Literature DB >> 28168319

Outcomes and Disability After Massive Proximal Upper Extremity Reconstruction in a Resource-Limited Setting.

Aviram M Giladi1, R Raja Shanmugakrishnan2, Hari Venkatramani2, S Raja Sekaran3, Kevin C Chung4, S Raja Sabapathy2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: At Ganga Hospital in Coimbatore, India, a unique approach is applied to treat massive upper limb injuries. However, long-term outcomes of complex reconstruction performed in the resource-limited setting are not known. This hinders understanding of outcomes and disability from these injuries and prevents systematically addressing care delivery around upper extremity trauma in the developing world. This project aims to analyze the details of the unique Ganga Hospital reconstruction experience and use patient-reported outcome measures for the first time in this patient population to evaluate post-injury recovery and disability .
METHODS: Forty-six patients were evaluated 6 months or more after massive proximal upper extremity reconstruction at Ganga Hospital. Patients completed functional tests, Jebsen-Taylor test (JTT), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs)-Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ), Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH), and Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Correlations between metrics were assessed with Pearson's correlation coefficients. Linear regression modeling evaluated associations between severity, reconstruction, and outcomes.
RESULTS: MHQ and DASH results correlated with functional test performance, JTT performance, and SF-36 scores (Pearson's coefficients all ≥0.33, p ≤ 0.05). In this cohort, mean MHQ score was 79 ± 15 and mean DASH score was 13 ± 15, which are not significantly different than scores for long-term outcomes after other complex upper extremity procedures. The following factors predicted PROs and functional performance after reconstruction: extent of soft tissue reconstruction, multi-segmental ulna fractures, median nerve injury, and ability for patients to return to work and maintain their job after injury.
CONCLUSIONS: Complex proximal upper extremity salvage can be performed in the resource-limited setting with excellent long-term functional and patient-reported outcomes. PRO questionnaires are useful for reporting outcomes that correlate to functional and sensory testing and may be used to assess post-traumatic disability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28168319     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-017-3902-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  36 in total

1.  Treatment of the severely injured upper extremity.

Authors:  A Gupta; R A Shatford; T W Wolff; T M Tsai; L R Scheker; L S Levin
Journal:  Instr Course Lect       Date:  2000

2.  The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

Authors:  J E Ware; C D Sherbourne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Major replantation versus revision amputation and prosthetic fitting in the upper extremity: a late functional outcomes study.

Authors:  B Graham; P Adkins; T M Tsai; J Firrell; W C Breidenbach
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.230

4.  Measuring outcomes and determining long-term disability after revision amputation for treatment of traumatic finger and thumb amputation injuries.

Authors:  Aviram M Giladi; Evan P McGlinn; Melissa J Shauver; Taylor P Voice; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  An objective and standardized test of hand function.

Authors:  R H Jebsen; N Taylor; R B Trieschmann; M J Trotter; L A Howard
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1969-06       Impact factor: 3.966

6.  Identifiable costs and tangible benefits resulting from the treatment of acute injuries of the hand.

Authors:  J S Gaul
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 2.230

7.  How much are upper or lower extremity disabilities associated with general health status in the elderly?

Authors:  Young Hak Roh; Ki Woong Kim; Nam-Jong Paik; Tae Kyun Kim; Hyun Sik Gong
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Responsiveness of three Patient Report Outcome (PRO) measures in patients with hand fractures: A preliminary cohort study.

Authors:  Gwen Weinstock-Zlotnick; Carol Page; Hassan M K Ghomrawi; Aviva L Wolff
Journal:  J Hand Ther       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 1.950

Review 9.  Outcome instruments for the assessment of the upper extremity following trauma: a review.

Authors:  Adam S Dowrick; Belinda J Gabbe; Owen D Williamson; Peter A Cameron
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 10.  Outcome evaluation measures for wrist and hand: which one to choose?

Authors:  Manish Changulani; Ugochuku Okonkwo; Tulsi Keswani; Yegappan Kalairajah
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2007-05-30       Impact factor: 3.075

View more
  1 in total

1.  Repair of segmental ulnar bone defect in juvenile caused by osteomyelitis with induced membrane combined with tissue-engineered bone: A case report with 4-year follow-up.

Authors:  Yang Gao; Jiangang Cheng; Zhuoyu Long; Pengzhen Cheng; Shuaishuai Zhang; Guoxian Pei; Zhengyu Li; Guolin Meng
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2022-08-31
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.