Idiopathic Megaduodenum in a Teenager: A Case Report.

Megaduodenum is a rare clinical syndrome characterized by significant duodenal dilation, elongation, and hypertrophy. Given its rarity and nonspecific clinical manifestations, megaduodenum may be misdiagnosed, leading to delays in surgical care and increased morbidity. We describe a case of idiopathic megaduodenum in a teenage Caucasian female, who presented with a five-year history of halitosis, recurrent belching, bloating, nausea and vomiting, and postprandial epigastric abdominal pain. She was diagnosed with megaduodenum by dramatic findings on contrast radiography. She developed a duodenal volvulus necessitating emergency exploratory laparotomy, during which a duodenal plication and a side-to-side duodenojejunostomy were performed. Exploratory laparotomy and histopathological analysis were unrevealing of any definitive abnormalities to explain her megaduodenum. Postoperatively, she developed two early small bowel obstructions, both from subsequent adhesions requiring repeat laparotomy with adhesiolysis. She has subsequently recovered without incident. Diagnosis and accurate classification of megaduodenum requires surgical exploration with a full-thickness biopsy and subsequent histopathologic analysis to rule out obstructive or functional disorders of the duodenum. Treatment of megaduodenum depends on the underlying cause and degree of duodenal distention. It is crucial that clinicians are knowledgeable of the various surgical options, their indications, and the potential postoperative complications that may arise.

The Use of Parenteral Nutrition and Disparities in Its Allocation Following Traumatic Injury.

INTRODUCTION: Severe traumatic injury requires rapid and extensive deployment of resources to save the lives of the critically injured. The sequelae of traumatic injuries frequently require extensive intervention obligating patients to a complicated recovery process devoid of meaningful nutrition. In this setting, parenteral nutrition (PN) is key in enabling appropriate wound healing, recovery, and rehabilitation. We sought to examine the use of PN in adult trauma management and to highlight any disparities in the utilization of PN in adult trauma patients. METHODS: We queried the 2017-2019 Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) for adult patients (aged > 18 y) who sustained blunt or penetrating traumatic injuries and received PN as part of their hospitalization. We compared time to PN administration based on demographics. We then used a multivariable logistic regression model to identify factors associated with the use of PN. We hypothesized that PN would be less commonly employed in the uninsured and minority groups. RESULTS: We identified 2,449,498 patients with sufficient data for analysis. Of these, 1831 patients were treated with PN. On univariate analysis, PN patients were more commonly male (74.7% PN versus 60.2% non-PN; P < 0.001). PN use was more frequent in the Black population (24.3% PN versus 15.5% non-PN; P < 0.001) and less frequent in the White population (72.7% PN versus 81.2% non-PN; P < 0.001). PN use was also much more common among patients covered by Medicaid. Penetrating trauma was over twice as common among PN recipients relative to non-PN patients (% PN versus % non-PN). PN patients had higher injury severity scores (ISSs), more intensive care unit days, longer hospitalizations, and increased mortality compared to non-PN patients. PN patients were half as likely to discharge home and twice as likely to discharge to a long-term care facility. Multivariable analysis including age, race, trauma mechanism, primary payer, and ISS, demonstrated an association of PN use with increasing age (OR 1.01, P < 0.001), cases of penetrating trauma (odds ratio [OR], 2.47; P < 0.001), and patients with high ISS (OR, 0.1.06; P < 0.001). There was decreased use in Uninsured patient (OR, 0.54; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PN use following traumatic injury is rarely required. Patients treated with PN typically have a resource-intense hospital course. More severe injuries, penetrating trauma, and increased age are more likely to result in PN use. Variations in PN use are apparent based on insurance payer, further examination into allocation of hospital and intensive care resources, as it pertains to patient socioeconomic status, is warranted in light of these findings.

Factors Associated with Discharge to Skilled Nursing Facility Following Gunshot Wounds.

INTRODUCTION: Firearm injury is a public health crisis. Most victims are minorities in underserved neighborhoods. Measuring firearm injury by mortality underestimates its impact, as most victims survive to discharge. This study was done to determine if race and insurance status are associated with discharge disposition for gunshot wound (GSW)-related trauma. METHODS: Using the 2019 Trauma Quality Improvement Program database, we identified GSW patients with Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) = 1-3. Exclusion criteria included patients who died in hospital and routine home discharge. We compared discharge patterns of patients based on demographics (age, gender, race, ethnicity, payor, AIS, hospital designation, and length of stay [LOS]) and injury severity. Multivariable logistic regression models identified factors associated with discharge disposition. RESULTS: Our sample included 2437 patients with GSWs. On univariable analysis, Black patients were more likely to discharge to home with home health (64.1% Black versus 34.7% White; P < 0.001). White patients were more likely to discharge to skilled nursing facility (SNF) (51.4% White versus 44.6% Black; P < 0.001). Controlling for age, race, Latin ethnicity, primary payor, LOS, AIS severity, and injury severity score factors independently associated with discharge to SNF included age (0.0462, P < 0.001), Medicaid (1.136, P < 0.0003), Medicare (1.452, P < 0.001), and LOS (0.03745, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Postacute care following traumatic injuries is essential to recovery. Black GSW victims are more likely to be discharged to home health than White patients, who are more likely to be discharged to SNF. Targeted programs to reduce barriers to appropriate aftercare are necessary to eliminate this bias and improve the care of underserved populations.

Accredited Health Department Partnerships to Improve Health: An Analysis of Community Health Assessments and Improvement Plans.

CONTEXT: The Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) Standards & Measures require the development and updating of collaborative community health assessments (CHAs) and community health improvement plans (CHIPs). OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to analyze the CHAs and CHIPs of PHAB-accredited health departments to identify the types of partners engaged, as well as the objectives selected to measure progress toward improving community health. DESIGN: The study team extracted and coded data from documents from 158 CHA/CHIP processes submitted as part of the accreditation process. Extracted data included population size, health department type, data sources, and types of partner organizations. Health outcome objectives were categorized by Healthy People 2020 Leading Health Indicator (LHI), as well as by the 7 broad areas in the PHAB reaccreditation framework for population health outcomes reporting. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included health departments accredited between 2013 and 2016 that submitted CHAs and CHIPs to PHAB, including 138 CHAs/CHIPs from local health departments and 20 from state health departments. RESULTS: All the CHAs/CHIPs documented collaboration with a broad array of partners, with hospitals and health care cited most frequently (99.0%). Other common partners included nonprofit service organizations, education, business, and faith-based organizations. Small health departments more frequently listed many partner types, including law enforcement and education, compared with large health departments. The majority of documents (88.6%) explicitly reference Healthy People 2020 goals, with most addressing the LHIs nutrition/obesity/physical activity and access to health services. The most common broad areas from PHAB's reaccreditation framework were preventive health care and individual behavior. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the range of partners accredited health departments engage with to collaborate on improving their communities' health as well as the objectives used to measure community health improvement. This illustrates the collaborative nature in which accredited health departments tackle community priorities.