Surgical stabilization of rib fractures is associated with better return on investment for a health care institution than nonoperative management.

BACKGROUND: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) continues to gain popularity due to patient benefits. However, little has been produced regarding the economic benefits of SSRF and its impact on hospital metrics such as Vizient. The aim of this study was to explore these benefits hypothesizing SSRF will demonstrate positive return on investment (ROI) for a health care institution. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of all rib fracture patients over 5 years at our Level I trauma center. Patients were grouped into SSRF versus nonoperative management. Basic demographics were obtained including case mix index (CMI). Outcomes included narcotic requirements in morphine milliequivalents prior to discharge, mortality, and discharge disposition. Furthermore, actual hospital length of stay (ALOS) versus Vizient expected length of stay were compared between cohorts. Contribution margin (CM) was also calculated. Independent t-test, paired t-test, and linear regression analysis were performed, and significance set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1,639 patients were included; 230 (14%) underwent SSRF. Age, gender, and Injury Severity Score were similar. Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients had more ribs fractured (7 vs. 4; p < 0.001) and more patients with flail chest (43.5% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001). Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients also had a significantly higher CMI (4.33 vs. 2.78; p = 0.001). Narcotic requirements and mortality were less in the SSRF cohort; 155 versus 246 morphine milliequivalents ( p < 0.001) and 1.7% versus 7.1% ( p = 0.003), respectively. Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients were more likely to be discharged home (70.4% vs. 63.7%; p = 0.006). Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients demonstrated shorter ALOS where nonoperative management patients demonstrated longer ALOS compared with Vizient expected length of stay. Contribution margins for SSRF patients were significantly higher and linear regression analysis showed a CM $1,128.14 higher per patient undergoing SSRF ( p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing SSRF demonstrate a significant ROI for a health care organization. Despite SSRF patients having a higher CMI, they were able to be discharged sooner than expected by Vizient calculations resulting in better a CM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Hardware Infection From Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures Is Lower Than Previously Reported.

Introduction Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is an emerging therapy for the treatment of patients with traumatic rib fractures. Despite the demonstrated benefits of SSRF, there remains a paucity of literature regarding the complications from SSRF, especially those related to hardware infection. Currently, literature quotes hardware infection rates as high as 4%. We hypothesize that the hardware infection rate is much lower than currently published. Methods This is an IRB-approved, four-year multicenter descriptive review of prospectively collected data from January 2016 to June 2022. All patients undergoing SSRF were included in the study. Exclusion criteria included those patients less that 18 years of age. Basic demographics were obtained: age, gender, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Abbreviate Injury Scale-chest (AIS-chest), flail chest (yes/no), delayed SSRF more than two weeks (yes/no), number of patients with a pre-SSRF chest tube, and number of ribs fixated. Primary outcome was hardware infection. Secondary outcomes included mortality rate and hospital length of stay (HLOS). Basic descriptive statistics were utilized for analysis. Results A total of 453 patients met criteria for inclusion in the study. Mean age was 63 ± 15.2 years and 71% were male. Mean ISS was 17.3 ± 8.5 with a mean AIS-chest of 3.2 ± 0.5. Flail chest (three consecutive ribs with two or more fractures on each rib) accounted for 32% of patients. Forty-two patients (9.3%) underwent delayed SSRF. The average number of ribs stabilized was 4.75 ± 0.71. When analyzing the primary outcome, only two patients (0.4%) developed a hardware infection requiring reoperation to remove the plates. Overall HLOS was 10.5 ± 6.8 days. Five patients suffered a mortality (1.1%), all five with ISS scores higher than 15 suggesting significant polytrauma. Conclusion This is the largest case series to date examining SSRF hardware infection. The incidence of SSRF hardware infection is very low (<0.5%), much less than quoted in current literature. Overall, SSRF is a safe procedure with low morbidity and mortality.

Impact of sternal fixation on patient outcomes: A case matched review.

INTRODUCTION: Sternal fractures are debilitating injuries often resulting in severe pain and respiratory compromise. Surgical fixation of sternal fractures is gaining popularity as a treatment modality for sternal fractures. Unfortunately, little literature exists on this topic. This study looks to further examine the benefits of sternal fixation (SF), hypothesizing SF results in improved pain, improved respiratory function, and decreased opioid use. METHODS: Retrospective review was performed between patients with sternal fractures who underwent nonoperative management (NOM) versus operative SF. Case matching was used to construct an artificial control group matched on age and Injury Severity Score using a 1:1 ratio of treatment to control. Exclusion criteria were age younger than 18 years. Outcomes of interest included mean pain score, total opioid requirements (in morphine milliequivalents) within 24 hours of discharge, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay (LOS), and incentive spirometry percent predicted value at discharge. Dependent variables were analyzed using t test, and Injury Severity Score was analyzed using the sign test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients from the SF cohort were matched with 58 patients from the NOM cohort. The average age was 59.8 years for the SF group and 62.2 years for the NOM group. Injury Severity Score was matched at 9 for both cohorts. Although pain scores were similar for both cohorts, the SF group required significantly less opioids at discharge (62.1 vs. 92.2 morphine milliequivalents; p = 0.007). In addition, the SF cohort demonstrated significantly improved respiratory function per incentive spirometry percent predicted value at discharge (75.5% vs. 59.9%; p < 0.001). Intensive care unit LOS and hospital LOS were similar between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Despite similarities in pain scores, intensive care unit LOS, and hospital LOS, SF was associated with decreased opioid requirements and improved respiratory function at discharge in this study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.