ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives: Outcome data from wearable devices are increasingly used in both research and clinics. Traditionally, a dedicated device is chosen for a given study or clinical application to collect outcome data as soon as the patient is included in a study or undergoes a procedure. The current study introduces a new measurement strategy, whereby patients' own devices are utilized, allowing for both a pre-injury baseline measure and ability to show achievable results. Materials and Methods: Patients with a pre-existing musculoskeletal injury of the upper and lower extremity were included in this exploratory, proof-of-concept study. They were followed up for a minimum of 6 weeks after injury, and their wearable outcome data (from a smartphone and/or a body-worn sensor) were continuously acquired during this period. A descriptive analysis of the screening characteristics and the observed and achievable outcome patterns was performed. Results: A total of 432 patients was continuously screened for the study, and their screening was analyzed. The highest success rate for successful inclusion was in younger patients. Forty-eight patients were included in the analysis. The most prevalent outcome was step count. Three distinctive activity data patterns were observed: patients recovering, patients with slow or no recovery, and patients needing additional measures to determine treatment outcomes. Conclusions: Measuring outcomes in trauma patients with the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) strategy is feasible. With this approach, patients were able to provide continuous activity data without any dedicated equipment given to them. The measurement technique is especially suited to particular patient groups. Our study's screening log and inclusion characteristics can help inform future studies wishing to employ the BYOD design.
Subject(s)
Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Wearable Electronic Devices , Humans , Smartphone , Treatment Outcome , Lower ExtremityABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Augmentation strategies for surgical fixation of proximal humerus fractures (PHF) are available to address their relatively high failure rate. The purpose of this study was to compare two medial-buttress augmentation strategies for PHF fixation. METHODS: A two-part PHF model with loss of medial buttress was created in 16 synthetic bones. The PHFs were fixed with locking plates and either calcium phosphate cement (CPC) or fibula strut (FS) augmentation. After cadaveric validations, the fixation constructs were subjected to nondestructive axial compression tests, followed by a cyclic test. Construct stiffness and angular displacement of the humerus head were recorded. RESULTS: Humeral head angular displacement was statistically greater in the CPC group than in the FS group at the applied force of 300 N and higher (p < 0.05). Axial stiffness was statistically greater in the FS fixation group than in the CPC group at initial and final phases of cyclic loading protocol (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In an osteoporotic cadaveric model of a 2-part PHF with loss of a medial buttress, locked plate constructs augmented with FS have a higher resistance to varus collapse compared to those augmented with CPC.
