Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 5 | Pages 307 - 314
1 May 2017
Rendon JS Swinton M Bernthal N Boffano M Damron T Evaniew N Ferguson P Galli Serra M Hettwer W McKay P Miller B Nystrom L Parizzia W Schneider P Spiguel A Vélez R Weiss K Zumárraga JP Ghert M

Objectives. As tumours of bone and soft tissue are rare, multicentre prospective collaboration is essential for meaningful research and evidence-based advances in patient care. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators encountered in large-scale collaborative research by orthopaedic oncological surgeons involved or interested in prospective multicentre collaboration. Methods. All surgeons who were involved, or had expressed an interest, in the ongoing Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial were invited to participate in a focus group to discuss their experiences with collaborative research in this area. The discussion was digitally recorded, transcribed and anonymised. The transcript was analysed qualitatively, using an analytic approach which aims to organise the data in the language of the participants with little theoretical interpretation. Results. The 13 surgeons who participated in the discussion represented orthopaedic oncology practices from seven countries (Argentina, Brazil, Italy, Spain, Denmark, United States and Canada). Four categories and associated themes emerged from the discussion: the need for collaboration in the field of orthopaedic oncology due to the rarity of the tumours and the need for high level evidence to guide treatment; motivational factors for participating in collaborative research including establishing proof of principle, learning opportunity, answering a relevant research question and being part of a collaborative research community; barriers to participation including funding, personal barriers, institutional barriers, trial barriers, and administrative barriers and facilitators for participation including institutional facilitators, leadership, authorship, trial set-up, and the support of centralised study coordination. Conclusions. Orthopaedic surgeons involved in an ongoing international randomised controlled trial (RCT) were motivated by many factors to participate. There were a number of barriers to and facilitators for their participation. There was a collective sense of fatigue experienced in overcoming these barriers, which was mirrored by a strong collective sense of the importance of, and need for, collaborative research in this field. The experiences were described as essential educational first steps to advance collaborative studies in this area. Knowledge gained from this study will inform the development of future large-scale collaborative research projects in orthopaedic oncology. Cite this article: J. S. Rendon, M. Swinton, N. Bernthal, M. Boffano, T. Damron, N. Evaniew, P. Ferguson, M. Galli Serra, W. Hettwer, P. McKay, B. Miller, L. Nystrom, W. Parizzia, P. Schneider, A. Spiguel, R. Vélez, K. Weiss, J. P. Zumárraga, M. Ghert. Barriers and facilitators experienced in collaborative prospective research in orthopaedic oncology: A qualitative study. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:–314. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.65.BJR-2016-0192.R1


Aims

To evaluate mid-to long-term patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of endoprosthetic reconstruction after resection of malignant tumours arising around the knee, and to investigate the risk factors for unfavourable PROMs.

Methods

The medical records of 75 patients who underwent surgery between 2000 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed, and 44 patients who were alive and available for follow-up (at a mean of 9.7 years postoperatively) were included in the study. Leg length discrepancy was measured on whole-leg radiographs, and functional assessment was performed with PROMs (Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) and Comprehensive Outcome Measure for Musculoskeletal Oncology Lower Extremity (COMMON-LE)) with two different aspects. The thresholds for unfavourable PROMs were determined using anchor questions regarding satisfaction, and the risk factors for unfavourable PROMs were investigated.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 10 | Pages 868 - 878
14 Oct 2024
Sekita T Asano N Kobayashi H Yonemoto T Kobayashi E Ishii T Kawai A Nakayama R

Aims

Surgical limb sparing for knee-bearing paediatric bone sarcoma is considered to have a clinically significant influence on postoperative function due to complications and leg-length discrepancies. However, researchers have not fully evaluated the long-term postoperative functional outcomes. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to elucidate the risk factors and long-term functional prognosis associated with paediatric limb-sparing surgery.

Methods

We reviewed 40 patients aged under 14 years who underwent limb-sparing surgery for knee bone sarcoma (15 cases in the proximal tibia and 25 in the distal femur) between January 2000 and December 2013, and were followed up for a minimum of five years. A total of 35 patients underwent reconstruction using artificial materials, and five underwent biological reconstruction. We evaluated the patients’ postoperative complications, survival rate of reconstruction material, and limb, limb function, and leg-length discrepancy at the final follow-up, as well as the risk factors for each.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 2 | Pages 79 - 85
15 Feb 2021
Downie S Stillie A Moran M Sudlow C Simpson AHRW

Aims

Surgery is often indicated in patients with metastatic bone disease (MBD) to improve pain and maximize function. Few studies are available which report on clinically meaningful outcomes such as quality of life, function, and pain relief after surgery for MBD. This is the published protocol for the Bone Metastasis Audit — Patient Reported Outcomes (BoMA-PRO) multicentre MBD study. The primary objective is to ascertain patient-reported quality of life at three to 24 months post-surgery for MBD.

Methods

This will be a prospective, longitudinal study across six UK orthopaedic centres powered to identify the influence of ten patient variables on quality of life at three months after surgery for MBD. Adult patients managed for bone metastases will be screened by their treating consultant and posted out participant materials. If they opt in to participate, they will receive questionnaire packs at regular intervals from three to 24 months post-surgery and their electronic records will be screened until death or five years from recruitment. The primary outcome is quality of life as measured by the European Organisation for Research and the Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ) C30 questionnaire. The protocol has been approved by the Newcastle & North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (REC ref 19/NE/0303) and the study is funded by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow (RCPSG) and the Association for Cancer Surgery (BASO-ACS).


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 5, Issue 8 | Pages 347 - 352
1 Aug 2016
Nuttall J Evaniew N Thornley P Griffin A Deheshi B O’Shea T Wunder J Ferguson P Randall RL Turcotte R Schneider P McKay P Bhandari M Ghert M

Objectives

The diagnosis of surgical site infection following endoprosthetic reconstruction for bone tumours is frequently a subjective diagnosis. Large clinical trials use blinded Central Adjudication Committees (CACs) to minimise the variability and bias associated with assessing a clinical outcome. The aim of this study was to determine the level of inter-rater and intra-rater agreement in the diagnosis of surgical site infection in the context of a clinical trial.

Materials and Methods

The Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial CAC adjudicated 29 non-PARITY cases of lower extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction. The CAC members classified each case according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) criteria for surgical site infection (superficial, deep, or organ space). Combinatorial analysis was used to calculate the smallest CAC panel size required to maximise agreement. A final meeting was held to establish a consensus.