Objective: To update the existing CHIP (CT in Head Injury Patients) decision rule for detection of (in-tra)cranial findings in adult patients following minor head injury (MHI).Methods: The study is... Show moreObjective: To update the existing CHIP (CT in Head Injury Patients) decision rule for detection of (in-tra)cranial findings in adult patients following minor head injury (MHI).Methods: The study is a prospective multicenter cohort study in the Netherlands. Consecutive MHI pa-tients of 16 years and older were included. Primary outcome was any (intra)cranial traumatic finding on computed tomography (CT). Secondary outcomes were any potential neurosurgical lesion and neuro-surgical intervention. The CHIP model was validated and subsequently updated and revised. Diagnostic performance was assessed by calculating the c-statistic. Results: Among 4557 included patients 3742 received a CT (82%). In 383 patients (8.4%) a traumatic find-ing was present on CT. A potential neurosurgical lesion was found in 73 patients (1.6%) with 26 (0.6%) patients that actually had neurosurgery or died as a result of traumatic brain injury. The original CHIP underestimated the risk of traumatic (intra)cranial findings in low-predicted-risk groups, while in high -predicted-risk groups the risk was overestimated. The c-statistic of the original CHIP model was 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.74) and it would have missed two potential neurosurgical lesions and one patient that underwent neurosurgery. The updated model performed similar to the original model regarding trau-matic (intra)cranial findings (c-statistic 0.77 95% CI 0.74-0.79, after crossvalidation c-statistic 0.73). The updated CHIP had the same CT rate as the original CHIP (75%) and a similar sensitivity (92 versus 93%) and specificity (both 27%) for any traumatic (intra)cranial finding. However, the updated CHIP would not have missed any (potential) neurosurgical lesions and had a higher sensitivity for (potential) neurosurgi-cal lesions or death as a result of traumatic brain injury (100% versus 96%).Conclusions: Use of the updated CHIP decision rule is a good alternative to current decision rules for patients with MHI. In contrast to the original CHIP the update identified all patients with (potential) neurosurgical lesions without increasing CT rate.(c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ) Show less
Introduction The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization... Show moreIntroduction The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. It was hypothesized that early mobilization would not lead to higher direct and indirect costs. Materials and methods This study used data of a multicenter randomized clinical trial (FuncSiE trial). From August 25, 2009 until September 18, 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were recruited and randomized to early mobilization (immediate motion exercises; n = 48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilization (n = 52). Patients completed questionnaires on health-related quality of life [EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form-36 (SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS)], health care use, and work absence. Follow-up was 1 year. Primary outcome were the total costs at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. Results There were no significant differences in EQ-5D, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS between the two groups. Mean total costs per patient were euro3624 in the early mobilization group versus euro7072 in the plaster group (p = 0.094). Shorter work absenteeism in the early mobilization group (10 versus 18 days; p = 0.027) did not lead to significantly lower costs for loss of productivity (euro1719 in the early mobilization group versus euro4589; p = 0.120). Conclusion From a clinical and a socio-economic point of view, early mobilization should be the treatment of choice for a simple elbow dislocation. Plaster immobilization has inferior results at almost double the cost. Show less
Foks, K.A.; Dijkland, S.A.; Lingsma, H.F.; Polinder, S.; Brand, C.L. van den; Jellema, K.; ... ; Patka, P. 2019
Background: Elbow dislocations can be classified as simple or complex. Simple dislocations are characterized by the absence of fractures, while complex dislocations are associated with fractures.... Show moreBackground: Elbow dislocations can be classified as simple or complex. Simple dislocations are characterized by the absence of fractures, while complex dislocations are associated with fractures. After reduction of a simple dislocation, treatment options include immobilization in a static plaster for different periods of time or so-called functional treatment. Functional treatment is characterized by early active motion within the limits of pain with or without the use of a sling or hinged brace. Theoretically, functional treatment should prevent stiffness without introducing increased joint instability. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to compare early functional treatment versus plaster immobilization following simple dislocations of the elbow. Methods/Design: The design of the study will be a multicenter randomized controlled trial of 100 patients who have sustained a simple elbow dislocation. After reduction of the dislocation, patients are randomized between a pressure bandage for 5-7 days and early functional treatment or a plaster in 90 degrees flexion, neutral position for prosupination for a period of three weeks. In the functional group, treatment is started with early active motion within the limits of pain. Function, pain, and radiographic recovery will be evaluated at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. The secondary outcome measures are the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, Oxford elbow score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow joint at both sides, rate of secondary interventions and complication rates in both groups (secondary dislocation, instability, relaxation), health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36 and EuroQol-5D), radiographic appearance of the elbow joint (degenerative changes and heterotopic ossifications), costs, and cost-effectiveness. Discussion: The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of a functional treatment for the management of simple elbow dislocations. Show less
BACKGROUND:: The primary aim of this study was to assess the health-related quality of life of survivors of severe trauma 1 year after injury, specified according to all the separate dimensions of... Show moreBACKGROUND:: The primary aim of this study was to assess the health-related quality of life of survivors of severe trauma 1 year after injury, specified according to all the separate dimensions of the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) and the Health Utilities Index (HUI). METHODS:: A prospective cohort study was conducted in which all severely injured trauma patients presented at a Level I trauma center were included. After 12 months, the EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 were used to analyze the health status. RESULTS:: Follow-up assessments were obtained from 246 patients (response rate, 68%). The overall population EQ-5D (median) utility score was 0.73 (EQ-5D Dutch general population norm, 0.88). HUI2, HUI3, and EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale scores were 0.81, 0.65, and 70, respectively. Eighteen percent had at least one functional limitation 1 year after trauma, and 60% reported functional limitations on two or more domains using the EQ-5D. The female gender and comorbidity were significant independent predictors of disability. CONCLUSION:: Functional outcome and quality of life of survivors of severe injury have not returned to normal 1 year after trauma. The prevalence of specific limitations in this population is very high (40-70%). Female gender and comorbidity are predictors of long-term disability. Show less
