Search

Background: It is unknown whether lung-protective ventilation is applied in burn patients and whether they benefit from it. This study aimed to determine ventilation practices in burn intensive care units (ICUs) and investigate the association between lung-protective ventilation and the number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28 (VFD-28). Methods: This is an international prospective observational cohort study including adult burn patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Low tidal volume (V T) was defined as V T ≤ 8 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW). Levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and maximum airway pressures were collected. The association between V T and VFD-28 was analyzed using a competing risk model. Ventilation settings were presented for all patients, focusing on the first day of ventilation. We also compared ventilation settings between patients with and without inhalation trauma. Results: A total of 160 patients from 28 ICUs in 16 countries were included. Low V T was used in 74% of patients, median V T size was 7.3 [interquartile range (IQR) 6.2-8.3] mL/kg PBW and did not differ between patients with and without inhalation trauma (p = 0.58). Median VFD-28 was 17 (IQR 0-26), without a difference between ventilation with low or high V T (p = 0.98). All patients were ventilated with PEEP levels ≥5 cmH2O; 80% of patients had maximum airway pressures

Critical ischemia in the upper extremity is rare. A surgical bypass is thought to be the superior treatment option. We describe a rare case where regular tunneling options of the bypass were not available and an intramedullary tunnel was used.

Abdominal cocoon is a rare cause of relative external small bowel obstruction. It is diagnosed predominantly in female adolescents. Diagnosis is made incidentally at laparotomy. In the past, most patients originated from subtropical regions. We discussed the first patient to be diagnosed as having the said condition in the Netherlands. A preoperative diagnosis would have been facilitated by previous knowledge of the condition. An adopted female adolescent of subtropical origin presented with recurrent failure of intestinal passage at our pediatric surgery ward after referral. Preoperative workup with a contrast-enhanced small bowel passage study showed a gastric and duodenal distension and a cauliflower sign on late passage films. Explorative laparotomy was performed under suspicion of a proximal jejunal obstruction. Findings at laparotomy were characteristic of abdominal cocoon.

Background Functional treatment is a widely used and generally accepted treatment for ankle sprain. A meta-analysis comparing the different functional treatment options could not make definitive conclusions regarding the effectiveness, and until now, little was known about patient satisfaction in relation to the outcome. Methods Patients with acute ankle sprain received rest, ice, compression and elevation with an compressive bandage at the emergency department. After 5-7 days, 100 patients with grade II and III sprains were randomized into two groups: one group was treated with tape and the other with a semi-rigid ankle brace, both for 4 weeks. Post-injury physical and proprioceptive training was standardized. As primary outcome parameter patient satisfaction and skin complications were evaluated using a predefined questionnaire and numeric rating scale. As secondary outcome parameter the ankle joint function was assessed using the Karlsson scoring scale and range of motion. Results Patient-reported comfort and satisfaction during treatment with a semi-rigid brace was significantly increased. The rate of skin complication in this group was significantly lower compared to the tape group (14.6% versus 59.1%, P Conclusion Treatment of acute ankle sprain with semi-rigid brace leads to significantly higher patient comfort and satisfaction, both with similar good outcome.

An accurate and reproducible measurement method for joint motion is essential for classification of success or failure in therapeutic intervention. Digital goniometry is increasingly used as a method of classification for knee joint excursion. The reliability of goniometry however remains debatable. Aim of the study was to determine both intra- and inter-rater reproducibility in degrees, with an electronic digital inclinometer (EDI 320) for active and passive maximum flexion and active maximum extension of the knee joint and to determine the reproducibility of active and passive range of motion. A classical crossover design, with strict measurement protocol was used. Two raters measured 72 knee motions each, in 42 healthy subjects in four sessions. The smallest detectable difference (SDD) was calculated by using adjusted Bland and Altman plots for each knee excursion. No differences in joint excursions between the sexes were found. Passive maximum flexion showed larger excursions than active maximum flexion with additional higher levels of reproducibility. SDDs for inter-rater comparisons yielded: 0+/-3.9 degrees for active maximum extension, 0+/-7.4 degrees for active maximum flexion, 0+/-6.4 degrees for passive maximum flexion, 0+/-7.6 degrees for AROM and 0+/-5.4 degrees for PROM. Intra-rater SDDs showed increased reproducibility by 0.4-1.9 degrees. We conclude that interpretation of knee joint excursions in clinical settings is with these SDDs. Clinical and statistical differences in research settings within these SDDs are not a true difference but should be attributed to measurement error.

Increasingly, goniometry of elbow motion is used for qualification of research results. Expression of reliability is in parameters not suitable for comparison of results. We modified Bland and Altman's method, resulting in the smallest detectable differences (SDDs). Two raters measured elbow excursions in 42 individuals (144 ratings per test person) with an electronic digital inclinometer in a classical test-retest crossover study design. The SDDs were 0 +/- 4.2 degrees for active extension; 0 +/- 8.2 degrees for active flexion, both without upper arm fixation; 0 +/- 6.3 degrees for active extension; 0 +/- 5.7 degrees for active flexion; 0 +/- 7.4 degrees for passive flexion with upper arm fixation; 0 +/- 10.1 degrees for active flexion with upper arm retroflexion; and 0 +/- 8.5 degrees and 0 +/- 10.8 degrees for active and passive range of motion. Differences smaller than these SDDs found in clinical or research settings are attributable to measurement error and do not indicate improvement.