scholarly journals National Analysis of Risk Factors for Nasal Fractures and Associated Injuries in Trauma

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-227
Author(s):  
Tiffany T. Pham ◽  
Ellen Lester ◽  
Areg Grigorian ◽  
Rachel E. Roditi ◽  
Jeffry T. Nahmias

Nasal fractures account for up to 58% of facial fractures. However, the literature characterizing associated injuries and risk factors for nasal fractures is sparse and is mostly composed of single-center experiences. This study sought to provide a large descriptive analysis and identify associated injuries and risk factors for nasal fractures in trauma using a national database. A retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) from 2007 to 2015 was performed. Patients ≥18 years of age with nasal fractures were included. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify predictors for nasal fracture in trauma. Of 5,494,609 trauma patients in the NTDB, 255,533 (4.6%) had a nasal fracture. Most were male (74.8%) with a mean age of 45.6 years. Blunt trauma accounted for 90.5% of fractures, with motor vehicle accident being the most common mechanism (27.5%). Closed fractures occurred in 93.0% of patients. Concomitant injuries included traumatic brain injury (TBI; 56.9%), malar/maxillary fracture (27.9%), and open wound of the face (38.6%) and nose (9.5%). Of all patients, 10.1% underwent closed or open reductions at index hospitalization. The strongest associated injuries with nasal fracture included open wound of the nose (odds ratio [OR]: 8.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.49–8.94, p < 0.001), epistaxis (OR: 5.26, 95% CI: 4.59–6.02, p < 0.001), malar/maxillary fracture (OR: 4.38, 95% CI: 4.30–4.45, p < 0.001), and orbital fracture (OR: 3.99, 95% CI: 3.91–4.06, p < 0.001). Nasal fractures are common traumatic injuries with more than 90% occurring by blunt mechanism and over half suffering from a concomitant TBI. The strongest associated injury with nasal fracture is an open wound of the nose.

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S51-S52
Author(s):  
Kajal Mehta ◽  
Nikitha Thrikutam ◽  
Kiran K Nakarmi ◽  
Paa Ekow Hoyte-Williams ◽  
Michael Peck ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Cooking- and cookstove-related burns (CSBs) comprise a large proportion of burn injuries globally. A cookstove is any apparatus that provides heat and is used for cooking (e.g., three-stone fire, traditional or improved cookstove). There are limited data on patterns of cooking behaviors and CSBs to inform prevention initiatives and advocacy. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, risk factors and outcomes of cooking-related burns and CSBs, specifically. Methods Patients with cooking and non-cooking related burns from 2018 to 2020 were identified in the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Burn Registry (GBR). Patient demographics, cooking arrangement, injury characteristics [mechanism, total body surface area (TBSA), revised Baux score] and outcomes were described. Differences in proportions and medians were compared. Bivariate regression was performed to identify risk factors associated with occurrence of CSB. Results GBR contained data of 6,965 burn-injured patients from 17 countries; 88% were from middle-income countries. One quarter of burn injuries (1,723 burns) were cooking-related. More than half of cooking-related burns (55%) occurred in females. Median age for cooking-related burns was 11 years (IQR 2–35). Of cooking-related burns, 22% were cookstove-related burns (CSBs; 311 burns). The most common mechanism in CSB was flame (87%), whereas the most common mechanism in other cooking burns was scald (62%). Patients with CSBs were more often female (65% vs 53%; p&lt; 0.001) and much older than patients with other cooking burns (32 years, IQR 22–47 vs 5 years, IQR 2–30). CSBs were significantly larger in TBSA size (30%, IQR 15–45% vs 15%, IQR 10–25%; p&lt; 0.001), had higher revised Baux scores (70, IQR 46–95 vs 28, IQR 10–25; p&lt; 0.001) and more often resulted in death (41 vs 11%; p&lt; 0.001) than other cooking burns (Table1). Patients with CSBs were more likely to be burned by fires (OR 4.74; 95% CI 2.99–7.54) and explosions (OR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03–4.18) than other cooking injuries. Kerosene had the highest odds of CSB than all other cooking fuels (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.52–3.69). Conclusions Cooking-related burns are common and have different epidemiology than CSBs, specifically (e.g., more often female, older, larger burn size, higher mortality). CSBs were more likely caused by structural factors (e.g., explosion, fire) than behavioral factors (e.g., accidental movements) when compared to other cooking burns.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. 2066-2074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tommy Ivanics ◽  
Hassan Nasser ◽  
Shravan Leonard-Murali ◽  
Jeffrey Genaw

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (12) ◽  
pp. 3963-3963
Author(s):  
Stefano Bongiolatti ◽  
◽  
Alessandro Gonfiotti ◽  
Domenico Viggiano ◽  
Sara Borgianni ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Hassane ◽  
S Palaniappan ◽  
M Szostok ◽  
M Shakeel

Abstract Aim Nasal fractures (NF) are the most common ENT presentation and commonly managed in the clinic or A&E. With the recent COVID pandemic, this study aims to assess the difference in demographics, incidence and aetiology in NF since the start of the first lockdown (16/03/2020) as well as management of nasal fractures. Method Retrospectively, data collection on demographics, history and management over 5 years (2015-2020) for all patients presenting with symptoms of nasal fracture. Data was collected on password-protected Excel spreadsheet and subsequent statistical analysis performed using IBM SPSS Statistics. Results A total of 346 patients were identified of which 36 were diagnosed during the lockdown. Seventy-one percent were ≤40 years old and common aetiology recorded was assault (n = 85), sports (n = 85) and falls (n = 77). Mechanical fall was the common aetiology in older patients. Across gender, falls was the most common aetiology in females (37/94) and assault for males (72/246). Epistaxis (57%) and nasal congestion (31.8%) were most commonly reported symptoms. Before lockdown, Fifty-six percent of the cohort underwent manipulation of NF under local anaesthetic and no intervention needed in 39% while 58% underwent no intervention during the lockdown. No patients were readmitted in 30 days who were treated conservatively or with local anaesthetic during the lockdown. Conclusions This study showed that the most common cause of NF was sports and assault while during the lockdown, falls was the leading cause. More patients were managed conservatively during the lockdown with no 30-readmission showing that conservative management was as effective as management under local anaesthetic.


2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 430-439
Author(s):  
Maksim A. Kurov ◽  
Valery G. Gоlubev

Injuries of the ankle joint (AJ) are the most common traumas of musculo-skeletal apparatus and a common reason for seeking medical advice. Overstrains of the ligament apparatus of AJ are the most common mechanism of traumas in running, sporting activity, in unexpected fallings into rough surfaces or getting with a heel into ribbed coverings of metroescalators, in a sharp stoppage of public transport, in wearing footwear on high heels, etc. 20-40% Of patients develop a clinical presentation of a chronic instability of the ankle joint. In the article the analysis of the literature data on the role of risk factors in development of a chronic posttraumatic instability of the ankle joint is given. In result the authors make the conclusion that the influence of the internal risk factors on development of a chronic posttraumatic instability of the ankle jointis studied insufficiently, and further investigations in this direction are required. This scientific trend is important and is of high practical significance, since its results could be used for elaboration of the algorithm of organ-saving operations which will permit to optimize medico-surgical approach, to reduce the number of patients with disability and to return patients to their professional and sporting activity.


2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-89
Author(s):  
U.R. Ullal ◽  
I.J. Deary ◽  
J. Gordon ◽  
J.H. Hayes ◽  
J.A. Wilson

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 460-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Li ◽  
Sami P. Moubayed ◽  
Emily Spataro ◽  
Sam P. Most

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document