ABSTRACT
A case of circumferential digital skin loss with exposed tendons from the proximal phalanx to the distal interphalangeal joint is presented. This was treated with a two-layer heterodigital cross-finger ("open book") flap from the adjacent digit, utilising a skin-only cross-finger flap to cover the palmar defect and an adipofascial flap to cover the dorsal defect.
Subject(s)
Finger Injuries/surgery , Microsurgery/methods , Skin Transplantation/methods , Soft Tissue Injuries/surgery , Surgical Flaps/blood supply , Debridement , Esthetics , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Tissue and Organ Harvesting/methods , Wound Healing/physiologySubject(s)
Poison Control Centers/statistics & numerical data , Poisoning/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Poisoning/etiology , Poisoning/mortality , Poisoning/therapy , Population Surveillance , Registries , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
The American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) 1995 annual survey is summarized. A decline in the total number of poison centers was noted (from 104 in 1991 to 83 in 1995). The 83 US poison centers handled 2,431, 599 human exposure cases. Certified centers (44) served 63.1% of the US population, handled 72.5% of all poison exposures handled by poison centers nationally, and achieved higher utilization rates within their regions (10.9 vs 7.4 human exposure cases handled/1,000 population). Certified centers had superior staff credentials as measured, by passing the certification examinations for specialists in poison information or board certification for medical and managing directors. Funding for poison centers in 1995 to-total $74.6 million, although this funding level was recognized to be inadequate as only 63.1% of the population was served by certified centers and utilization of poison centers was not optimal. The annual cost of covering the entire US with adequate poison control services (meeting AAPCC certification standards and with utilization at a level of 15 human exposures per thousand population) is estimated at $120 million. Funding difficulties were prevalent. Thirty-five centers indicated that closure had been a real threat at least once in the previous 5 years. Analysis of cost per human exposure case by center volume demonstrated that economies of scale were achieved when a center handled at least 20,000 to 30,000 human exposure calls/year. Increasing human exposure volume beyond 30,000/year did not lead to a reduction in the average cost per human exposure case.
