ABSTRACT
Hospital admissions for trampoline-related injuries are a metric of injury severity. The literature shows hospital admissions are more likely to occur from trampoline park injuries rather than home trampoline injuries. The purpose of this study was to investigate the demographics, injury characteristics, patient experiences, and economic impact of home versus trampoline park injuries requiring admission to hospital before and after two indoor trampoline parks opened in the catchment area of a Level II trauma centre. A case series research design was used. All patients who were admitted to hospital following a trampoline injury were contacted. For those who consented, clinical data was recorded from patients' charts and electronic health records. A subset of participants consented to a telephone interview wherein patient narratives were collected on the mechanism of injury, recovery process, and impact of the injury. During the study period, 15 patients required 17 hospital admissions. Twelve consented to participate in the study. Nine of the 12 required an operative intervention. Eight of the 12 were trampoline park injuries. Anatomical location of the injuries, injury type and severity scores, hospital stay, and median age were similar. The economic impact of home trampoline and trampoline park injuries varied. Overall, there were more hospital admissions and more operative interventions for trampoline park injuries during the four-year study period. Seven participants who consented to be interviewed provided additional insights into the injury experience and long-term outcomes. This study contributes to the literature on trampoline-related injuries, focusing on hospital admissions, economic impact, and adds the important perspective of patients in evaluating the effect of these injuries.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Satisfaction with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is correlated with the fulfillment of expectations. Good surgeon-patient communication impacts how expectations are formed and managed. The TKA communication checklist was developed to help surgeons better understand and manage patients' postoperative expectations in order to increase satisfaction with TKA. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, mean satisfaction scores of a standard of care communication group and a checklist intervention group were compared. The duration of postoperative follow-up appointments was also assessed to determine whether the checklist took significantly more time in practice. RESULTS: Sixty patients received the checklist in TKA appointments with surgeons between 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively and their satisfaction ratings were compared with 67 patients who had received the standard of care communication. The checklist group reported higher satisfaction on overall TKA satisfaction and expectations met (P = .02), care and concern shown by the surgeon (P = .01), surgeons' communication ability (P = .01), and satisfaction with time spent in follow-ups (P < .001). Satisfaction with relief from pain and return to function was not significant (P = .06). More time was spent in the checklist groups' follow-ups, with a mean difference of 1 minute, 51 seconds (P = .001). CONCLUSION: The TKA communication checklist significantly improved patients' satisfaction across multiple dimensions. This has practical significance because patient satisfaction is increasingly used as a key performance indicator for surgeons and healthcare institutions alike. Increased TKA satisfaction will benefit patients, surgeons, and the healthcare system overall.
