Joseph D. Amos

BACKGROUND: Craniofacial trauma affects approximately 3 million individuals in the United States annually. Historically, low overall data quality and inadequate sample size have limited the development of clinical practice guidelines for prophylactic antibiotic use in facial fractures. We sought to examine the current use patterns and effects of prophylactic antibiotics in non-operative facial fractures. METHODS: A prospective analysis of adult patients with nonoperative facial fractures was conducted across 19 centers from January 2022 to December 2023. Kruskal-Wallis H, Mann-Whitney U, Pearson’s χ², Fisher's exact tests, and logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between antibiotic duration (no antibiotics, ≤24 hours, and >24 hours) and facial fracture-associated infectious complications. RESULTS: Among 1,835 patients, 1,168 (63.7%) received no antibiotics and 667 (36.4%) received antibiotics (≤24 hours, n = 264 (14.4%); >24 hours, n = 403 (22.0%). Nineteen (1.0%) patients developed infectious complications (0.7% in the no antibiotic group vs. 1.7% with antibiotics). Most patients (99.0%) did not develop an infection despite the majority (63.7%) receiving no antibiotics. Injuries were predominately closed fractures (86.3%), without mucosal disruption (83.9%) or foreign bodies (97.7%). Antibiotic administration had a statistically significant association with the occurrence of infectious complications (p = 0.050). However, no significant association was seen between antibiotic duration and infectious complications following multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for confounders (≤24 hours: adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.30–5.14; p = 0.766; >24 hours: adjusted odds ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.37–4.69; p = 0.668). CONCLUSION: Despite most patients not receiving antibiotics, infection rates remained low. This indicates prophylactic antibiotic use does not reduce the risk of fracture-associated infections for most injury patterns. While a randomized trial is optimal to validate these data, at this time, there is no evidence to support presumptive antibiotics for closed non-operative facial fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II.

Background Uncompensated care (UC) is healthcare provided with no payment from the patient or an insurance provider. UC directly contributes to escalating healthcare costs in the USA and potentially impacts patient care. In Texas, there has been a steady increase in the number of trauma centers and UC volumes without an increase in trauma funding of UC. The method of calculating UC trauma funds in Texas is imprecise as it is driven by Medicaid volumes and not actual trauma care costs. Methods Five years of annual trauma UC disbursement reports from the Texas Department of State Health Services were used to determine changes in UC economic considerations for level I, II, and III trauma centers in the largest urban trauma service areas (TSAs). Data for UC costs, compensation, and TSA demographics were used to assess variations. Statistical significance was determined using a Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunn’s pairwise comparison post-hoc analysis and logistic regression. Results TSA-E (Dallas-Fort Worth area) has 33% of the level I trauma centers in Texas (n=6) and yet serves only 27% of the total state population across 14 metropolitan and 5 non-metropolitan counties. Since 2015, TSA-E has shown higher UC costs (pDiscussion The unregulated expansion of trauma centers in Texas has led to an unprecedented increase in hospitals participating in trauma care. The unbalanced allocation of UC funding could lead to further economic instability, compromise resource allocation, and negatively impact patient care in an already fragile healthcare environment. Level of evidence Level IV; Retrospective economic analysis and evaluation.