An Esthetic Scoring System for Scaphocephaly Assessment and Outcomes: A Pilot Study.

Scaphocephaly is the commonest form of craniosynostosis with a varied presentation consisting of many morphological components and a range of possible surgical interventions. However, with regard to esthetic assessment, there is no universally applied assessment system. The aim was to develop a simple assessment tool encompassing multiple phenotypic components of scaphocephaly. This was done by piloting a red/amber/green (RAG) scoring system to judge esthetic outcomes following scaphocephaly surgery using photographs and experienced observers. Standard photographic views of 20 patients who had undergone either passive or anterior 2/3 vault remodelling were scored by 5 experienced assessors. Using a RAG scoring system before and after scaphocephaly correction according to 6 morphological characteristics: visual impression of cephalic index, calvarial height, bitemporal pinching, frontal bossing, posterior bullet, and displacement of the vertex. All 5 assessors were asked to score the preoperative and postoperative views independently. The RAG scores were each assigned a number (1-3) and added to give a composite score (range 6-18) and these were averaged between the 5 assessors. There was a highly statistically significant difference between both preoperative and postoperative composite scores ( P <0.0001). A subgroup analysis of the postoperative composite score between the 2 surgical techniques showed no significant difference ( P =0.759). The RAG scoring system can be used to assess esthetic change following scaphocephaly correction and it provides both a visual analogue and a numerical indicator of change. This assessment method needs further validation but is a potentially reproducible way to score and compare esthetic outcomes in scaphocephaly correction.

A Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Flexor Tenolysis in Zones 2-5.

Background: Although numerous surgical techniques have been described and deployed, flexor tenolysis remains one of the most challenging procedures in hand surgery and there is no standardised way of recording the outcomes. The aim of this study is to systematically review the evidence supporting current concepts and outcomes in flexor tenolysis. Methods: The systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Medline and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published in English using the keyword search terms 'flexor' or 'tendon' and 'tenolysis' or 'tenoarthrolysis'. A total of 555 articles were listed and further screening provided fourteen studies remaining for final inclusion. The parameters for data extraction included number of digits operated on, age of the patients, initial injury mechanism requiring flexor tenolysis, outcome assessment method, follow-up period, results and complications. The primary outcome was postoperative active range of motion. Results: 556 digits were included across all studies and the age of patients ranged between 1 and 75 years. Eleven out of fourteen of the articles used the Strickland criteria to report their outcomes. Other outcome measures used were total active motion (TAM), Buck-Gramcko and pulp-to-palm distance. In the studies which used the Strickland criteria, the average percentage of outcomes reported as 'good' or 'excellent' was 68% with a range between 45% and 91%. Three other studies used Buck-Gramcko, TAM and pulp-to-palm distance outcome reporting and achieved 72% 'good' or 'excellent', 84% improvement and 30% able to touch distal palm crease respectively. Conclusions: Although the literature contains a limited number of observational studies, the current evidence shows that 68% of well-selected patients who undergo flexor tenolysis achieve a good or excellent outcome as measured by the Strickland criteria. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).

Price of a Finger.

Background: Traumatic loss of an index finger is offered twice the amount of compensation as compared to a loss of little finger. However, the little finger plays a pivotal role in power grip thus is underestimated in its importance. Our aim was to test our hypothesis that loss of the little finger will result in greater or equal loss of grip strength compared to loss of the index finger. Methods: Grip strength in the power grip position was measured in 12 healthy volunteers using a JAMAR hand dynamometer. Grip strength of their dominant hand was recorded as a mean kg force of three attempts in three grip configurations 1) using all fingers 2) excluding the index finger and 3) excluding the little finger. Grip strength percentage compared to the full hand was calculated and statistical significance was investigated with a two-tailed T-test. Results: Participants' age varied from 19-64 years, with 4 males and 8 females. Mean full hand grip strength was 28.3 kg force; grip strength with index finger excluded was 65.8% and with little finger excluded was 66.2%. There was no significant difference in grip strength percentage when comparing index or little finger exclusion (p = 0.92). Conclusions: We did not find a difference in power grip using a simulated model of index or little finger loss in a healthy volunteer cohort. This should be taken into account in traumatic loss and work compensation.