients. However, patients with a poor outcome had a clinically relevant and significant recall bias., Clinical Relevance: Our findings suggest that patients with a poor outcome have a substantial recall bias. This has clinical relevance when considering treatment effects of revision surgery, whereby the clinical benefit of the treatment might be affected by recall bias., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors indicated that no external funding was received for any aspect of this work. The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJSOA/A264)., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated. All rights reserved.)