METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at Hospital Sultanah Aminah Johor Bahru from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019. All patients with TBI requiring urgent craniotomy were identified from the operating theatre registry, and the required data were extracted from their clinical notes, including the Glasgow Outcome Score (GCS) at discharge and 6 months later. Logistic regression was performed to identify the factors associated with poor outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 154 patients were included in this study. The median door-to-skin time was 605 (interquartile range = 494-766) min. At discharge, 105 patients (68.2%) had poor outcomes. At the 6-month follow-up, only 58 patients (37.7%) remained to have poor outcomes. Simple logistic regression showed that polytrauma, hypotensive episode, ventilation, severe TBI, and the door-to-skin time were significantly associated with poor outcomes. After adjustments for the clinical characteristics in the analysis, the likelihood of having poor outcomes for every minute delay in the door-to-skin time increased at discharge (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.005; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.002-1.008) and the 6-month follow-up (AOR = 1.008; 95% CI = 1.005-1.011).
CONCLUSION: The door-to-skin time is directly proportional to poor outcomes in patients with TBI. Concerted efforts from all parties involved in trauma care are essential in eliminating delays in surgical interventions and improving outcomes.
Methods: This was a cross-sectional validation study. The original English version of the IDAF-4C+ was translated into Malay, back-translated, and then sent for content validation via an expert validation and face validation by the target student population. Three hundred and seventy questionnaires were then distributed among 16-year-old school children. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted for the IDAF-4C module using a bootstrapped maximum likelihood estimator. Spearman's rank correlation was used to assess the relationship between the IDAF-S and IDAF-4C modules. Intraclass correlation (ICC) was used to determine the stability of the IDAF-S and IDAF-4C modules, while kappa values were used for the IDAF-P module.
Results: The response rate was 86.5% for CFA and 76.9% for stability. CFA showed the existence of only one factor with a reliability estimate of 0.921, obtained via Raykov's procedure. All items in the IDAF-S module were significantly correlated with the IDAF-4C module (P < 0.001). The IDAF-S and IDAF-4C modules were stable, as determined via a two-way mixed model with absolute agreement, a single measure and a Case 3 ICC (A, 1). The IDAF-P module showed satisfactory stability, as assessed via kappa values.
Conclusion: The Malay version of the IDAF-4C+ is valid and reliable in measuring dental anxiety and fear among Malaysian secondary school children.
AIM: To compare the quality of CT brain images produced by a fixed CT scanner and a portable CT scanner (CereTom).
METHODS: This work was a single-centre retrospective study of CT brain images from 112 neurosurgical patients. Hounsfield units (HUs) of the images from CereTom were measured for air, water and bone. Three assessors independently evaluated the images from the fixed CT scanner and CereTom. Streak artefacts, visualisation of lesions and grey-white matter differentiation were evaluated at three different levels (centrum semiovale, basal ganglia and middle cerebellar peduncles). Each evaluation was scored 1 (poor), 2 (average) or 3 (good) and summed up to form an ordinal reading of 3 to 9.
RESULTS: HUs for air, water and bone from CereTom were within the recommended value by the American College of Radiology (ACR). Streak artefact evaluation scores for the fixed CT scanner was 8.54 versus 7.46 (Z = -5.67) for CereTom at the centrum semiovale, 8.38 (SD = 1.12) versus 7.32 (SD = 1.63) at the basal ganglia and 8.21 (SD = 1.30) versus 6.97 (SD = 2.77) at the middle cerebellar peduncles. Grey-white matter differentiation showed scores of 8.27 (SD = 1.04) versus 7.21 (SD = 1.41) at the centrum semiovale, 8.26 (SD = 1.07) versus 7.00 (SD = 1.47) at the basal ganglia and 8.38 (SD = 1.11) versus 6.74 (SD = 1.55) at the middle cerebellar peduncles. Visualisation of lesions showed scores of 8.86 versus 8.21 (Z = -4.24) at the centrum semiovale, 8.93 versus 8.18 (Z = -5.32) at the basal ganglia and 8.79 versus 8.06 (Z = -4.93) at the middle cerebellar peduncles. All results were significant with P-value < 0.01.
CONCLUSIONS: Results of the study showed a significant difference in image quality produced by the fixed CT scanner and CereTom, with the latter being more inferior than the former. However, HUs of the images produced by CereTom do fulfil the recommendation of the ACR.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was carried out in two local neurosurgical centres. The SPD group was performed in Hospital Umum Sarawak (HUS) and the SDD group was performed in Hospital Sultanah Aminah Johor Bahru (HSAJB), from 1 January 2012 till 30 January 2014 with a total of 30 patients in both treatment groups.
RESULTS: Overall, there were no statistically significant difference in terms of patient general characteristics, pre-operative and post-operative symptoms, Markwalder grades, post-operative hematoma volume and recurrence, mortality and functional outcome at discharge and at three month follow-up between both groups. Albeit not achieving statistical significance, we observed a lower rate of surgical complication especially for post-operative intracranial hematoma with placement of the SPD system.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study concludes that both treatment methods proved to be highly effective in the treatment of CSDH. However, with a lower overall surgical complication rate, treatment with single burr-hole craniostomy, irrigation and placement of the SPD system can be considered a treatment of choice for the management of symptomatic CSDH.
METHODS: A search was conducted using the PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Review databases from January 1, 1997 until September 9, 2017. The search strategy was constructed using the Population Intervention Comparison Outcome framework with keywords related to nasal fracture and its treatment. Two sets of independent researchers performed the analysis. Qualitative analysis was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies and National Institute for Clinical Excellence methodology for randomized controlled trial checklists.
RESULTS: The 4276 titles were obtained from PubMed database alone. Exclusion was made based on the title, abstract and full-text analysis. Finally, 23 papers were included and analyzed. Of the 23 papers, 13 (56.5%) were retrospective record review, 2 (8.7%) were randomized clinical trial or a randomized study and 8 case series (34.8%). 16 (69.6%) studies addressed closed reduction, 3 studies (13%) on open reduction and 4 studies (17.4%) addressed both open and closed reduction. The main focus in the outcome in all studies was accuracy of the anatomical reduction of the nasal bones. Three studies (13.0%) reported restoration of function such as breathing comfort or release in respiratory obstruction and another 3 (13.0%) addressed both cosmetic and breathing outcomes. Residual deformity was the most described complications in the studies (30.4%). In general, most of the studies were not of high quality as they lacked in some key elements in the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies checklist.
CONCLUSION: Both closed and open reduction provided good outcomes in cosmetic and breathing. Septoplasty is recommended to be performed simultaneously with fracture reduction.