National hip fracture registries audit similar aspects of care but there is variation in the actual data collected; these differences restrict international comparison, benchmarking, and research. The Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) published a revised minimum common dataset (MCD) in 2022 to improve consistency and interoperability. Our aim was to assess compatibility of existing registries with the MCD. We compared 17 hip fracture registries covering 20 countries (Argentina; Australia and New Zealand; China; Denmark; England, Wales, and Northern Ireland; Germany; Holland; Ireland; Japan; Mexico; Norway; Pakistan; the Philippines; Scotland; South Korea; Spain; and Sweden), setting each of these against the 20 core and 12 optional fields of the MCD.Aims
Methods
Patients receiving cemented hemiarthroplasties after hip fracture have a significant risk of deep surgical site infection (SSI). Standard UK practice to minimize the risk of SSI includes the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement with no consensus regarding type, dose, or antibiotic content of the cement. This is the protocol for a randomized clinical trial to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of high dose dual antibiotic-loaded cement in comparison to low dose single antibiotic-loaded cement in patients 60 years and over receiving a cemented hemiarthroplasty for an intracapsular hip fracture. The WHiTE 8 Copal Or Palacos Antibiotic Loaded bone cement trial (WHiTE 8 COPAL) is a multicentre, multi-surgeon, parallel, two-arm, randomized clinical trial. The pragmatic study will be embedded in the World Hip Trauma Evaluation (WHiTE) (ISRCTN 63982700). Participants, including those that lack capacity, will be allocated on a 1:1 basis stratified by recruitment centre to either a low dose single antibiotic-loaded bone cement or a high dose dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement. The primary analysis will compare the differences in deep SSI rate as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention within 90 days of surgery via medical record review and patient self-reported questionnaires. Secondary outcomes include UK Core Outcome Set for hip fractures, complications, rate of antibiotic prescription, resistance patterns of deep SSI, and resource use (more specifically, cost-effectiveness) up to four months post-randomization. A minimum of 4,920 patients will be recruited to obtain 90% power to detect an absolute difference of 1.5% in the rate of deep SSI at 90 days for the expected 3% deep SSI rate in the control group.Aims
Methods
A rigorous approach to developing, delivering and documenting
rehabilitation within randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions
is required to underpin the generation of reliable and usable evidence.
This article describes the key processes used to ensure provision
of good quality and comparable rehabilitation to all participants
of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing surgery
with conservative treatment of proximal humeral fractures in adults. These processes included the development of a patient information
leaflet on self-care during sling immobilisation, the development
of a basic treatment physiotherapy protocol that received input
and endorsement by specialist physiotherapists providing patient
care, and establishing an expectation for the provision of home
exercises. Specially designed forms were also developed to facilitate
reliable reporting of the physiotherapy care that patients received.Objectives
Methods
Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the
greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a
heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. The National Hip Fracture
Audit currently provides a framework for service evaluation. This
evaluation is based upon the assessment of process rather than assessment
of patient-centred outcome and therefore it fails to provide meaningful
data regarding the clinical effectiveness of treatments. This study
aims to capture data from the cohort of patients who present with
a fracture of the proximal femur at a single United Kingdom Major
Trauma Centre. Patient-centred outcomes will be recorded and provide
a baseline cohort within which to test the clinical effectiveness
of experimental interventions.
