Introduction: An aging population in developed countries has increased the number of osteoporotic hip fractures and will continue to grow over the next decades. Previous studies have investigated the effect of integrated orthogeriatric trauma units and care model on outcomes of hip fracture patients. Although all of the models perform better than usual care, there is no conclusive evidence which care model is superior. More confirmative studies reporting the efficacy of orthogeriatric trauma units are needed. The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes of hip fracture patients admitted to the hospital before and after implementation of an orthogeriatric trauma unit. Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a level 2 trauma center between 2016 and 2018. Patients aged 70 years or older with a hip fracture undergoing surgery were included to evaluate the implementation of an orthogeriatric trauma unit. The main outcomes were postoperative complications, patient mortality, time spent at the emergency department, time to surgery, and hospital length of stay. Results: A total of 806 patients were included. After implementation of the orthogeriatric trauma unit, there was a significant decrease in postoperative complications (42% vs. 49% in the historical cohort, p = 0.034), and turnaround time at the emergency department was reduced by 38 minutes. Additionally, there was significantly less missing data after implementation of the orthogeriatric trauma unit. After correcting for covariates, patients in the orthogeriatric trauma unit cohort had a lower chance of complications (OR 0.654, 95% CI 0.471-0.908, p = 0.011) and a lower chance of 1-year mortality (OR 0.656, 95% CI 0.450-0.957, p = 0.029). Conclusions: This study showed that implementation of an orthogeriatric trauma unit leads to a decrease in postoperative complications, 1-year mortality, and time spent at the emergency department, while also improving the quality of data registration for clinical studies. Level of Evidence: Level III.

Purpose Proximal row carpectomy (PRC) and 4-corner arthrodesis (FCA) are common salvage procedures for the treatment of scapholunate advanced collapse and scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse. This study aimed to assess rates of reoperation and conversion to wrist fusion and to assess the factors associated with reoperation and conversion to wrist fusion for patients treated with PRC and FCA.Methods A retrospective chart review was performed evaluating 266 adult patients undergoing PRC or FCA at a single institutional system from 2002 to 2016. Demographic data, patient-and injury-specific data, reoperation and conversion rates, and complications were collected. Potential factors associated with reoperation or wrist fusion were evaluated using a bivariate, followed by a multivariable, analysis.Results Reoperation was more commonly performed in FCA (34%) than in PRC (11%) (odds ratio [OR], 3.4; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.7e6.8) and occurred at a shorter postoperative interval. In a multivariable analysis for reoperation, manual labor was associated with reoperation in patients undergoing FCA (OR, 5.4; 95% CI, 1.5e19.1). In those undergoing PRC, anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) and/or posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) neurectomy was associated with a lower rate of reoperation (OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06e0.57). In a multivariable analysis for conversion to wrist arthrodesis, intraoperative AIN and/or PIN neurectomy (OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06e0.57) was associated with a lower rate of conversion to wrist fusion, and smoking (OR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.8e13.5) was associated with a higher rate of conversion to wrist fusion. In the subanalysis of patients who underwent PRC, only AIN and/or PIN neurectomy was associated with lower rates of conversion to wrist arthrodesis (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.04e0.56).Conclusions In our cohort, we observed that AIN and/or PIN neurectomy reduced the risk of reoperation and conversion to wrist arthrodesis after PRC. Smoking increased the odds of conversion to wrist arthrodesis in the combined PRC/FCA cohort; however, it is unclear whether this was due to smoking itself or whether the indications for PRC or FCA were affected, leading to this result.

The FPL tendon path can be preoperatively marked using: (1) the MC1-axis from which it runs ulnarly approximately at an angle of 30° in both abduction and adduction; or (2) the MC2-axis from which it runs radially at an angle of 47.5° in abduction and at an angle of 25° in adduction. We conclude that the FPL tendon path can be preoperatively marked using these axes and does not parallel the metacarpal axes of the thumb.