Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 570 - 571
1 Aug 2008
Eyre JR Jeavons RP Branfoot T Dennison M Sherman K Royston S Britten S
Full Access

Introduction: To assess the effectiveness of a regional basic external fixation trauma course.

Methods: Effectiveness of an annual, low-cost, Royal College of Surgeons of England approved, regional basic ex-fix course, led by consultant trauma experts from Yorkshire, UK, covering anatomy, surgical techniques, biomechanics, early management of open fractures and temporary external fixation placement was assessed. Pre- and post-course questionnaires asking grade, current hospital, previous experience, and a mini-test to design a temporary ex-fix construct for four fracture patterns (IIIb open tibia, open book pelvis, Schatzker 6, and total articular pilon) were used. Designs were assessed for stability, safe corridors and plastics assess.

Results:

- 10/22 participants had not previously attended an ex-fix course.

- Pre- vs. post-course score (out of 4) = 2.5 vs. 3.7 (p< 0.001, Mann-Whitney U)

- All participants Teaching Hospitals vs. DGHs:

- Pre-course scores = 2.9 vs. 1.9 (p< 0.01)

- Post-course scores = 3.6 vs. 3.8 (not significant)

- Pre-course scores by grade of participant:

- SHO vs. Senior SHO = 2.6 vs. 1.5 (p< 0.05)

- SpR vs. Senior SHO = 3.0 vs. 1.5 (p< 0.05)

- SpR vs. SHO = 3.0 vs. 2.6 (not significant)

- Post-course scores by grade:

- SpR vs. Senior SHO vs. SHO = 4.0 vs. 3.8 vs. 3.3 (not significant).

Discussion: Recently Pearse and Naique reported a 48% fixation revision rate in open tibial fractures transferred for tertiary care, suggesting that improved core skills are required to ensure appropriate packaging of patients prior to transfer with open, complex articular and pelvic fractures.

Participation in a simple ex-fix course improves knowledge of ex-fix design. Retention of knowledge must be reassessed after several months.

This course fills a gap in education of basic external fixation for orthopaedic trainees. We recommend every region with a tertiary referral system for complex trauma utilises this course.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 570 - 570
1 Aug 2008
Eyre JR Jeavons RP Branfoot T Dennison M Royston S Britten S
Full Access

Introduction: The hub and spoke model of trauma describes fracture stabilisation prior to referral. Many arrive at tertiary centres with inadequate temporary external fixation. This study investigates ex-fix availability, training and awareness of referral protocols in two regions.

Methods: Hospitals feeding two regional trauma centres were targeted with two telephone questionnaires, one for on-call orthopaedic SpRs and one for theatre nursing staff ascertaining ex-fix availability, training, knowledge of regional referral protocols, and clinical scenarios to establish common practice in each unit.

Results: 16 hospitals: 15 SpRs, 16 nurses responded

Equipment: 0/31 aware guidelines for ex-fix stock

- Ex-fix trays per unit (all manufacturers) mean = 4.14 (1–9)

- Majority equipment in unit = Orthofix (11), Hoffman II (5), AO (1)

- 12/15 SpRs reported insufficient ex-fix equipment for pelvis, 4 long bones and bridging knees (Damage Control Orthopaedics = DCO)

- 7/15 SpRs reported insufficient ex-fix for 4 long bones/ bridging knees

SpRs:

- mean year of training = 2.2

- Experience: Generic trauma course (9) Specific ExFix (6) Manufacturer (9)

- 14/15 would value specific regional ex-fix course

- DCO patient scenario SpR unable to fix -lack of knowledge vs. lack of equipment 7/15 vs. 12/15 p< 0.01

Referral Protocols:

- 7/31 aware of transfer protocol

- 31/31 want referral routes clearly identified

- 12/15 would value regular regional audit

Discussion: A deficiency of ex-fix equipment for DCO/ polytrauma exists across many units in both regions. No accepted advice on equipment level requirement exists.

All trainees had attended ex-fix teaching. Those who had only attended generic courses were less confident in DCO scenarios.

Most favoured a specific regional ex-fix course.

Tertiary care protocols have been distributed, but many units are unaware of their existence. A regular regional audit of trauma referrals would provide protocol reinforcement and opportunity for feedback.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 570 - 570
1 Aug 2008
Eyre JR Jeavons RP Branfoot T Dennison M Royston S Britten S
Full Access

Introduction: To investigate adequacy of temporary ex-fix in grade III open fractures of the tibia, prior to definitive treatment by Flap & Frame at 2 UK trauma centres.

Methods: From 2000 – 2006 all open fractures of the tibia treated by the Ilizarov Method at our two institutions were entered onto the Flap & Frame database. The database was searched for all temporary external fixators placed prior to definitive Ilizarov fixation. Data collected - ex-fix type, whether revision necessary, reasons for revision.

Results:

- 97 grade III open fractures in 95 patients

- 64 required temporary spanning ex-fix:

- 23 applied at trauma centre / 41 at DGH

- 14/64 ex-fixes required revision (prior to definitive Ilizarov):

- poor plastics access (6) / instability (2) /both (6)

- All 14 revised were applied in a DGH, i.e. 14/41 DGH ex-fix needed revision (34%)

- Ex fixes revised after application at trauma centre vs. DGH = 0/23 vs. 14/41, p< 0.01 X2

- Revision of Hoffman hybrid vs. monolateral ex fix = 4/4 vs. 10/60 p< 0.001 X2

- Non modular system (Orthofix) vs. modular systems (Hoffman II / AO) = 7/17 vs. 0/39 (p< 0.001)

Discussion: Naique and Pearse described a revision rate of skeletal fixation of 48% in grade IIIb open fractures referred to their tertiary centre. In our series 34% of temporary external fixators needed revision. Modular systems (Hoffman II and AO) required no revision, irrespective of application at a trauma centre or DGH.

All Hoffman hybrids needed revision, due to instability and plastics access. Significantly more non modular (Orthofix) ex-fixes required revision compared to modular, for poor plastics access.

We recommend modular external fixator application (Hoffman II or AO) to avoid problems with temporary external fixation of open tibial fractures. Hybrid temporary external fixation should be abandoned in such injuries.