Browsing by Author "Gabr, Mostafa"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Impact of US hospital center and interhospital transfer on spinal cord injury management: An analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.
    (The journal of trauma and acute care surgery, 2021-06) Williamson, Theresa; Hodges, Sarah; Yang, Lexie Zidanyue; Lee, Hui-Jie; Gabr, Mostafa; Ugiliweneza, Beatrice; Boakye, Maxwell; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Goodwin, C Rory; Karikari, Isaac O; Lad, Shivanand; Abd-El-Barr, Muhammad

    Background

    Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) is a serious public health problem. Outcomes are determined by severity of immediate injury, mitigation of secondary downstream effects, and rehabilitation. This study aimed to understand how the center type a patient presents to and whether they are transferred influence management and outcome.

    Methods

    The National Trauma Data Bank was used to identify patients with SCI. The primary objective was to determine association between center type, transfer, and surgical intervention. A secondary objective was to determine association between center type, transfer, and surgical timing. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit on surgical intervention and timing of the surgery as binary variables, adjusting for relevant clinical and demographic variables.

    Results

    There were 11,744 incidents of SCI identified. A total of 2,883 patients were transferred to a Level I center and 4,766 presented directly to a level I center. Level I center refers to level I trauma center. Those who were admitted directly to level I centers had a higher odd of receiving a surgery (odds ratio, 1.703; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-1.97; p < 0.001), but there was no significant difference in terms of timing of surgery. Patients transferred into a level I center were also more likely to undergo surgery than those at a level II/III/IV center, although this was not significant (odds ratio, 1.213; 95% confidence interval, 0.099-1.48; p = 0.059).

    Conclusion

    Patients with traumatic SCI admitted to level I trauma centers were more likely to have surgery, particularly if they were directly admitted to a level I center. This study provides insights into a large US sample and sheds light on opportunities for improving pre hospital care pathways for patients with traumatic SCI, to provide the timely and appropriate care and achieve the best possible outcomes.

    Level of evidence

    Care management, Level IV.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Parathyroid‐Targeted Overexpression of Regulator of G‐Protein Signaling 5 (RGS5) Causes Hyperparathyroidism in Transgenic Mice
    (Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2019-05) Balenga, Nariman; Koh, James; Azimzadeh, Pedram; Hogue, Joyce; Gabr, Mostafa; Stains, Joseph P; Olson, John A
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Utility of Cervical Collars Following Cervical Fusion Surgery. Does It Improve Fusion Rates or Outcomes? A Systematic Review.
    (World neurosurgery, 2018-12-26) Karikari, Isaac; Ghogawala, Zoher; Ropper, Alexander E; Yavin, Daniel; Gabr, Mostafa; Goodwin, C Rory; Abd-El-Barr, Muhammad; Veeravagu, Anand; Wang, Marjorie C
    BACKGROUND:The use of postoperative cervical collars following cervical fusions is common practice. Its use has been purported to improve fusion rates and outcomes. There is a paucity in the strength of evidence to support its clinical benefit. Our objective is to critically evaluate the published literature to determine the strength of evidence supporting the use of postoperative cervical collar use following cervical fusions. METHODS:A systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (also known as PRISMA) was performed. An online search using Medline and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was used to query prospective and retrospective clinical trials evaluating cervical fusions with or without postoperative collar. RESULTS:The search identified 894 articles in Medline and 65 articles in the Cochrane database. From these articles, 130 were selected based on procedure and collar use. Only 3 studies directly compared between collar use and no collar use. Our analysis of the mean improvement in neck disability index scores and improvement over time intervals did not show a statistically significant difference between collar versus no collar (P = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS:We found no strong evidence to support the use of cervical collars after 1- and 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedures, and no studies comparing collar use and no collar use after posterior cervical fusions. Given the cost and likely impact of collar use on driving and the return to work, our study shows that currently there is no proven benefit to routine use of postoperative cervical collar in patients undergoing 1- and 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for degenerative cervical pathologies.