Aims. To systematically review qualitative studies of patients with distal tibia or ankle fracture, and explore their experience of injury and recovery. Methods. We undertook a systematic review of qualitative studies. Five databases were searched from inception to 1 February 2022. All titles and abstracts were screened, and a subset were independently assessed. Methodological quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. The GRADE-CERQual checklist was used to assign confidence ratings. Thematic synthesis was used to analyze data with the identification of codes which were drawn together to form subthemes and then themes. Results. From 2,682 records, 15 studies were reviewed in full and four included in the review. A total of 72 patients were included across the four studies (47 female; mean age 50 years (17 to 80)). Methodological quality was high for all studies, and the GRADE-CERQual checklist provided confidence that the findings were an adequate representation of patient experience of distal tibia or ankle fracture. A central concept of ‘being the same but different’ conveyed the substantial disruption to patients’ self-identity caused by their injury. Patient experience of ‘being the same but different’ was expressed through three interrelated themes, with seven subthemes: i) being proactive where persistence, doing things differently and keeping busy prevailed; ii) living with change including symptoms, and living differently due to challenges at work and leisure; and iii) striving for normality, adapting while lacking in confidence, and feeling fearful and concerned about the future. Conclusion. Ankle injuries were disruptive, draining, and impacted on patients’ wellbeing. Substantial short- and longer-term challenges were experienced during recovery. Rehabilitation and psychosocial treatment strategies may help to ameliorate these challenges. Patients may benefit from clinicians being cognisant of patient experience when assessing, treating, and discussing
The aim of this study was to compare the longer-term outcomes of operatively and nonoperatively managed patients treated with a removable brace (fixed-angle removable orthosis) or a plaster cast immobilization for an acute ankle fracture. This is a secondary analysis of a multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing adults with an acute ankle fracture, initially managed either by operative or nonoperative care. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a cast immobilization or a fixed-angle removable orthosis (removable brace). Data were collected on baseline characteristics, ankle function, quality of life, and complications. The Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) was the primary outcome which was used to measure the participant’s ankle function. The primary endpoint was at 16 weeks, with longer-term follow-up at 24 weeks and two years.Aims
Methods
A pilon fracture is a severe ankle joint injury caused by high-energy trauma, typically affecting men of working age. Although relatively uncommon (5% to 7% of all tibial fractures), this injury causes among the worst functional and health outcomes of any skeletal injury, with a high risk of serious complications and long-term disability, and with devastating consequences on patients’ quality of life and financial prospects. Robust evidence to guide treatment is currently lacking. This study aims to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two surgical interventions that are most commonly used to treat pilon fractures. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 334 adult patients diagnosed with a closed type C pilon fracture will be conducted. Internal locking plate fixation will be compared with external frame fixation. The primary outcome and endpoint will be the Disability Rating Index (a patient self-reported assessment of physical disability) at 12 months. This will also be measured at baseline, three, six, and 24 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes include the Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), the five-level EuroQol five-dimenison score (EQ-5D-5L), complications (including bone healing), resource use, work impact, and patient treatment preference. The acceptability of the treatments and study design to patients and health care professionals will be explored through qualitative methods.Aims
Methods
