Dataset Information

Traumatic Finger Amputation Treatment Preference among Hand Surgeons in the United States and Japan.

ABSTRACT: Large geographic differences in procedure utilization draw into question its appropriate use. In Japan, replantation is frequent for even very distal finger amputations. In the United States, revision amputation is far more common. There has been no detailed investigation into the drivers of these differences.The authors created a survey to assess experience with replantation, estimates of physical and functional outcomes, attitudes toward amputees, and preferences in several injury scenarios. The survey was distributed to members of the Finger Replantation and Amputation Multicenter Study and to hand surgeons making podium presentations at the Thirty-Second Annual Meeting of the Central Japanese Society for Surgery of the Hand.One hundred percent of both groups responded. There were no significant differences in surgeon experience. Japanese surgeons were significantly more likely to recommend replantation in all scenarios, despite 62 percent ranking function 6 months after replantation as "poor." Japanese surgeons also rated the appearance of a hand with an amputated finger significantly poorer. Finally, Japanese surgeons were significantly more likely to report stigmatization against finger amputees.There is no study with a high level of evidence comparing outcomes following replantation and revision amputation. The lack of evidence results in surgeons basing recommendations on personal preference. In this case, Japanese surgeons preferred replantation despite agreeing that functional outcomes were suboptimal. This may be because of Japanese cultural beliefs. Comparative effectiveness research, such as that planned by the Finger Replantation and Amputation Multicenter Study, can provide evidence toward the appropriate use of replantation.

SUBMITTER: Shauver MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5079431 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Traumatic Finger Amputation Treatment Preference among Hand Surgeons in the United States and Japan.

Shauver Melissa J MJ Nishizuka Takanobu T Hirata Hitoshi H Chung Kevin C KC

Plastic and reconstructive surgery 20160401 4

<h4>Background</h4>Large geographic differences in procedure utilization draw into question its appropriate use. In Japan, replantation is frequent for even very distal finger amputations. In the United States, revision amputation is far more common. There has been no detailed investigation into the drivers of these differences.<h4>Methods</h4>The authors created a survey to assess experience with replantation, estimates of physical and functional outcomes, attitudes toward amputees, and prefere ...[more]

PMID: 27018674

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to perform a cost-utility analysis to compare revision amputation and replantation treatment of finger amputation injuries across a spectrum of injury scenarios.MethodsThe study was conducted from the societal perspective. Decision tree models were created for the reference case (two-finger amputation injury) and seven additional injury scenarios for comparison. Inputs included cost, quality of life, and probability of each health state. A Web-based time trade-off survey was created to determine quality-adjusted life-years for health states; 685 nationally representative adult community members were invited to participate in the survey. Overall cost and quality-adjusted life-years for revision amputation and replantation were calculated for each decision tree. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated if a treatment was more costly but more effective.ResultsThe authors had a 64 percent response rate (n = 437). Replantation treatment had greater costs and quality-adjusted life-years compared with revision amputation in all injury scenarios. Replantation of single-digit injuries had the highest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($136,400 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). Replantation of three- and four-digit amputation injuries had relatively low cost-to-benefit ratios ($27,100 and $23,800 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively). Replantation for distal thumb amputation had a relatively low incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($26,300 per quality-adjusted life-year) compared with replantation of nonthumb distal amputations ($60,200 per quality-adjusted life-year).ConclusionsThe relative cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained with replantation treatment varied greatly among the injury scenarios. Situations in which indications for replantation are debated had higher cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. This study highlights variability in value for replantation among different injury scenarios.

Project description:BackgroundThe best treatment for intertrochanteric hip fractures is controversial. The use of cephalomedullary nails has increased, whereas use of sliding hip screws has decreased despite the lack of evidence that cephalomedullary nails are more effective. As current orthopaedic trainees receive less exposure to sliding hip screws, this may continue to perpetuate the preferential use of cephalomedullary nails, with important implications for resident education, evidence-based best practices, and healthcare cost.Questions/purposesWe asked: (1) What are the current practice patterns in surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fractures among orthopaedic surgeons? (2) Do surgical practice patterns differ based on surgeon characteristics, practice setting, and other factors? (3) What is the rationale behind these surgical practice patterns? (4) What postoperative approaches do surgeons use for intertrochanteric fractures?MethodsA web-based survey containing 20 questions was distributed to active members of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Three thousand seven-hundred eighty-six of 10,321 invited surgeons participated in the survey (37%), with a 97% completion rate (3687 of 3784 responded to all questions in the survey). The survey elicited information regarding surgeon demographics, preferred management strategies, and decision-making rationale for intertrochanteric fractures.ResultsSurgeons use cephalomedullary nails most frequently for treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Sixty-eight percent primarily use cephalomedullary nails, whereas only 19% primarily use sliding hip screws, and the remaining 13% use cephalomedullary nails and sliding hip screws with equal frequency. The cephalomedullary nail was the dominant approach regardless of experience level or practice setting. Surgeons who practiced in a nonacademic setting (71% versus 58%; p < 0.001), did not supervise residents (71% versus 61%; p < 0.001), or treated more than five intertrochanteric fractures a month (78% versus 67%; p < 0.001) were more likely to use primarily cephalomedullary nails. Of the surgeons who used only cephalomedullary nails, ease of surgical technique (58%) was cited as the primary reason, whereas surgeons who used only sliding hip screws cite familiarity (44%) and improved outcomes (37%) as their primary reasons. Of those who use only short cephalomedullary nails, ease of technique (59%) was most frequently cited. Postoperatively, 67% allow the patient to bear weight as tolerated. Nearly all respondents (99.5%) use postoperative chemical thromboprophylaxis.ConclusionsDespite that either sliding hip screw or cephalomedullary nail fixation are associated with equivalent outcomes for most intertrochanteric femur fractures, the cephalomedullary nail has emerged as the preferred construct, with the majority of surgeons believing that a cephalomedullary nail is easier to use, associated with improved outcomes, or is biomechanically superior to a sliding hip screw. The difference between what is evidence-based and what is done in clinical practice may be attributed to several factors, including financial considerations, educational experience, or inability of our current outcomes measures to reflect the experiences of surgeons. The educators, researchers, and policymakers among us must work harder to better define the roles of sliding hip screws and cephalomedullary nails and ensure that the increasing population with hip fractures receives high-quality and economically responsible care.Level of evidenceLevel V, therapeutic study.

Dataset Information

Traumatic Finger Amputation Treatment Preference among Hand Surgeons in the United States and Japan.

Publications

Traumatic Finger Amputation Treatment Preference among Hand Surgeons in the United States and Japan.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets