Clinical Implications of Psychosocial Factors on Pediatric External Fixation Treatment and Recommendations

Abstract

Background Pediatric limb reconstruction using circular external fixation is a prolonged treatment that interrupts patients' daily function. Patient personality characteristics and expectations may interfere with planned treatment, making complicated medical procedures more challenging. The aims of this study are to identify factors impacting treatment outcome and recommendations for preoperative evaluation and planning. Questions/purposes (1) Are there group differences between patients with and without a preexisting mental health condition(s) in terms of unplanned reoperations? (2) Does the number of surgical procedures before current external fixator placement correlate with the number of unplanned readmissions, unplanned reoperations, and days spent in circular external fixation? (3) Are there group differences between single-compared with two-parent households in terms of inpatient narcotic doses, length of inpatient stay, number of unplanned readmissions, length of readmission(s), and/or unplanned outpatient clinic visits? (4) Does patient age at the time of surgery have an impact on treatment duration, postoperative complications, and treatment outcome? Methods This is a retrospective chart review of pediatric patients who underwent limb reconstruction between 2008 and 2012. Patients with limb length discrepancy [ 4 cm or severe angular deformity and who agreed to intervention were treated with circular external fixation. Sixty-seven patients were included; 16 patients were excluded. Statistical analyses included Pearson r correlation and t-test. Results Patients who reported preexisting mental health diagnosis (13%) had more unplanned reoperations than patients who did not (no mental health diagnosis; 87%) (mental health diagnosis 3.4 ± 10.3 versus no mental health diagnosis 0.2 ± 0.5 reoperation[s], p = 0.022). Number of previous surgical procedures correlated with number of unplanned reoperations (r = 0.448, p \ 0.001), number of unplanned readmissions (r = 0.375, p \ 0.001), and number of days in an apparatus (r = 0.275, p = 0.018). Compared with patients from two-parent households, patients from single-parent households received a greater number of inpatient narcotic doses (singleparent 129 ± 118 versus two-parent 73 ± 109 doses, p = 0.039), longer length of inpatient stay (single-parent 73 ± 63 versus two-parent 40 ± 65 days, p = 0.036), more unplanned readmissions (single-parent 0.4 ± 0.1 versus two-parent 0.2 ± 0.2 readmission, p = 0.024), longer hospitalization when readmitted (single-parent 5 ± 11 versus two-parent 1 ± 3 day(s), p = 0.025), and fewer unplanned outpatient visits (single-parent 0.2 ± 0.8 versus two-parent 0.9 ± 1.1 visit, p = 0.005). Apparatus applications with successful outcome had higher average age than those with poor outcome (successful outcome 16 ± 3 versus poor outcome 13 ± 4 years old, p = 0.011). Age at time of apparatus application correlated with One or more of the authors (JGB, MKS, AMC), or a member of his or her immediate family, has or may receive payments ...

Complex forearm deformities: operative strategy in posttraumatic pathology

“…Circular external fixation, and still the Ilizarov ring fixator being the gold standard, in pediatrics has advantages and disadvantages [ 21 , 23 ]. The advantages include: axial loading of the long bone segment to allow for better bone formation and consolidation by tensioned wires (especially in the non-load bearing upper extremity), fixation of small and/osteopenic bone fragments, a very high degree of adaptability, and the possibility to extend the apparatus across joints (elbow and wrist in our setup) to address instability or subluxation during lengthening [ 23 ].…”

“…The use of ring fixators is difficult and belongs really into the hands of the superspecialist as it needs a highly trained knowledge of the device, its possibilities and danger, a profound understanding of the cross-sectional anatomy of the forearm and a dedicated aftercare unit. There is a clear interference with activities of daily living, the child has to wear an intimidating device for quite a long time, to pay a lot of outpatient visits and the sometimes painfull distractions can lead to profound psychosocial issues [ 21 ]. Bearing these factors in mind, ring fixators are an astonishing treatment module for the very complex and challening corrections, both in posttraumatic and hereditary deformities ([ 5 , 9 , 21 , 23 ]; Figs.…”

Auto Strut: A novel smart robotic system for external fixation device for bone deformity correction, a preliminary experience

“…The duration of treatment is defined by the deformity and the intended change and could range between 30 days and several months, increasing the burden on the patients and their caregivers. 17 …”

“…The duration of treatment is defined by the deformity and the intended change and could range between 30 days and several months, increasing the burden on the patients and their caregivers. 17 Bright and colleagues 18 described a prototype of motorized distraction fixator based on the Ilizarov method. They reported tibial lengthening with motorized distraction at a rate of 1 mm per day in 1440 steps.…”

Hastes intramedulares elásticas de titânio em crianças com fratura diafisária de fêmur: relato de caso e revisão literária acerca do tema

“…O procedimento também requer estabilidade mental, resiliência e boas habilidades de enfrentamento para lidar com o aumento da dor, mobilidade limitada e fadiga do tratamento (NIEMELA, 2007apud RICHARD, 2015. Isso é crucial, porque os distúrbios psicológicos, emocionais e comportamentais não tratados demonstraram complicar a reabilitação (BAIR, 2008 apud RICHARD, 2015). Além disso, complicações potenciais, como infecção no local do pino, falha relacionada ao dispositivo, fratura e refração, atraso na união, parada incompleta ou deformidade angular podem tornar a intervenção desafiadora ainda mais árdua (ANTOCI, 2008apud RICHARD, 2015).…”