BackgroundOrthopedic trauma surgery has multiple, both patient-based and surgeon-based risk factors. Evaluating and modifying certain patient safety factors could mitigate some of these risks. This study investigates the influence that the time of day of surgery has on mortality and complication rates.Question/purposeThis study evaluates whether the time of day of orthopedic trauma surgery influences complication or mortality rates.Patients and methodsA prospective Swiss surgical database developed as a nationwide quality assurance project was reviewed retrospectively. All patients with trauma-coded diagnoses that were surgically treated in Swiss hospitals between 2004 and 2014 were evaluated. Surgery times were stratified into morning, afternoon, evening and night. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and complication rates. Co-factors were sought in bivariate and multivariable analysis.ResultsOf 31,692 patients, 13,969 (44.3%) were operated in the morning, 12,696 (40.3%) in the afternoon, 4,331 (13.7%) in the evening, and 550 (1.7%) at night. Mortality rates were significantly higher in nighttime (2.4%, OR 1.26, p=0.04) and afternoon surgery (1.7%, OR 1.94, p=0.03) vs. surgery in the morning (1.1%). Surgery performed in the afternoon and at night showed significantly increased general complication rates vs. surgery performed in the morning. (OR 1.22, p=0.006 and OR 1.51, p=0.021, respectively).ConclusionThis study observed higher complication and mortality rates for surgery performed after-hours, which correlates with other recent studies. Surgeon fatigue is a potential contributing factor for these increased risks. Other potential factors include surgeon experience, surgery type, and the potential for more severe or emergent injuries occurring after-hours.

BackgroundInjuries to the acromioclavicular (AC) joint are one of the most common among sporting injuries of the upper extremity. Several studies investigated different treatment options comparing surgical and non-surgical treatment, and type of operative interventions. This study aims to evaluate treatment decisions regarding injuries of the AC joint and to compare different treatment strategies depending on the specific training of the treating physician.MethodsWe performed a nationwide survey by contacting different experienced physicians and sending them questionnaires. The questionnaire included 37 questions that assessed preferred treatment strategies in AC joint injuries. We addressed different surgical and nonsurgical options as well as level of experience and factors that might influence the decision on treatment strategy. The physicians were stratified according to their training into general surgeons (group trauma associated) and orthopedic surgeons (orthopedic associated). The AC joint lesions were categorized according to the widely used Rockwood classification.ResultsThis study analyses 96 questionnaires. We included 46 (47.9%) colleagues in group trauma and 50 (52.1%) in group orthopedics. Most of the colleagues (98.9%) prefer non-operative treatment of type I and type II AC lesions. Similarly, 96.8% agree on surgical treatment of types IV, V, and VI lesions. The treatment of type III lesions is performed in 41.6% of cases non-operatively and in 58.4% of cases surgically. Trauma-associated colleagues are 3.4 times more likely to treat AC lesions with a hook plate compared to orthopedic-associated colleagues (p = 0.05). In decreasing order, the most commonly used non-surgical technique is sling immobilization (63.7%), and the most commonly performed surgical treatment is the hook plate (41.1%) in treating type III injuries.ConclusionThis study shows a distinct difference in treatment of AC joint injuries depending on the training of the physician. Further, the need for high-quality studies arises to define the optimal treatment of type III lesions.

Ultrasonography should be part of routine surgical investigation and should be mastered and used by surgeons.

Background: Electric bicycles (E-bikes) are an increasingly popular means of transport, and have been designed for a higher speed comparable to that of small motorcycles. Accident statistics show that E-bikes are increasingly involved in traffic accidents. To test the hypothesis of whether accidents involving E-bikes bear more resemblance to motorcycle accidents than conventional bicyclists, this study evaluates the injury pattern and severity of E-bike injuries in direct comparison to injuries involving motorcycle and bicycle accidents. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the data of 1796 patients who were treated at a Level I Trauma Center between 2009 and 2018 due to traffic accident, involving bicycles, E-bikes or motorcycles, were evaluated and compared with regard to injury patterns and injury severity. Accident victims treated as inpatients at least 16 years of age or older were included in this study. Pillion passengers and outpatients were excluded. Results: The following distribution was found in the individual groups: 67 E-bike, 1141 bicycle and 588 motorcycle accidents. The injury pattern of E-bikers resembled that of bicyclists much more than that of motorcyclists. The patients with E-bike accidents were almost 14 years older and had a higher incidence of moderate traumatic brain injuries than patients with bicycle accidents, in spite of the fact that E-bike riders were nearly twice as likely to wear a helmet as compared to bicycle riders. The rate of pelvic injuries in E-bike accidents was twice as high compared with bicycle accidents, whereas the rate of upper extremity injuries was higher following bicycle accidents. Conclusion: The overall E-bike injury pattern is similar to that of cyclists. The differences in the injury pattern to motorcycle accidents could be due to the higher speeds at the time of the accident, the different protection and vehicle architecture. What is striking, however, is the higher age and the increased craniocerebral trauma of the E-bikers involved in accidents compared to the cyclists. We speculate that older and untrained people who have a slower reaction time and less control over the E-bike could benefit from head protection or practical courses similar to motorcyclists.