Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 8 | Pages 631 - 637
10 Aug 2021
Realpe AX Blackstone J Griffin DR Bing AJF Karski M Milner SA Siddique M Goldberg A

Aims

A multicentre, randomized, clinician-led, pragmatic, parallel-group orthopaedic trial of two surgical procedures was set up to obtain high-quality evidence of effectiveness. However, the trial faced recruitment challenges and struggled to maintain recruitment rates over 30%, although this is not unusual for surgical trials. We conducted a qualitative study with the aim of gathering information about recruitment practices to identify barriers to patient consent and participation to an orthopaedic trial.

Methods

We collected 11 audio recordings of recruitment appointments and interviews of research team members (principal investigators and research nurses) from five hospitals involved in recruitment to an orthopaedic trial. We analyzed the qualitative data sets thematically with the aim of identifying aspects of informed consent and information provision that was either unclear, disrupted, or hindered trial recruitment.


Aims

Arthroscopic microfracture is a conventional form of treatment for patients with osteochondritis of the talus, involving an area of < 1.5 cm2. However, some patients have persistent pain and limitation of movement in the early postoperative period. No studies have investigated the combined treatment of microfracture and shortwave treatment in these patients. The aim of this prospective single-centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was to compare the outcome in patients treated with arthroscopic microfracture combined with radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy (rESWT) and arthroscopic microfracture alone, in patients with ostechondritis of the talus.

Methods

Patients were randomly enrolled into two groups. At three weeks postoperatively, the rESWT group was given shockwave treatment, once every other day, for five treatments. In the control group the head of the device which delivered the treatment had no energy output. The two groups were evaluated before surgery and at six weeks and three, six and 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale. Secondary outcome measures included a visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain and the area of bone marrow oedema of the talus as identified on sagittal fat suppression sequence MRI scans.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 3 | Pages 150 - 163
1 Mar 2021
Flett L Adamson J Barron E Brealey S Corbacho B Costa ML Gedney G Giotakis N Hewitt C Hugill-Jones J Hukins D Keding A McDaid C Mitchell A Northgraves M O'Carroll G Parker A Scantlebury A Stobbart L Torgerson D Turner E Welch C Sharma H

Aims

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.

Methods

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.