The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) was developed in 2007 as a predictor of 30-day mortality after hip fracture surgery following a neck of femur fracture. The National Hip Fracture Database is the standard used which calculated their own score using national data. The NHF score for 30-day mortality was calculated for 50 patients presenting with a fractured neck femur injury between January 2020 to March 2020. A score <5 was classified as low risk and >/=5 as high risk. Aim was to assess the accuracy in calculating the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score against the National Hip Fracture Database. To explore whether it should it be routinely included during initial assessment to aid clinical management?. There was an increase in the number of mortalities observed in patients who belonged to the high-risk group (>=5) compared to the low risk group. COVID-19 positive patients had worse outcomes with average 30-day mortality of 6.78 compared to the average of 6.06. GEH NHF score per month showed significant accuracy against the NHFD scores. The identification of high-risk groups from their NHF score can allow for targeted optimisations and elucidation of risk factors easily gathered at the point of hospitalisation. The NHFS is a valuable tool and useful predictor to stratify the risk of 30-day mortality and 1-year mortality after hip fracture surgery. Inclusion of the score should be considered as mandatory Trust policy for neck of femur fracture patients to aid clinical management and improve patient safety overall

In absence of available quantitative measures, the assessment of fracture healing based on clinical examination and X-rays remains a subjective matter. Lacking reliable information on the state of healing, rehabilitation is hardly individualized and mostly follows non evidence-based protocols building on common guidelines and personal experience. Measurement of fracture stiffness has been demonstrated as a valid outcome measure for the maturity of the repair tissue but so far has not found its way to clinical application outside the research space. However, with the recent technological advancements and trends towards digital health care, this seems about to change with new generations of instrumented implants – often unfortunately termed “smart implants” – being developed as medical devices. The AO Fracture Monitor is a novel, active, implantable sensor system designed to provide an objective measure for the assessment of fracture healing progression (1). It consists of an implantable sensor that is attached to conventional locking plates and continuously measures implant load during physiological weight bearing. Data is recorded and processed in real-time on the implant, from where it is wirelessly transmitted to a cloud application via the patient's smartphone. Thus, the system allows for timely, remote and X-ray free provision of feedback upon the mechanical competence of the repair tissue to support therapeutic decision making and individualized aftercare. The device has been developed according to medical device standards and underwent extensive verification and validation, including an in-vivo study in an ovine tibial osteotomy model, that confirmed the device's capability to depict the course of fracture healing as well as its long-term technical performance. Currently a multi-center clinical investigation is underway to demonstrate clinical safety of the novel implant system. Rendering the progression of bone fracture healing assessable, the AO Fracture Monitor carries potential to enhance today's postoperative care of fracture patients

Timely and competent treatment of paediatric fractures is paramount to a healthy future working population. Anecdotal evidence suggests that children travel greater distances to obtain care compared to adults causing economic and geographic inequities. This study aims to qualify the informal regionalization of children's fracture care in Ontario. The results could inform future policy on resource distribution and planning of the provincial health care system. A retrospective cohort study was conducted examining two of the most common paediatric orthopaedic traumatic injuries, femoral shaft and supracondylar humerus fractures (SCH), in parallel over the last 10 years (2010-2020) using multiple linked administrative databases housed at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) in Toronto, Ontario. We compared the distance travelled by these pediatric cohorts to clinically equivalent adult fracture patterns (distal radius fracture (DR) and femoral shaft fracture). Patient cohorts were identified based on treatment codes and distances were calculated from a centroid of patient home forward sortation area to hospital location. Demographics, hospital type, and closest hospital to patient were also recorded. For common upper extremity fracture care, 84% of children underwent surgery at specialized centers which required significant travel (44km). Conversely, 67% of adults were treated locally, travelling a mean of 23km. Similarly, two-thirds of adult femoral shaft fractures were treated locally (mean travel distance of 30km) while most children (84%) with femoral shaft fractures travelled an average of 63km to specialized centers. Children who live in rural areas travel on average 51km more than their adult rural-residing counterparts for all fracture care. Four institutions provide over 75% of the fracture care for children, whereas 22 institutions distribute the same case volume in adults.?. Adult fracture care naturally self-organizes with proportionate distribution without policy-directed systemization. There is an unplanned concentration of pediatric fracture care to specialized centers in Ontario placing undue burden on pediatric patients and inadvertently stresses the surgical resources in a small handful of hospitals. In contrast, adult fracture care naturally self-organizes with proportionate distribution without policy-directed systemization. Patient care equity and appropriate resource allocation cannot be achieved without appropriate systemization of pediatric fracture care

It is known that Osteoporosis is the pathology of bone mass and tissue loss resulting in an increase of fragility, risk of fracture occurrence, and risk of fracture recurrence. We noted there was no definitive pathway in our last audit, therefore recommended: availability of the Osteoporosis clinic referral form in an accessible place, the form be filled by the doctor reviewing the patient in the first fracture clinic, and a liaison nurse to ensure these forms were filled and sent to the Osteoporosis clinic. This second audit analyses our Trust's response to these recommendations and effect achieved in Osteoporosis care. We reviewed our local data base from the 7/27/2020 – 10/2/2021 retrospectively for distal radius fractures who were seen in fracture clinic. We analysed a sample size of 59 patients, excluding patients who had already commenced bone protection medications. 67.7% of our patients had neither been on bone protection medications nor recorded referrals and 13.5% were already on bone protection medications when they sustained the fragility fracture. Ten out of the 51 patients were offered referral to the osteoporosis clinic, and one refused. This makes 20% (10 out of 50) of the patients had completed referrals. In comparison, in our first audit, 11% had already been on bone protection medications and 18% had completed referrals. The second cycle showed a slight increase in compliance. Majority of the referrals were completed by Orthopaedic Consultants in both audits and ana awareness increase noted among non-consultants in starting the referral process. Based on our analysis, our Trust has a slight improvement in commencing bone protection medications, associated with slight improvement in completing referrals to the Osteoporosis clinic. Despite our recommendations in the first audit, there is still no easily accessible definitive pathway to ensure our Trust's patients have timely access to bone protection and continued care at the Osteoporosis clinic. We recommend streamlining our recommendations to have a more effective approach in ensuring our Trust meets national guidelines. We will implement a Yes or No question assessment for patients visiting clinic in our electronic database which should assist in referral completions

Abstract. Background. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries with coinciding posterolateral tibial plateau (PLTP) depression fractures are rare. According to the most up to date literature, addressing the PLTP is crucial in preventing failure of the ACL. However, the surgical management of these injuries pose a great challenge to orthopaedic surgeons, given the anatomical location of the depressed PTP fragment. We report a case of a 17-year-old patient presenting to our department with this injury and describe a novel fixation method, that has not been described in the literature. Surgical Technique. A standard 2-portal arthroscopy is used to visualise the fractures. The PLTP is addressed first. With the combined use of arthroscopy and fluoroscopy, a guide pin is triangulated from the anteromedial aspect of the tibia, towards the depressed plateau fragment. Once the guide pin is approximately 1cm from the centre of the fragment, it is over-drilled with a cannulated drill, and simultaneously bluntly punched up to its original anatomical location. Bone graft is then used to fill the void, supported by two subchondral screws. Both fluoroscopy and arthroscopy are used to confirm adequacy of fixation. Finally, the tibial spine avulsion fracture is repaired arthroscopically using the standard suture bridging technique. Conclusion. We describe a novel, one-stage, minimally invasive approach that addresses both the ACL injury and PLTP fracture. We highlight the advantages of utilising this approach and functional outcomes

The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) is validated to predict mortality after fragility neck of femur fractures (NOF). Risk stratification supports informed consent, peri-operative optimisation and case prioritisation. With the inclusion of fragility distal femur fractures (DFF) in the BPT, increasing attention is being placed on the outcome of these injuries. Developing on the lessons learnt over the past decades in NOF management is key. This study assesses the validity of the NHFS in predicting mortality after fragility DFFs. A multi-centre study of 3 high volume fragility fracture units was performed via a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected databases. Patients aged 60 years-of-age who presented with AO 33.A/B/C native DFF, or V.3.A/B periprosthetic DFF over an 86-month period between September 2014 and December 2021 and underwent surgical treatment were eligible for inclusion. Open and/or polytrauma (ISS >15) were excluded. All operations were performed or supervised by Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeons and were reviewed peri-operatively by a 7-day MDT. Patients with a NHFS of gt;=5 were stratified into a high-risk of 30-day mortality cohort, with all others being œlow-risk. 285 patients were eligible for inclusion with 92 considered to be low-risk of 30-day mortality, these tended to be younger female patients admitted from their own homes. 30-day mortality was 0% in the low-risk cohort and 6.2% (12/193) in the high-risk group. 1-year mortality was 8.7% (8/92) and 35.7% (69/193) in the low and high-risk groups respectively. Area Under the Curve (AUC) analyses of Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves demonstrated the greatest ability to predict mortality at 30-days for the high-risk cohort (0.714). The NHFS demonstrates a good ability to predict 30-day mortality in those patients with a NHFS =5 after a surgically managed fragility DFF. With comparable mortality outcomes to those documented from fragility NOF

Fragility fractures associated with osteoporosis (OP) reduce quality of life, increase risk for subsequent fractures, and are a major economic burden. In 2010, Osteoporosis Canada produced clinical practice guidelines on the management of OP patients at risk for fractures (Papaioannou et al. CMAJ 2010). We describe the real-world incidence of primary and subsequent fragility fractures in elderly Canadians in Ontario, Canada in a timespan (2011–2017) following guideline introduction. This retrospective observational study used de-identified health services administrative data generated from the publicly funded healthcare system in Ontario, Canada from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. The study population included individuals ≥66 years of age who were hospitalized with a primary (i.e. index) fragility fracture (identified using ICD-10 codes from hospital admissions, emergency and ambulatory care) occurring between January 1, 2011 and March 31, 2015. All relevant anatomical sites for fragility fractures were examined, including (but not limited to): hip, vertebral, humerus, wrist, radius and ulna, pelvis, and femur. OP treatment in the year prior to fracture and subsequent fracture information were collected until March 31, 2017. Patients with previous fragility fractures over five years prior to the index fracture, and those fractures associated with trauma codes, were excluded. 115,776 patients with an index fracture were included in the analysis. Mean (standard deviation) age at index fracture was 80.4 (8.3) years. In the year prior to index fracture, 32,772 (28.3%) patients received OP treatment. The incidence of index fractures per 1,000 persons (95% confidence interval) from 2011–2015 ranged from 15.16 (14.98–15.35) to 16.32 (16.14–16.51). Of all examined index fracture types, hip fractures occurred in the greatest proportion (27.3%) of patients (Table). The proportion of patients incurring a second fracture of any type ranged from 13.4% (tibia, fibula, knee, or foot index fracture) to 23% (vertebral index fracture). Hip fractures were the most common subsequent fracture type and the proportion of subsequent hip fractures was highest in patients with an index hip fracture (Table). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) time to second fracture ranged from 436 (69–939) days (radius and ulna index fracture) to 640 (297–1,023) days (tibia, fibula, knee, or foot index fracture). The median (IQR) time from second to third fracture ranged from 237 (75–535) days (pelvis index fracture) to 384 (113–608) days (femur index fracture). This real-world study found that elderly patients in Ontario, Canada incurring a primary fragility fracture from 2011–2015 were at risk for future fractures occurring over shorter periods of time with each subsequent fracture. These observations are consistent with previous reports of imminent fracture risk and the fragility fracture cascade in OP patients (Balasubramanian et al. ASBMR 2016, Toth et al. WCO-IOF-ESCEO 2018). Overall, these data suggest that in elderly patients with an index fragility fracture at any site (with the exception of the radius or ulna), the most likely subsequent fracture will occur at the hip in less than 2 years

The hip fracture burden on health and social care services in Scotland is anticipated to increase significantly, primarily driven by an ageing population. This study forecasts future hip fracture incidence and the annual number of hip fractures in Scotland until 2029. The monthly number of patients with hip fracture aged ≥ 50 admitted to a Scottish hospital between 01/01/2017 and 31/12/2021 was identified through data collected by the Scottish Hip Fracture Audit. This data was analysed using Exponential Smoothing and Auto Regressive Integrated Moving Average forecast modelling to project future hip fracture incidence and the annual number of hip fractures until 2029. Adjustments for population change were accounted for by integrating population projections published by National Records of Scotland. Between 2017 and 2021 the annual number of hip fractures in Scotland increased from 6675 to 7797, with a respective increase in hip fracture incidence from 313 to 350 per 100,000. By 2029, the averaged projected annual number of hip fractures is 10311, with an incidence rate of 463 per 100,000. The largest percentage increase in hip fracture occurs in the 70-79 age group (57%), with comparable increases in both sexes (30%). Based upon these projections, overall length of stay following hip fracture will increase from 142713 bed days per annum in 2021, to 203412 by 2029, incurring an additional cost of over £25 million. Forecast modelling demonstrates that the annual number of hip fractures in Scotland will rise substantially by 2029, with considerable implications for health and social care services

The British Orthopedic Association recommends that patients referred to fracture clinic are reviewed within 72 hours. With the increase in referrals and limited clinic capacity it is becoming increasingly difficult to see every referral with in a 72 hour time frame. Some patients are waiting 2 weeks or more before they can be seen in a fracture clinic. With the aim of improving care by seeking to meet BOAST 7 target, waiting times for fracture clinic appointments at the Homerton University Hospital were audited prospectively against this national guideline, before virtual fracture clinic was implemented and 6 weeks after the implementation of virtual fracture clinic at our hospital. Virtual fracture clinic is where an Orthopedic consultant reviews a patients x-rays and A&E documentation and decides if that patients needs to be seen in a face to face fracture clinic to discuss operative vs. non-operative management of their injury or if a treatment plan can be delivered without the patient having to come back to hospital. The study was conducted as a prospective closed-loop audit in which the second cycle took place after the implementation of the new virtual fracture clinic service. The first cycle showed a non-compliant waiting time with only 18% of patients being seen within 72 hours. Following the implementation of virtual fracture clinic, 84% of all patients were reviewed within 72 hours. Virtual fracture clinic delivered a significant reduction in waiting times. Virtual fracture clinic has only just been implemented at the Homerton University Hospital and hopefully at the next audit we will be 100% compliant with the BOA BOAST 7 Guideline. We would recommend that virtual fracture clinics being rolled out in Orthopedic departments in all hospitals which have Orthopedic services

Introduction. We aim to assess whether radiographic characteristics of the greater tuberosity fragment can predict rotator cuff tears inpatients with anterior shoulder dislocations combined with an isolated fracture of the greater tuberosity. Methods. A retrospective single-centre case series of 61 consecutive patients that presented with anterior shoulder dislocations combined with an isolated fracture of the greater tuberosity between January 2018 and July 2022. Inclusion criteria: patients with atraumatic anterior shoulder dislocation associated with an isolated fracture of the greater tuberosity with a minimum follow-up of 3-months. Exclusion criteria: patients with other fractures of the proximal humerus or glenoid. Rotator cuff tears were diagnosed using magnetic resonance or ultrasound imaging. Greater tuberosity fragment size and displacement was calculated on plain radiographs using validated methods. Results. The case series was composed of 22 men and 39 women with a mean age of 65 years (29 - 91 years). The mean follow-up was 15months and median follow up 8.5 months (3 – 60 months). A rotator cuff tear was diagnosed in 14 patients (16%) and involved the supraspinatus (13), infraspinatus (4) and subscapularis (2). Full-thickness tears occurred in 6 patients and partial-thickness tears in 8patients. The mean time from initial injury to rotator cuff tear diagnosis was 5 months (2 – 22 months). The mean greater tuberosity fragment length was 23.4 mm in rotator cuff tear patients versus 32.6 mm in those without a tear (p = 0.006, CI: -15 - -2). The mean greater tuberosity. fragment width was 11.1 mm in rotator cuff tear patients versus 17.8 mm in those without a tear (p = 0.0004, CI: -10 - -2). There was no significant difference in the super inferior and anteroposterior fragment displacement between the two groups. Conclusion. In patients with shoulder dislocations combined with an isolated fracture of the greater tuberosity, rotator cuff tears are associated with a smaller sized greater tuberosity fragment

Determine the prevalence, etiologies, and risk factors of unplanned return to the OR (UROR) in adult orthopaedic trauma patients. Retrospective review of a trauma prospective registry from 2014 – 2019 at a Level 1 academic hospital. An UROR was defined as a patient returning to OR unexpectedly following a planned definitive surgery to either readdress the presenting diagnosis or address a complication arising from the index procedure. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed comparing those patients with an UROR versus those without. A total of 1568 patients were reviewed. The rate of UROR was 9.8% (153 patients). Symptomatic implant was the leading cause of UROR (60%). Other significant UROR causes were infection (15%) and implant failure (9%). The median time between index procedure and UROR was 301 days. For the univariate and multivariate analysis, open fracture (p< 0.05), fracture complexity (p<0.01), and weekend procedure (p< 0.01) were all associated with increased risk of UROR. All other variables were not statistically significant for any associations. Those patients with an UROR for reasons other than symptomatic implants were more likely to have polyorthopaedic injuries (p < 0.05), ISS > 15 (p < 0.05), osteoporosis (p < 0.01), ICU status (p < 0.05), psychiatric history (p < 0.05), compartment syndrome (p < 0.05), neurovascular injury (p < 0.01), open fracture (p < 0.05), and fracture complexity (p < 0.05). The rate of UROR in the orthopaedic trauma patient population is 10%. Most of these cases are due to implant-related issues. UROR for reasons other than symptomatic implants tend to be polytraumatized patients with higher-energy injuries, multiple complex fractures, and associated soft tissue injuries. Future focus on improved implant development and treatments for polytraumatized patients with complex fractures is warranted to decrease a relatively high UROR rate in orthopaedic trauma

Introduction: Increasing number of osteoporotic fractures of the femur, especially upper part of the femur creates everyday problem of health services. Treatment of these fractures has been improving markedly during the past 25 years. DHS, gamma nail and some other implants are very useful in everyday surgery. However some of complications still can not be resolved like cut out. Osteoporotic fractures in subtrochanteric area represent even bigger challenging. Diaphyseal fractures are also difficult to be treated. The main problem is quality of osteoporotic bone. Plate with parallel screws doesn’t provide reliable fixation. Intramedulary nails, because of wide channel in distal femur area also don’t provide desirable fixation stability. Material and Method: We analysed results of using of one new device: selfdynamisable internal fixator (SIF) in the series of 389 patients treated because of upper femur fractures. That device has possibilities of spontaneous dynamisation in two axes: along the femoral neck axis and along the diaphyseal axis. Spontaneous dynamisation in the diaphyseal axis is very important if diaphyseal or subrtochanteric fracture or comminuted fracture of the upper femur with subtrochanteric extension treated. For activation of axial dynamisation it not necessary to do any action from outside the body. This feature is activated spontaneously if there is no progress in fracture union within 6–8 weeks. This device provides three-dimensional fixation using clams and rod onto the lateral surface of the femur. The age of patients was from 59 to 87 years. This internal fixator is applied using minimally invasive method – by one or two small incisions. Results: During the treatment it has been confirmed working of self-dynamisation concept. Spontaneous dynamisation in the long axis of the femur has been proven in 21% of patients with subtrochanteric and diaphyseal fractures and it has been proven radiologically that sliding happened between 1–4 mm (average 2.5 mm). Such dynamisation together with 3D configuration of screws resulted in relatively quick fracture healing. Follow up was 19 months (6–60). Altogether 97.6% fractures healed within normal healing time. There were 1 infection, 2 cut out, 1 mechanical complication, 4 delay unions and one non-union. Conclusion: According to results obtained, it can bee concluded that new biological internal fixator is suitable for minimally invasive technique, without opening of fracture site

First rib fractures (FRFs) have historically been a marker for severe trauma and poor outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess whether an association still exists between a fractured first rib and global trauma scores suffered by the patient, examine mortality rate and identify other commonly associated injuries. This study examined patients who presented to the Rockhampton Hospital with a traumatic FRF between the dates of July 2015 to June 2020. Patient demographics, mortality rate and additional injuries sustained by the patients were collected. The Injury Severity Score (ISS) was utilised and calculated for each patient. Analysis was conducted to determine associations between trauma scores and FRFs, mortality rate and other injuries sustained at the time of rib fracture. In total, 545 patients had a rib fracture with 48 patients identified as having an FRF. Median age was 50 years. Thirty-seven (77%) were male. The most common mechanism of FRF was motor vehicle/motorbike accidents (71%). Fifty percent of patients with an observed FRF had the highest global ISS of very severe, with 13% severe, 22% moderate and 15% mild. No patients died from their injuries. Of those with an FRF, 79% experienced fractures other than ribs, 75% had other rib fractures and 52% had chest injuries. A larger than expected proportion of FRFs were not associated with severe trauma scores or high mortality. These findings suggest that patients with an FRF may have a greater chance of surviving their traumatic FRF than previously reported. Clinicians should be aware of the potential for severity and other associated injuries, such as chest wall fractures and thoracic injuries, when treating a patient with a fracture of their first rib

Introduction. Treatment pathways of 5. th. metatarsal fractures are commonly directed based on fracture classification, with Jones types for example, requiring closer observation and possibly more aggressive management. Primary objective. To investigate the reliability of assessment of subtypes of 5. th. metatarsal fractures by different observers. Methods. Patients were identified from our prospectively collected database. We included all patient referred to our virtual fracture clinic with a suspected or confirmed 5. th. metatarsal fracture. Plain AP radiographs were reviewed by two observers, who were initially trained on the 5. th. metatarsal classification identification. Zones were defined as Zone 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2, 3, diaphyseal shaft (DS), distal metaphysis (DM) and head. An inter-observer reliability analysis using Cohen's Kappa coefficient was carried out, and degree of observer agreement described using Landis & Koch's description. All data was analysed using IBM SPSS v.27. Results. 878 patients were identified. The two observers had moderate agreement when identifying fractures in all zones, apart from metatarsal head fractures, which scored substantial agreement (K=.614). Zones 1.1 (K=.582), 2 (K=.536), 3 (K=.601) and DS (K=.544) all tended towards but did not achieve substantial agreement. Whilst DS fractures achieved moderate agreement, there was an apparent difficulty with distal DS, resulting in a lot of cross over with DM (DS 210 vs 109; DM 76 vs 161). Slight agreement with the next highest adjacent zone was found when injuries were thought to be in zones 1.2, 1.3 and 2 (K=0.17, 0.115 and 0.152 respectively). Conclusions. Reliability of sub-categorising 5. th. metatarsal fractures using standardised instructions conveys moderate to substantial agreement in most cases. If the region of the fracture is going to be used in an algorithm to guide a management plan and clinical follow up during a virtual clinic review, defining fractures of zones 1–3 needs careful consideration

Odontoid fracture of the second cervical vertebra (C2) is the most common spinal fracture type in elderly patients. However, very little is known about the biomechanical fracture mechanisms, but could play a role in fracture prevention and treatment. This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical competence and fracture characteristics of the odontoid process. A total of 42 human C2 specimens (14 female and 28 male, 71.5 ± 6.5 years) were scanned via quantitative computed tomography, divided in 6 groups (n = 7) and subjected to combined quasi-static loading at a rate of 0.1 mm/s until fracturing at inclinations of −15°, 0° and 15° in sagittal plane, and −50° and 0° in transverse plane. Bone mineral density (BMD), specimen height, fusion state of the ossification centers, stiffness, yield load, ultimate load, and fracture type according to Anderson and d'Alonzo were assessed. While the lowest values for stiffness, yield, and ultimate load were observed at load inclination of 15° in sagittal plane, no statistically significant differences could be observed among the six groups (p = 0.235, p = 0.646, and p = 0.505, respectively). Evaluating specimens with only clearly distinguishable fusion of the ossification centers (n = 26) reveled even less differences among the groups for all mechanical parameters. BMD was positively correlated with yield load (R² = 0.350, p < 0.001), and ultimate load (R² = 0.955, p < 0.001), but not with stiffness (p = 0.070). Type III was the most common fracture type (23.5%). These biomechanical outcomes indicate that load direction plays a subordinate role in traumatic fractures of the odontoid process in contrast to BMD which is a strong determinant of stiffness and strength. Thus, odontoid fractures appear to result from an interaction between load magnitude and bone quality

Our study seeks to determine whether characteristics of radiographs taken post-reduction of a forearm fracture can indicate future risk of refracture or loss of reduction. We hypothesize that reducing forearm fractures too precisely may be counterproductive and provide less benefit than reductions left slightly offset prior to cast immobilization. We conducted a retrospective review of 1079 pediatric patients treated for forearm fractures between January 2014 and September 2021 in a 327 bed regional medical center. Percent fracture displacement, location, orientation, comminution, fracture line visibility and angle of angulation were determined by AP and lateral radiographs. Percent fracture displacement was derived by: (Displacement of Bone Shafts / Diameter) x 100% = %Fracture Displacement. Patients treated with closed reduction were reduced from a mean displacement of 29.26±36.18% at an angulation of 22.67±16.57 degrees to 7.88±9.07% displacement and 3.89±6.68 degrees angulation post-reduction. Patients developing complications including a loss of reduction or refracture were found to have post-operative radiographs with a lower percent displacement (0.50±1.12) than those not developing complications (8.65±9.21)(p=0.0580). Post-reduction angulation (p=1.000), average reduction in angulation (p=1.000) and average reduction in displacement percent(p=0.2102) were not significantly associated with development of complications. Percent displacement of radial shafts was seen to be the most important metric to monitor in post-operative radiographs for patients undergoing closed reduction of a forearm fracture. We theorize a slight displacement provides greater surface area for osteoblastic expansion and callus formation leading to a decreased risk of refracture or loss of reduction. While our sample size precludes our ability to measure the ideal amount of post-reduction displacement for optimal healing, our results demonstrate that some degree of shaft displacement is required for optimal healing conditions

Abstract. Introduction. Displaced olecranon fractures in the elderly are challenging due to associated comorbidities, poor tissue quality, high risk of complications, and the possible need for implant removal. Treatment options with such fractures range from non-operative management to internal fixation with various types of implants. Currently, there is no consensus on the treatment of olecranon fractures in the elderly with relatively low functional demand. Aim. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse the clinical outcomes of various treatment modalities for olecranon fracture in the elderly. Methods. We systematically reviewed the literature covering the treatment of olecranon fractures in the elderly according to PRISMA guidelines. We used search tools of Medline, Embase, Wiley online library, Cochrane and Scopus. Keywords used in the search were Olecranon fracture and Elderly OR Geriatric in all fields. Studies involving patients older than 60 years of age and all modalities of treatment were included. Results. 14 papers studying 270 patients were identified of which, 112 were treated non-operatively, 25 with limited fixation, 98 with tension band wire fixation, 34 with plate fixation, and 1 patient was treated with excision. Conclusions. Nonoperative as well as limited fixation were shown to provide satisfactory results in the elderly. Treatment decisions in this age group should be individualised to factors such as fracture stability, quality of bone & soft tissues, and patient's functional demand. We recommend a treatment protocol for treating olecranon fracture in the elderly based on the above factors

The purpose of this study was to determine whether there have been changes in the complexity of femoral fragility fractures presenting to our Dunedin Orthopaedic Department, New Zealand, over a period of ten years. Patients over the age of 60 presenting with femoral fragility fractures to Dunedin Hospital in 2009 −10 (335 fractures) were compared with respect to demographic data, incidence rates, fracture classification and treatment details to the period 2018-19 (311 fractures). Pathological and high velocity fractures were excluded. The gender proportion and average age (83.1 vs 83.0 years) was unchanged. The overall incidence of femoral fractures in people over 60 years in our region fell by 27% (p<0.001). Intracapsular fractures (31 B1 and B2) fell by 29% (p=0.03) and stable trochanteric fractures by 56% (p<0.001). The incidence of unstable trochanteric fractures (31A2 and 31A3) increased by 84.5% from 3.5 to 6.4/10,000 over 60 years (p = 0.04). The proportion of trochanteric fractures treated with an intramedullary (IM) nail increased from 8% to 37% (p <0.001). Fewer intracapsular fractures were treated by internal fixation (p<0.001) and the rate of acute total hip joint replacements increased from 13 to 21% (p=0.07). The incidence of femoral shaft fractures did not change significantly with periprosthetic fractures comprising 70% in both cohorts. While there has been little difference in the numbers there has been a decrease in the incidence of femoral fragility fractures likely due to the increasing use of bisphosphonates. However, the incidence of unstable trochanteric fractures is increasing. This has led to the increased use of IM nails which are increasingly used for stable fractures as well. The increasing complexity of femoral fragility fractures is likely to have an impact on implant use, theatre time and cost

Osteoporosis is a disease when bone mass and tissue is lost, with a consequent increase in bone fragility and increase susceptibility to develop fracture. The osteoporosis prevalence increases markedly with age, from 2% at 50 years to more than 25% at 80 years. 1. in women. The vast majority of distal radius fractures (DRFs) can be considered fragility fractures. The DRF is usually the first medical presentation of these fractures. With an aging population, all fracture clinics should have embedded screening for bone health and falls risk. DRF is the commonest type of fracture in perimenopausal women and is associated with an increased risk of later non-wrist fracture of up to one in five in the subsequent decade. 2. . According to the national guidelines in managing the fragility fractures of distal radius with regards the bone health review, we, as orthopedic surgeons, are responsible to detect the risky patients, refer them to the responsible team to perform the required investigations and offer the treatment. We reviewed our local database (E-trauma) all cases of fracture distal radius retrospectively during the period from 01/08/2019 to 29/09/2019. We included total of 45 patients who have been managed conservatively and followed up in fracture clinic. Our inclusion criteria was: women aged 65 years and over, men aged 75 years and over with risk factors, patients who are more than 50 years old and sustained low energy trauma whatever the sex is or any patient who has major risk factor (current or frequent recent use of oral or systemic glucocorticoids, untreated premature menopause or previous fragility fracture). We found that 96% of patients were 50 years old or more and 84% of the patients were females. 71% of patients were not referred to Osteoporosis clinic and 11% were already under the orthogeriatric care and 18% only were referred. Out of the 8 referred patients, 3 were referred on 1st appointment, 1 on the 3rd appointment, 1 on discharge from fracture clinic to GP again and 3 were without clear documentation of the time of referral. We concluded that we as trust are not compliant to the national guidelines with regards the osteoporosis review for the DRF as one of the first common presentations of fragility fractures. We also found that the reason for that is that there is no definitive clear pathway for the referral in our local guidelines. We recommended that the Osteoporosis clinic referral form needs to be available in the fracture clinic in an accessible place and needs to be filled by the doctor reviewing the patient in the fracture clinic in the 1st appointment. A liaison nurse also needs to ensure these forms have been filled and sent to the orthogeriatric team. Alternatively, we added a portal on our online database (e-trauma), therefore the patient who fulfils the criteria for bone health review should be referred to the orthogeriatric team to review

One of the most important sequelae to ageing is osteoporosis and subsequently hip fractures. Hip fractures are associated with major morbidity, mortality and costs. Most patients require surgery to restore mobility. Provision of surgery and its complications is poorly understood in South Africa. Our aim was to collect and report current hip fracture care at four centres in South Africa, as well as reporting surgical and general patient outcomes. A three year retrospective cohort at four centres will be described, focussing on provision of surgical care, mortality, types of surgery and complications. We identified 562 patients who had surgical intervention for fragility fractures, 66% were females. Forty nine percent had open reduction and internal fixation, 28% had hemi-arthroplasty replacement whilst 23% had total hip replacements. Twenty percent of patients had operative intervention within 36 hours of presentation to the emergency department. Mortality was 9% at 30 days. The most common complications were lower respiratory infections (29%), urinary tract infections (21%) and surgical site infections (9%). This is the largest cohort of surgically treated hip fracture from South Africa. Proportions of patients receiving different surgical interventions such as THR are comparable to the broader literature. However a number of key performance indicators such as surgery within 36 hours are challenging to meet. Given the changing demographics of South Africa, this study provides an early insight to contemporary care and may help provide direction for broader national strategies for reporting and improving hip fracture care