Mark McAndrew | US Army (original) (raw)

Papers by Mark McAndrew

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American), 2007

Recent reports have suggested that functional outcomes are similar following either amputation or... more Recent reports have suggested that functional outcomes are similar following either amputation or reconstruction of a severely injured lower extremity. The goal of this study was to compare two-year direct health-care costs and projected lifetime health-care costs associated with these two treatment pathways. Two-year health-care costs were estimated for 545 patients with a unilateral limb-threatening lower-extremity injury treated at one of eight level-I trauma centers. Included in the calculation were costs related to (1) the initial hospitalization, (2) all rehospitalizations for acute care related to the limb injury, (3) inpatient rehabilitation, (4) outpatient doctor visits, (5) outpatient physical and occupational therapy, and (6) purchase and maintenance of prosthetic devices. All dollar figures were inflated to constant 2002 dollars with use of the medical service Consumer Price Index. To estimate projected lifetime costs, the number of expected life years was multiplied by an estimate of future annual health-care costs and added to an estimate of future costs associated with the purchase and maintenance of prosthetic devices. When costs associated with rehospitalizations and post-acute care were added to the cost of the initial hospitalization, the two-year costs for reconstruction and amputation were similar. When prosthesis-related costs were added, there was a substantial difference between the two groups ($81,316 for patients treated with reconstruction and 91,106forpatientstreatedwithamputation).Theprojectedlifetimehealth−carecostforthepatientswhohadundergoneamputationwasthreetimeshigherthanthatforthosetreatedwithreconstruction(91,106 for patients treated with amputation). The projected lifetime health-care cost for the patients who had undergone amputation was three times higher than that for those treated with reconstruction (91,106forpatientstreatedwithamputation).Theprojectedlifetimehealth−carecostforthepatientswhohadundergoneamputationwasthreetimeshigherthanthatforthosetreatedwithreconstruction(509,275 and $163,282, respectively). These estimates add support to previous conclusions that efforts to improve the rate of successful reconstructions have merit. Not only is reconstruction a reasonable goal at an experienced level-I trauma center, it results in lower lifetime costs.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2002

Factors thought to influence the decision for limb salvage include injury severity, physiologic r... more Factors thought to influence the decision for limb salvage include injury severity, physiologic reserve of the patient, and characteristics of the patient and their support system. Eligible patients were between the ages of 16 and 69 with Gustilo type IIIB and IIIC tibial fractures, dysvascular limbs resulting from trauma, type IIIB ankle fractures, or severe open midfoot or hindfoot injuries. Data collected at enrollment relevant to the decision-making process included injury characteristics and its treatment, and the nature and severity of other injuries. Logistic regression and stepwise modeling were used to determine the effect of each covariate on the variable salvage/ amputation. Of 527 patients included in the analysis, 408 left the hospital with a salvaged limb. Of the 119 amputations performed, 55 were immediate and 64 were delayed. The multivariate analysis confirmed the bivariate analysis: all injury characteristics remained significant predictors of limb status with the exception of bone loss; and soft tissue injury and absence of plantar sensation were the most important factors in accounting for model validity. Soft tissue injury severity has the greatest impact on decision making regarding limb salvage versus amputation.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2006

A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is... more A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is essential in reducing the high costs associated with these injuries. Patients (n = 423) who underwent amputation or reconstruction after limb threatening lower extremity trauma and who were working before the injury were prospectively evaluated at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months. Time to first RTW was assessed. For individuals working at 84 months, the percentage of time limited in performance at work was estimated using the Work Limitations Questionnaire. Estimates of the cumulative proportion returning to work at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months were 0.12, 0.28, 0.42, 0.51, and 0.58. Patients working at 84 months were, on average, limited in their ability to perform the demands of their job 20 to 25% of the time. In the context of a Cox proportional hazards model, differences in RTW outcomes by treatment (amputation versus reconstruction) were not statistically significant. Factors that were significantly associated (p < 0.05) with higher rates of RTW include younger age, being White, higher education, being a nonsmoker, average to high self efficacy, preinjury job tenure, higher job involvement, and no litigation. Early (3 month) assessments of pain and physical functioning were significant predictors of RTW. Return to work after severe lower extremity trauma remains a challenge. Although the causal pathway from injury to impairment and work disability is complex, this study points to several factors that influence RTW that suggest strategies for intervention.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 2000

(a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics ... more (a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics of patients enrolled in a study to examine outcomes after high-energy lower extremity trauma (HELET) and to compare them with the general population; (b) to determine whether characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation after HELET are significantly different from each other. A prospective study of 601 patients admitted with high-energy lower extremity trauma to eight Level I trauma centers. Patients were evaluated during the initial hospitalization. They are being followed up for 24 months postinjury. Study patients are compared with the general population by using census information, population survey data, and published norms. Characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation are also compared. Most patients were male (77 percent), white (72 percent), and between the ages of twenty and forty-five years (71 percent). Seventy percent graduated from high school (compared with 86 percent nationally) (p < 0.05). One fourth lived in households with incomes below the federal poverty line, compared with 16 percent nationally (p < 0.05). The percentage with no health insurance (38 percent) was also higher than in the general population (20 percent) (p < .05). The percentage of heavy drinkers was over two times higher than reported nationally (p < 0.01). Study patients were slightly more neurotic and extroverted and less open to new experiences. When patient characteristics were compared for those undergoing amputation versus limb salvage, no significant differences were found among any of the variables (p > 0.05). In conclusion, LEAP patients differ in important ways from the general population. However, the decision to amputate verus reconstruct does not appear to be significantly influenced by patient characteristics.

The New England journal of medicine, 2002

Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma ce... more Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma centers. However, long-term outcomes after limb reconstruction or amputation have not been fully evaluated.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 1990

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2000

Factors influencing the progression of physical impairment to patient-perceived disability are no... more Factors influencing the progression of physical impairment to patient-perceived disability are not well known. We sought to better understand this relationship in the setting of injury. We followed a cohort of 302 patients with lower extremity fractures over a 1-year period. Physical impairment was assessed by range of motion, strength, and pain. Range of motion and strength were assessed together as a proportion of normal function of the extremity (impairment score). Pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score. Disability was assessed using the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), a widely used measure of patient-perceived limitations of everyday activities attributable to illness. The SIP was administered during hospitalization to assess preinjury baseline. Impairment assessment and readministration of the SIP were performed at 12 months after injury. Impairment in leg function (range of motion and strength) was highly correlated (p < 0.001) with overall SIP score at 12 months, but accounted for only 23% of the variance in overall SIP scores. Likewise, VAS pain score was highly correlated (p < 0.001) with overall SIP score at 12 months, but accounted for only 29% of the variance in overall SIP scores. In a multivariate linear regression analysis, variables that were independently associated with overall SIP score included impairment score, VAS pain score, preinjury SIP, poverty status, education status, social support, having hired a lawyer, and involvement with workers' compensation. These variables accounted for 52% of the variance in overall SIP scores at 12 months. The degree of physical impairment accounts for only a small amount of the variance in disability from lower extremity fracture. Identifiable patient characteristics including age, socioeconomic status, preinjury health, and social support together with impairment account for over half of the variance in long-term disability. Further research is needed to increase understanding of other factors that influence the progression of impairment to disability, especially those factors that may be amenable to intervention.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 1996

Previous studies have shown that over one-quarter of patients who were working before a severe lo... more Previous studies have shown that over one-quarter of patients who were working before a severe lower extremity fracture had not returned to work by 12 months after injury. Disabilities also persisted in household management, recreation, and social interaction. The objective of this study was to determine whether recovery extended beyond 12 months. Three hundred nineteen patients who were previously working and were treated at three level I trauma centers for a severe lower extremity fracture were prospectively followed at 3, 6, and 12 months after injury. Patients were queried at each follow-up about their work status and completed the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) at 6 and 12 months. The SIP is a widely used and well validated measure of general health status; it was used in this study to measure functional recovery across several domains of daily living. Patients who had not recovered by 12 months (i.e., 204 who were not working, working with limitations, or had limitations in performing other daily activities as measured by elevated scores on the SIP) were contacted again at 30 months and asked to complete an interview and the SIP. At 30 months, an estimated 82% of the study patients had returned to work (compared to 72% at 12 months). SIP scores improved only slightly from 6.4 at 12 months to 5.7 at 30 months. At 30 months, 64% of the patients had no disability (SIP scores less than 4), 17% had mild disability (SIP scores of 4 to 9), 12% had moderate disability (SIP scores of 10 to 19), and 7% had severe disability (SIP scores of 20 or higher). Although the majority of patients with persistent disabilities at 30 months had residual physical impairments at 12 months, the extent of impairment did not fully explain why some people had and had not recovered at 30 months after injury. The results confirm those of other studies that conclude that overall, outcomes after serious trauma are good when appropriate trauma and rehabilitation care are rendered. However, a minority of patients still report limitations at 30 months after injury, with one-fifth not returning to work.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2006

A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is... more A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is essential in reducing the high costs associated with these injuries. Patients (n = 423) who underwent amputation or reconstruction after limb threatening lower extremity trauma and who were working before the injury were prospectively evaluated at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months. Time to first RTW was assessed. For individuals working at 84 months, the percentage of time limited in performance at work was estimated using the Work Limitations Questionnaire. Estimates of the cumulative proportion returning to work at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months were 0.12, 0.28, 0.42, 0.51, and 0.58. Patients working at 84 months were, on average, limited in their ability to perform the demands of their job 20 to 25% of the time. In the context of a Cox proportional hazards model, differences in RTW outcomes by treatment (amputation versus reconstruction) were not statistically significant. Factors that were significantly associated (p < 0.05) with higher rates of RTW include younger age, being White, higher education, being a nonsmoker, average to high self efficacy, preinjury job tenure, higher job involvement, and no litigation. Early (3 month) assessments of pain and physical functioning were significant predictors of RTW. Return to work after severe lower extremity trauma remains a challenge. Although the causal pathway from injury to impairment and work disability is complex, this study points to several factors that influence RTW that suggest strategies for intervention.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 2000

(a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics ... more (a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics of patients enrolled in a study to examine outcomes after high-energy lower extremity trauma (HELET) and to compare them with the general population; (b) to determine whether characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation after HELET are significantly different from each other. A prospective study of 601 patients admitted with high-energy lower extremity trauma to eight Level I trauma centers. Patients were evaluated during the initial hospitalization. They are being followed up for 24 months postinjury. Study patients are compared with the general population by using census information, population survey data, and published norms. Characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation are also compared. Most patients were male (77 percent), white (72 percent), and between the ages of twenty and forty-five years (71 percent). Seventy percent graduated from high school (compared with 86 percent nationally) (p < 0.05). One fourth lived in households with incomes below the federal poverty line, compared with 16 percent nationally (p < 0.05). The percentage with no health insurance (38 percent) was also higher than in the general population (20 percent) (p < .05). The percentage of heavy drinkers was over two times higher than reported nationally (p < 0.01). Study patients were slightly more neurotic and extroverted and less open to new experiences. When patient characteristics were compared for those undergoing amputation versus limb salvage, no significant differences were found among any of the variables (p > 0.05). In conclusion, LEAP patients differ in important ways from the general population. However, the decision to amputate verus reconstruct does not appear to be significantly influenced by patient characteristics.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 1993

The New England journal of medicine, 2002

Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma ce... more Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma centers. However, long-term outcomes after limb reconstruction or amputation have not been fully evaluated.

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American), 2007

Recent reports have suggested that functional outcomes are similar following either amputation or... more Recent reports have suggested that functional outcomes are similar following either amputation or reconstruction of a severely injured lower extremity. The goal of this study was to compare two-year direct health-care costs and projected lifetime health-care costs associated with these two treatment pathways. Two-year health-care costs were estimated for 545 patients with a unilateral limb-threatening lower-extremity injury treated at one of eight level-I trauma centers. Included in the calculation were costs related to (1) the initial hospitalization, (2) all rehospitalizations for acute care related to the limb injury, (3) inpatient rehabilitation, (4) outpatient doctor visits, (5) outpatient physical and occupational therapy, and (6) purchase and maintenance of prosthetic devices. All dollar figures were inflated to constant 2002 dollars with use of the medical service Consumer Price Index. To estimate projected lifetime costs, the number of expected life years was multiplied by an estimate of future annual health-care costs and added to an estimate of future costs associated with the purchase and maintenance of prosthetic devices. When costs associated with rehospitalizations and post-acute care were added to the cost of the initial hospitalization, the two-year costs for reconstruction and amputation were similar. When prosthesis-related costs were added, there was a substantial difference between the two groups ($81,316 for patients treated with reconstruction and 91,106forpatientstreatedwithamputation).Theprojectedlifetimehealth−carecostforthepatientswhohadundergoneamputationwasthreetimeshigherthanthatforthosetreatedwithreconstruction(91,106 for patients treated with amputation). The projected lifetime health-care cost for the patients who had undergone amputation was three times higher than that for those treated with reconstruction (91,106forpatientstreatedwithamputation).Theprojectedlifetimehealth−carecostforthepatientswhohadundergoneamputationwasthreetimeshigherthanthatforthosetreatedwithreconstruction(509,275 and $163,282, respectively). These estimates add support to previous conclusions that efforts to improve the rate of successful reconstructions have merit. Not only is reconstruction a reasonable goal at an experienced level-I trauma center, it results in lower lifetime costs.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2002

Factors thought to influence the decision for limb salvage include injury severity, physiologic r... more Factors thought to influence the decision for limb salvage include injury severity, physiologic reserve of the patient, and characteristics of the patient and their support system. Eligible patients were between the ages of 16 and 69 with Gustilo type IIIB and IIIC tibial fractures, dysvascular limbs resulting from trauma, type IIIB ankle fractures, or severe open midfoot or hindfoot injuries. Data collected at enrollment relevant to the decision-making process included injury characteristics and its treatment, and the nature and severity of other injuries. Logistic regression and stepwise modeling were used to determine the effect of each covariate on the variable salvage/ amputation. Of 527 patients included in the analysis, 408 left the hospital with a salvaged limb. Of the 119 amputations performed, 55 were immediate and 64 were delayed. The multivariate analysis confirmed the bivariate analysis: all injury characteristics remained significant predictors of limb status with the exception of bone loss; and soft tissue injury and absence of plantar sensation were the most important factors in accounting for model validity. Soft tissue injury severity has the greatest impact on decision making regarding limb salvage versus amputation.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2006

A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is... more A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is essential in reducing the high costs associated with these injuries. Patients (n = 423) who underwent amputation or reconstruction after limb threatening lower extremity trauma and who were working before the injury were prospectively evaluated at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months. Time to first RTW was assessed. For individuals working at 84 months, the percentage of time limited in performance at work was estimated using the Work Limitations Questionnaire. Estimates of the cumulative proportion returning to work at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months were 0.12, 0.28, 0.42, 0.51, and 0.58. Patients working at 84 months were, on average, limited in their ability to perform the demands of their job 20 to 25% of the time. In the context of a Cox proportional hazards model, differences in RTW outcomes by treatment (amputation versus reconstruction) were not statistically significant. Factors that were significantly associated (p < 0.05) with higher rates of RTW include younger age, being White, higher education, being a nonsmoker, average to high self efficacy, preinjury job tenure, higher job involvement, and no litigation. Early (3 month) assessments of pain and physical functioning were significant predictors of RTW. Return to work after severe lower extremity trauma remains a challenge. Although the causal pathway from injury to impairment and work disability is complex, this study points to several factors that influence RTW that suggest strategies for intervention.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 2000

(a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics ... more (a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics of patients enrolled in a study to examine outcomes after high-energy lower extremity trauma (HELET) and to compare them with the general population; (b) to determine whether characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation after HELET are significantly different from each other. A prospective study of 601 patients admitted with high-energy lower extremity trauma to eight Level I trauma centers. Patients were evaluated during the initial hospitalization. They are being followed up for 24 months postinjury. Study patients are compared with the general population by using census information, population survey data, and published norms. Characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation are also compared. Most patients were male (77 percent), white (72 percent), and between the ages of twenty and forty-five years (71 percent). Seventy percent graduated from high school (compared with 86 percent nationally) (p < 0.05). One fourth lived in households with incomes below the federal poverty line, compared with 16 percent nationally (p < 0.05). The percentage with no health insurance (38 percent) was also higher than in the general population (20 percent) (p < .05). The percentage of heavy drinkers was over two times higher than reported nationally (p < 0.01). Study patients were slightly more neurotic and extroverted and less open to new experiences. When patient characteristics were compared for those undergoing amputation versus limb salvage, no significant differences were found among any of the variables (p > 0.05). In conclusion, LEAP patients differ in important ways from the general population. However, the decision to amputate verus reconstruct does not appear to be significantly influenced by patient characteristics.

The New England journal of medicine, 2002

Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma ce... more Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma centers. However, long-term outcomes after limb reconstruction or amputation have not been fully evaluated.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 1990

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2000

Factors influencing the progression of physical impairment to patient-perceived disability are no... more Factors influencing the progression of physical impairment to patient-perceived disability are not well known. We sought to better understand this relationship in the setting of injury. We followed a cohort of 302 patients with lower extremity fractures over a 1-year period. Physical impairment was assessed by range of motion, strength, and pain. Range of motion and strength were assessed together as a proportion of normal function of the extremity (impairment score). Pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score. Disability was assessed using the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), a widely used measure of patient-perceived limitations of everyday activities attributable to illness. The SIP was administered during hospitalization to assess preinjury baseline. Impairment assessment and readministration of the SIP were performed at 12 months after injury. Impairment in leg function (range of motion and strength) was highly correlated (p < 0.001) with overall SIP score at 12 months, but accounted for only 23% of the variance in overall SIP scores. Likewise, VAS pain score was highly correlated (p < 0.001) with overall SIP score at 12 months, but accounted for only 29% of the variance in overall SIP scores. In a multivariate linear regression analysis, variables that were independently associated with overall SIP score included impairment score, VAS pain score, preinjury SIP, poverty status, education status, social support, having hired a lawyer, and involvement with workers' compensation. These variables accounted for 52% of the variance in overall SIP scores at 12 months. The degree of physical impairment accounts for only a small amount of the variance in disability from lower extremity fracture. Identifiable patient characteristics including age, socioeconomic status, preinjury health, and social support together with impairment account for over half of the variance in long-term disability. Further research is needed to increase understanding of other factors that influence the progression of impairment to disability, especially those factors that may be amenable to intervention.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 1996

Previous studies have shown that over one-quarter of patients who were working before a severe lo... more Previous studies have shown that over one-quarter of patients who were working before a severe lower extremity fracture had not returned to work by 12 months after injury. Disabilities also persisted in household management, recreation, and social interaction. The objective of this study was to determine whether recovery extended beyond 12 months. Three hundred nineteen patients who were previously working and were treated at three level I trauma centers for a severe lower extremity fracture were prospectively followed at 3, 6, and 12 months after injury. Patients were queried at each follow-up about their work status and completed the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) at 6 and 12 months. The SIP is a widely used and well validated measure of general health status; it was used in this study to measure functional recovery across several domains of daily living. Patients who had not recovered by 12 months (i.e., 204 who were not working, working with limitations, or had limitations in performing other daily activities as measured by elevated scores on the SIP) were contacted again at 30 months and asked to complete an interview and the SIP. At 30 months, an estimated 82% of the study patients had returned to work (compared to 72% at 12 months). SIP scores improved only slightly from 6.4 at 12 months to 5.7 at 30 months. At 30 months, 64% of the patients had no disability (SIP scores less than 4), 17% had mild disability (SIP scores of 4 to 9), 12% had moderate disability (SIP scores of 10 to 19), and 7% had severe disability (SIP scores of 20 or higher). Although the majority of patients with persistent disabilities at 30 months had residual physical impairments at 12 months, the extent of impairment did not fully explain why some people had and had not recovered at 30 months after injury. The results confirm those of other studies that conclude that overall, outcomes after serious trauma are good when appropriate trauma and rehabilitation care are rendered. However, a minority of patients still report limitations at 30 months after injury, with one-fifth not returning to work.

The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 2006

A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is... more A better understanding of the factors influencing return to work (RTW) after major limb trauma is essential in reducing the high costs associated with these injuries. Patients (n = 423) who underwent amputation or reconstruction after limb threatening lower extremity trauma and who were working before the injury were prospectively evaluated at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months. Time to first RTW was assessed. For individuals working at 84 months, the percentage of time limited in performance at work was estimated using the Work Limitations Questionnaire. Estimates of the cumulative proportion returning to work at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 84 months were 0.12, 0.28, 0.42, 0.51, and 0.58. Patients working at 84 months were, on average, limited in their ability to perform the demands of their job 20 to 25% of the time. In the context of a Cox proportional hazards model, differences in RTW outcomes by treatment (amputation versus reconstruction) were not statistically significant. Factors that were significantly associated (p < 0.05) with higher rates of RTW include younger age, being White, higher education, being a nonsmoker, average to high self efficacy, preinjury job tenure, higher job involvement, and no litigation. Early (3 month) assessments of pain and physical functioning were significant predictors of RTW. Return to work after severe lower extremity trauma remains a challenge. Although the causal pathway from injury to impairment and work disability is complex, this study points to several factors that influence RTW that suggest strategies for intervention.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 2000

(a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics ... more (a) to report the demographic, socioeconomic, behavioral, social, and vocational characteristics of patients enrolled in a study to examine outcomes after high-energy lower extremity trauma (HELET) and to compare them with the general population; (b) to determine whether characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation after HELET are significantly different from each other. A prospective study of 601 patients admitted with high-energy lower extremity trauma to eight Level I trauma centers. Patients were evaluated during the initial hospitalization. They are being followed up for 24 months postinjury. Study patients are compared with the general population by using census information, population survey data, and published norms. Characteristics of patients undergoing limb salvage versus amputation are also compared. Most patients were male (77 percent), white (72 percent), and between the ages of twenty and forty-five years (71 percent). Seventy percent graduated from high school (compared with 86 percent nationally) (p < 0.05). One fourth lived in households with incomes below the federal poverty line, compared with 16 percent nationally (p < 0.05). The percentage with no health insurance (38 percent) was also higher than in the general population (20 percent) (p < .05). The percentage of heavy drinkers was over two times higher than reported nationally (p < 0.01). Study patients were slightly more neurotic and extroverted and less open to new experiences. When patient characteristics were compared for those undergoing amputation versus limb salvage, no significant differences were found among any of the variables (p > 0.05). In conclusion, LEAP patients differ in important ways from the general population. However, the decision to amputate verus reconstruct does not appear to be significantly influenced by patient characteristics.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 1993

The New England journal of medicine, 2002

Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma ce... more Limb salvage for severe trauma has replaced amputation as the primary treatment in many trauma centers. However, long-term outcomes after limb reconstruction or amputation have not been fully evaluated.