The characteristics of referring facilities and transferred hand surgery patients: factors associated with emergency patient transfers.

BACKGROUND: As emergency departments (EDs) become increasingly overwhelmed and specialist coverage in some EDs decreases, patients may be transferred to tertiary or quaternary facilities for specialized care to decrease patient load at transferring facilities. Our objective was to determine whether facilities that transferred patients for hand surgery had hand surgery coverage and to evaluate any nonmedical factors that might have been associated with transfer. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted for 1167 visits of hand and wrist patients seen in the EDs of two urban level-I trauma centers. The hand surgery capacity of referring facilities was determined by phone calls to the EDs. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to identify nonmedical factors that could potentially affect the decision to transfer. RESULTS: A total of 155 (13.3%) of 1167 patients arrived from other facilities for specialized hand care. These patients were significantly more likely to be male (p = 0.02), have noncommercial insurance (p = 0.04), require an interpreter (p = 0.01), and arrive between 6:00 p.m. and midnight (p = 0.03). In a multivariable analysis, sex and insurance status were significantly associated with transfer (p < 0.05). The subset of ninety-five patients who were transferred from other EDs was significantly more likely to be male (p < 0.01) and arrive on weekends (p < 0.01) or between 6:00 p.m. and midnight (p < 0.01). Of these patients, seventy-seven (81%) were transferred from an ED that reported partial or full hand surgery coverage. However, only eight (10.4%) received a hand surgery evaluation prior to transfer. CONCLUSIONS: The low percentage of patients receiving hand surgery evaluations prior to transfer suggests that referring hospitals are not using their own hand surgeon resources. Nonmedical factors, including noncommercial insurance and off-hour time of initial arrival, may be associated with the decision to transfer patients. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Identifying nonmedical factors associated with patient transfers and referrals can enlighten efforts to improve the quality and appropriate use of transfers for specialty care.

Does the gatekeeper model work in hand surgery?

BACKGROUND: Most managed care plans use a physician "gatekeeper" to control referrals to hand surgeons. The appropriateness of this model for upper extremity complaints has never been challenged. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prior management of patients with elective hand disorders who present to a hand surgery clinic. METHODS: All patients presenting to a tertiary, academic medical center for a new-patient hand surgery evaluation from February 3, 2011, to June 15, 2011, were prospectively enrolled. Patients were evaluated for prior provider, diagnosis, treatment, and complications. Actual diagnosis, recommended workup, and appropriate treatment were determined independently by two experienced hand examiners. Traumatic injuries and surgeon disagreements in diagnosis and treatment were excluded, leaving 125 patients. RESULTS: Ninety-eight percent of patients had been evaluated by a primary care provider. Overall, the correct diagnosis was established 34 percent of the time. Nerve compression syndromes were diagnosed with the greatest accuracy (64 percent), whereas stenosing tenosynovitis was diagnosed correctly only 15 percent of the time. Before presentation, 74 percent of patients had undergone a study or intervention. On review, 70 percent of studies/interventions were deemed unnecessary. Advanced imaging was unwarranted in 90 percent of patients who received it. Seventeen percent of patients experienced a complication. Most (67 percent) were caused by a delay in diagnosis, whereas 33 percent resulted from an intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Health care providers less familiar with an examination of the hand often misdiagnose and mistreat common problems. A referral system may not be the most efficient means of delivering care to patients with elective hand maladies.

Patients transferred for emergency upper extremity evaluation: does insurance status matter?

BACKGROUND: Academic institutions receive many patients transferred specifically for hand surgery evaluation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the demographics and insurance status of patients transferred for this reason. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 155 transferred and 1017 nontransferred patients with a primary hand diagnosis during 3 summer months at two urban academic institutions. Patients were evaluated for insurance status/type, medical comorbidities, employment status, and reason for transfer. Insurance was defined as present/absent and favorable/unfavorable, with unfavorable defined as Medicaid or state-sponsored insurance. Reason for transfer or presenting diagnosis was separated by category. RESULTS: The mean age was similar between groups, but a higher percentage of transfer patients were men (69.9 percent versus 59.7 percent; p < 0.05). The percentage of insured patients was similar (92.9 percent versus 93.2 percent), but the number with no insurance or undesirable insurance was greater for transferred patients (30.1 percent versus 22.9 percent; p < 0.05). Patients with poor or no insurance were twice as likely to be inappropriately transferred (OR, 2.17; p = 0.03). Transferred patients were less likely to be employed (55.1 percent versus 64.8 percent; p < 0.05); however, the percentages of workers' compensation (13.5 percent versus 14.6 percent) and diabetes (6.41 percent versus 6.10 percent) cases were similar. Common reasons for transfer were closed fractures/dislocations (21.9 percent), infection (17.4 percent), and amputation/devascularization (17.4 percent). CONCLUSION: Patients transferred to tertiary care centers for emergency upper extremity evaluation have a higher rate of undesirable or no insurance and are more likely to be male or unemployed.

The overutilization of resources in patients with acute upper extremity trauma and infection.

PURPOSE: To compare patients with acute upper extremity injuries and infections presenting initially to the emergency department with patients transferred from outside institutions, and to evaluate triage guidelines for the appropriate transfer of these patients. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 1,172 consecutive patients with acute upper extremity injuries or infections presenting to 2 level 1 trauma centers over 3-month periods. We analyzed demographics, transfer details, injury characteristics, intervention received, follow-up, and complications. Triage guidelines were established by a board of academic upper extremity and emergency physicians and retrospectively applied to patient data. RESULTS: Of 1,172 patients, 155 (13%) arrived via transfer from outside facilities. Transferred patients had more complex injuries by our guidelines, but many did not require level 1 emergent care. The receiving emergency department discharged 26% of the transferred patients without upper extremity specialist evaluation, and 24% of the transferred patients received no procedural intervention at any point. Only 10% went to the operating room emergently. Implementing our guidelines for appropriate triage, we found that 53% of transfers did not require emergent transfer to a level 1 facility. These nonemergent transfers spent an average of 15.2 hours from the time of initial evaluation at the outside facility to discharge from the level 1 emergency department, compared with 3.1 hours in patients who arrived primarily. Retrospectively, our triage guidelines had a 2% undertriage rate and a 3% overtriage rate. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of the patients transferred with upper extremity injuries and infections for specialized evaluation may be transferred unnecessarily. Guidelines for the care and transfer of patients with acute upper extremity injuries or infections may lead to better use of resources. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic III.

Allergic dermatitis due to topical antibiotics.

In this report we present a case of allergic dermatitis from chronic use of antibiotic ointment mistakenly diagnosed as a localized finger infection.

Therapeutic modalities--an updated review for the hand surgeon.

The number of therapeutic modalities available to the hand surgeon has greatly increased over the past several decades. A field once predicated only on heat, massage, and cold therapy now uses electrical stimulators, ultrasound, biofeedback, iontophoresis, phonophoresis, mirror therapy, lasers, and a number of other modalities. With this expansion in choices, there has been a concurrent effort to better define which modalities are truly effective. In this review, we aim to characterize the commonly used modalities and provide the evidence available that supports their continued use.

Telemedicine and plastic surgery: a review of its applications, limitations and legal pitfalls.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is a rapidly expanding technology involving the exchange of medical information to assist diagnosis and treatment at a distance. Within the field of plastic surgery, where visual examination contributes heavily to patient management decision-making, telemedicine has great potential. However, privacy and medico-legal issues must be considered when using electronic communication to assist our clinical practice. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review of manuscripts published on telemedicine was performed. Articles were selected for relevance to plastic and reconstructive surgery and reviewed for applications, benefits and complications of telemedicine. In addition, the manuscripts were reviewed for conforming to current legal guidelines for the electronic transfer of patient information. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria (11 trauma and burns, 4 hand, 5 wound-care, 5 maxillofacial, 1 digital replantation, 2 free-flap monitoring, and 1 technical application). Twenty-eight (96%) manuscripts reported a benefit of telemedicine (commonly including increased access to expertise and costs saved through reduction of unnecessary transfers). However only five (17%) reported a statistical benefit compared to a standard treatment cohort (face-to-face interactions). Fifteen (51%) reported on adverse effects, which included misdiagnosis, time consumption, training, technical and cost issues. Only four manuscripts (14%) discussed conforming to legal guidelines within their institution. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine can improve access to the specialty of plastic surgery by facilitating the provision of expertise at remote sites. Its application can be used in many situations and between a variety of healthcare professionals. However, there is little critical analysis on the benefits and risks of telemedicine. In addition, its legal implications need to be carefully considered if it is to be safely integrated into our daily practice.

Surgical and technical aspects of hand transplantation: is it just another replant?

The ultimate goal of hand allotransplantation is to achieve graft survival and useful long-term function. To achieve these goals, selection of the appropriate patient, detailed preoperative planning, and precise surgical technique are of paramount importance. Transplantation should be reserved for motivated consenting adults in good general heath, who are psychologically stable and have failed a trial of prosthetic use. While the key surgical steps of transplantation are similar to those of replantation, there are major differences. This article describes the steps in hand allotransplantation, and the importance of patient selection as well as preoperative and postoperative care.

A minimally invasive technique for burying free flaps and grafts.

The placement of large-volume flaps and grafts into a subcutaneous pocket often requires extensive incisions for accurate placement. We describe a technique that allows for the precise, atraumatic placement of these tissues through minimal incisions. No unusual or expensive surgical instrumentation is required, and the technique is easy to learn. We have found the technique especially useful in the augmentation of severe facial atrophy.

The use of human acellular dermal matrix for the correction of secondary deformities after breast augmentation: results and costs.

BACKGROUND: Secondary breast deformities following breast augmentation constitute some of the most challenging and difficult problems to correct. Although the application and efficacy of human acellular dermal matrix in breast reconstruction has been previously reported, there is little information in the literature relating to its indications, results, or cost in aesthetic breast surgery. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed a single surgeon's experience in correcting secondary deformities with human acellular dermal matrix after breast augmentation from 2005 to 2009. A total of 23 patients (38 breasts) were included in the study. RESULTS: There were 28 breasts with surface irregularities and 22 breasts with implant malposition (12 had both). On average, 1.13 sheets of human acellular dermal matrix were used per breast per operation. At the authors' institution, this material equates to a cost to the patient of $3536 to $4856 per breast (depending on sheet size and thickness). Twenty of 23 patients (87 percent) [32 of 38 breasts (84 percent)] had improvement in their breast deformity after breast revision surgery. Three patients (six breasts) needed another cosmetic breast operation before the end of the follow-up period: two because of persistent surface irregularities and one with a request for larger implants. One patient (3 percent) had an infection in one breast, requiring removal of the human acellular dermal matrix. CONCLUSIONS: Human acellular dermal matrix is a useful and safe adjunct for correction of contour deformities after breast augmentation. Its high cost, however, may be a deterrent to widespread use in self-pay patients.

Ischemia of postmastectomy skin after infiltration of local anesthetic with epinephrine: a case report and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The goals of this study were to review the literature regarding the use of local anesthetic with epinephrine and to report an observation of prolonged ischemia and necrosis in postmastectomy skin. METHODS: A PubMed literature review was performed and the patient's medical record was reviewed. RESULTS: Prior skin necrosis with epinephrine use in acral areas was often due to physician or manufacturing overdose. Many large studies have confirmed subsequently epinephrine's safety in acral areas. There are reports of prolonged ischemia in the dermatology literature when used in areas with impaired venous and lymphatic drainage. Our case report suggests that the impaired clearance mechanisms in postmastectomy skin with an underlying implant can lead to ischemia when using local anesthetic with epinephrine. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of epinephrine to local anesthetic increases the duration of analgesia and provides for a relatively bloodless operating field. In the past many surgeons were reluctant to use it because of concerns about arterial vasospasm and tissue necrosis. However, perceptions have recently changed as large reviews have documented its safe use in acral areas. Based on our review of the literature and this case, epinephrine use may not be appropriate in patients with compromised venous and lymphatic drainage.

Long-term results of periarterial sympathectomy.

PURPOSE: To compare long-term results (minimum follow-up of 23 months) of periarterial sympathectomy for patients with digital vasospasm secondary to either an autoimmune disease or generalized atherosclerotic disease. Patients with posttraumatic or localized occlusive disease and vasospasm were not evaluated. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients had periarterial sympathectomy at 1 hospital by 1 senior surgeon. Periarterial sympathectomy was targeted to the areas of ulceration. Twenty patients (with 24 involved extremities and 42 ulcerated digits) had a documented autoimmune disease; 17 patients had scleroderma or an undifferentiated mixed connective tissue disorder, 2 had systemic lupus erythematosus, and 1 had rheumatoid arthritis. Eight patients (with 9 involved extremities and 17 ulcerated digits) had atherosclerotic disease. The primary outcomes were complete healing of all ulcers, a decrease in the number of ulcers, and need for amputation by the end of follow-up. Statistical analysis was done using the Fischer exact t-test. RESULTS: The average follow-up for all patients was 96 months (90 months for the autoimmune group and 113 months for the atherosclerotic group). Fifteen of the 20 patients (28 of 42 digits) in the autoimmune group had complete healing or decrease in ulcer number. Conversely, only 1 of the 8 patients (2 of 17 digits) in the atherosclerotic group had complete healing or decrease in ulcer number. Eleven of the 42 (26%) digits treated in the autoimmune group required amputation. In contrast, 10 of the 17 (59%) digits treated in the atherosclerotic group ultimately required amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Periarterial sympathectomy can lead to complete healing and decrease in ulcer number in autoimmune disease patients with digital ischemia from vasospasm. However, our data suggest that periarterial sympathectomy may be of little or no benefit in patients with chronic digital ischemia and vasospasm secondary to severe atherosclerotic disease. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic III.

Traumatic amputation of a supernumerary digit: a 16-year-old boy's perspective of suture ligation.

Traditionally, the duplicated digit in an infant with polydactyly is managed by suture ligation and the digit is allowed to auto-amputate. However, painful neuromas may result from this commonly used technique and sharp excision has been suggested as a superior alternative. We present a case of a 16-year-old male who requested revascularization after a traumatic partial amputation of a supernumerary digit on his left hand. He requested revascularization because suture ligation of a duplicated digit on his right hand as an infant had resulted in a neuroma and considerable pain.

Latissimus dorsi flap closure of the irradiated clavicular wound.

Partial or total resection of a previously irradiated clavicle and surrounding soft tissues is a difficult clinical problem. Attempts to close the defect with local tissue often result in wound breakdown and exposure of any remaining clavicle. Furthermore, the most appealing local muscle flap, the pectoralis major, is often unsuitable for reconstruction because of previous resection or radiation damage. Over a 3-year period, 8 patients had resection of a previously irradiated clavicle and surrounding soft tissues. Four underwent excision for sarcoma and four for osteoradionecrosis complicated by chronic wounds. All defects were reconstructed with a pedicled latissimus dorsi muscle flap. No patient had a flap failure, and all had closed wounds at a minimum 18-month follow-up. Our series demonstrates the success of latissimus dorsi flap coverage for post-claviculectomy defects in an irradiated field. To our knowledge, this is the first described series of such patients. The latissimus dorsi muscle flap should be considered for all difficult wounds involving the clavicle and surrounding soft tissues.