Management of nonoperative cervical spine fractures: An institutional analysis of follow-up duration and image acquisition.

Background: How long do nonoperative cervical fractures have to be followed and with how many imaging studies? Methods: We reviewed 69 adult patients with 122 (31 occiptocervical and 91 sub-axial) cervical fractures; at least one of the cervical fractures was managed nonoperatively. Outcomes were assessed along with the optimal follow-up duration and frequency of various diagnostic studies. Results: An average of four follow-up visits occurred on average 28-, 66-, 94-, and 158-day post hospital discharge. The average time between discharge and orthotic clearance was 70 days (±32.4 days). Radiographic studies were obtained at follow-up visits, respectively, in, 82.6%, 83.6%, 94.7%, and 100% of patients. Conclusion: The trend for managing nonoperative cervical fractures was an unduly prolonged follow-up duration that included obtaining too many imaging studies.

Trauma transfers discharged from the emergency department-Is there a role for telemedicine?

BACKGROUND: As the only Level I trauma center in the state, our hospital has seen an increase in the number of traumas requiring transfer for a higher level of care, placing strain on an already strained health care system. Traumas that are transferred to our facility and subsequently discharged back home indicate a subset of patients who may not be appropriate to transfer. The aim of this study is to identify commonalities between patients who were transferred for a higher level of care but do not require inpatient status and to assess patients who may benefit from a telemedicine evaluation. METHODS: A 2-year retrospective review of a prospective collected database of patients who were discharged from the ED following transfer to a Level I trauma center was conducted. Data included demographics, injuries, transferring facility, method of transport, activation criteria and level, additional imaging, consulting services, procedures, and disposition. RESULTS: A total of 2,350 patients were transferred. Of those, 27% (632/2,350) were discharged home directly from the trauma bay. Of those patients, 36% (230/632) required complex bedside intervention or subspecialty consultation prior to discharge including complex laceration repairs 53%, ophthalmology examination 24%, splinting 18%, and joint reduction 5%. Sixty-four percent (402/632) of patients did not require complex bedside procedures prior to discharge. One hundred twenty hospitals transferred patients to our center during this period. The top 10 transferring facilities accounted for 40% (948/2,350) of our transfer volume. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that patients who are transferred to our facility and subsequently discharged have a common pattern of injuries; typically, isolated hand and face/ophthalmology. This is likely attributed to the lack of resources in rural facilities to evaluate and develop treatment plans for these injuries; however, only 36% of discharged patients required a bedside procedure. Excluding Level I traumas, head and spine injuries, and patients requiring complex bedside procedures, there was a 13% inappropriate rate of transfer (310/2,350). Development and implementation of a telemedicine system could potentially reduce the transfer and ED discharge rate, thereby improving efficiency and allowing for reallocation of resources as appropriate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic, Level III.