Bartoletta, John J.

Background: Patients with upper limb dysfunction from a brain injury often have different goals of treatment and expectations following a fracture of the upper extremity. This study retrospectively reviewed outcomes of nonoperative management of acute humerus fractures in patients with severe ipsilateral hemiparesis or hemiplegia. Methods: Patients who had sustained an acute humerus fracture managed nonoperatively, greater than 1 year following an upper motor neuron (UMN) injury resulting in ipsilateral severe hemiparesis or hemiplegia at a single tertiary care center from 1988 to 2019, were reviewed. Fractures were classified using the AO-Müller/Orthopaedic Trauma Association and/or Neer classifications. Primary outcome measures included House classification level of function, pain, achievement of and time to radiographic union, and the need for subsequent surgical procedures. Results: Ten distinct nonoperatively managed humerus fractures—3 proximal (11A23), 5 mid-shaft (12A2b = 1, 12A2c = 2, 12A3a = 1, 12A2b = 1), and 2 distal (13A2 = 1, 13 C1 = 1)—were identified in 8 patients (6 women and 2 men) with ipsilateral hemiparesis or hemiplegia. The median radiographic follow-up was 20 months (range: 78 days to 12 years). The median clinical follow-up was 33.5 months (range: 100 days to 12 years). All patients presented with severe pain that was absent at final follow-up. Radiographic union was achieved in all patients with a mean time to union of 90.9 ± 39.3 days (range: 35-185 days). No patients required operative management. Conclusions: Nonoperative management of humerus fractures in patients with an ipsilateral UMN injury might result in reliable pain relief and union without the need for further surgical intervention. Management of humerus fractures in this patient population should be individualized toward their goals of care.

Abstract Background Some surgeons advocate for concomitant proximal row carpectomy (PRC) with total wrist arthrodesis (TWA), though there are limited data to support or oppose this view. Questions/Purposes Does concomitant PRC improve rates of union, revision, hardware loosening, hardware failure, and hardware removal in TWA? Patients and Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent TWA with and without concomitant PRC between January 2008 and December 2018 was undertaken. Patients were included if they underwent TWA using a dorsal spanning plate. Patients were excluded if they underwent partial wrist arthrodesis, revision TWA, or TWA with nondorsal spanning plate fixation. Results A total of 183 wrists in 180 patients were included in the study, 96 (52.5%) in the TWA only and 87 (47.5%) in the TWA + PRC groups. Median clinical and radiographic follow-up was 18.0 months (3.0–133.0 months) in the TWA + PRC group and 18.5 months (2.0–126.0 months) in the TWA only group (p = 0.907). No difference in nonunion (TWA + PRC: 13/87 [14.9%], TWA only: 18/96 [18.8%], odds ratio: 0.76, p = 0.494), revision (TWA + PRC: 5/87 [5.75%], TWA only: 8/96 [8.33%], hazard ratio [HR]: 0.73, p = 0.586), loosening (TWA + PRC: 4/87 [4.60%], TWA only: 6/96 [6.25%], HR: 0.74, p = 0.646), failure (TWA + PRC: 5/87 [5.75%], TWA only: 4/96 [4.17%], HR: 1.55, p = 0.530), and removal (TWA + PRC: 12/87 [13.8%], TWA only: 16/96 [16.7%], HR: 0.84, p = 0.634) were identified. Conclusion Concomitant PRC might not improve rates of union or diminish complications in patient undergoing TWA. The role of PRC and the rationale for its use in TWA need to be individualized and discussed with patients prior to surgery. Level of Evidence This is a Level IV, therapeutic study.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) surge has enabled the widespread usage of telemedicine (TM) and presents a unique opportunity to determine the hand surgery patients’ perception of care using validated patient satisfaction scores. Methods: Electronic surveys were distributed to patients aged 18 years and older who underwent a video TM encounter with a single surgeon at an academic medical center during the initial COVID-19 surge (March 23 to October 22, 2020). The study-specific questions were derived from the Press Ganey (PG) Medical Practice TM Survey and compared with institutional PG Outpatient Medical Practice Survey data. Three cohorts were defined: pre-COVID face-to-face, post-COVID TM, and post-COVID face-to-face. Results: Thirty of 65 TM patients (46.2%) responded. No differences in sex, age, or visit type were identified between cohorts. The TM cohort was more likely to live greater than 300 miles from the institution. Median response for all cohorts for the PG care provider and overall experience responses were “very good,” and no differences were identified between cohorts. Patient satisfaction with their TM experience was high with median satisfaction scores for arranging and connecting to a TM visit, talking with the provider over a video connection, and having the provider understand the clinical problem were “very good.” Patients in the TM cohort reported no difference in preference for face-to-face or TM visits. Conclusions: Patients are satisfied with TM as a substitute for face-to-face visits suggesting that TM can possibly be used to deliver comparable patient experience for hand surgery encounters.