Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) is a promising tool to estimate bone structure characteristics and predict fragile fracture. The aim of this pilot cross-sectional study was to evaluate the performance of a multi-channel residual network (MResNet) based on ultrasonic radiofrequency (RF) signal to discriminate fragile fractures retrospectively in postmenopausal women. Methods. RF signal and speed of sound (SOS) were obtained using an axial transmission QUS at one‐third distal radius for 246 postmenopausal women. Based on the involved RF signal, we conducted a MResNet, which combines multi-channel training with original ResNet, to classify the high risk of fragility fractures patients from all subjects. The bone mineral density (BMD) at lumber, hip and femoral neck acquired with DXA was recorded on the same day. The fracture history of all subjects in adulthood were collected. To assess the ability of the different methods in the discrimination of fragile fracture, the odds ratios (OR) calculated using binomial logistic regression analysis and the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) were analyzed. Results. Among the 246 postmenopausal women, 170 belonged to the non-fracture group, 50 to the vertebral group, and 26 to the non-vertebral fracture group. MResNet was discriminant for all fragile fractures (OR = 2.64; AUC = 0.74), for Vertebral fracture (OR = 3.02; AUC = 0.77), for non-vertebral fracture (OR = 2.01; AUC = 0.69). MResNet showed comparable performance to that of BMD of hip and lumbar with all types of fractures, and significantly better performance than SOS all types of fractures. Conclusions. the MResNet model based on the ultrasonic RF signal can significantly improve the ability of QUS device to recognize previous fragile fractures. Moreover, the performance of the proposed model modified by age, weight, and height is further optimized. These results open perspectives to evaluate the risk of fragile fracture applying a deep learning model to analyze ultrasonic RF signal

Osteoporosis is common and the health and financial cost of fragility fractures is considerable. The burden of cardiovascular disease has been reduced dramatically by identifying and targeting those most at risk. A similar approach is potentially possible in the context of fragility fractures. The World Health Organization created and endorsed the use of FRAX, a fracture risk assessment tool, which uses selected risk factors to calculate a quantitative, patient-specific, ten-year risk of sustaining a fragility fracture. Treatment can thus be based on this as well as on measured bone mineral density. It may also be used to determine at-risk individuals, who should undergo bone densitometry. FRAX has been incorporated into the national osteoporosis guidelines of countries in the Americas, Europe, the Far East and Australasia. The United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence also advocates its use in their guidance on the assessment of the risk of fragility fracture, and it may become an important tool to combat the health challenges posed by fragility fractures

Hypovitaminosis D has been identified as a common risk factor for fragility fractures and poor fracture healing. Epidemiological data on vitamin D deficiency have been gathered in various populations, but the association between vertebral fragility fractures and hypovitaminosis D, especially in males, remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OH D) in patients presenting with vertebral fragility fractures and to determine whether patients with a vertebral fracture were at greater risk of hypovitaminosis D than a control population. Furthermore, we studied the seasonal variations in the serum vitamin D levels of tested patients in order to clarify the relationship between other known risk factors for osteoporosis and vitamin D levels. We measured the serum 25-OH D levels of 246 patients admitted with vertebral fractures (105 men, 141 female, mean age 69 years, . sd. 8.5), and in 392 orthopaedic patients with back pain and no fractures (219 men, 173 female, mean age 63 years, . sd. 11) to evaluate the prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency. Statistical analysis found a significant difference in vitamin D levels between patients with vertebral fragility fracture and the control group (p = 0.036). In addition, there was a significant main effect of the tested variables: obesity (p < 0.001), nicotine abuse (p = 0.002) and diabetes mellitus (p < 0.001). No statistical difference was found between vitamin D levels and gender (p = 0.34). Vitamin D insufficiency was shown to be a risk factor for vertebral fragility fractures in both men and women. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:89–93

Aims. This study aims to define the epidemiology of trauma presenting to a single centre providing all orthopaedic trauma care for a population of ∼ 900,000 over the first 40 days of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to that presenting over the same period one year earlier. The secondary aim was to compare this with population mobility data obtained from Google. Methods. A cross-sectional study of consecutive adult (> 13 years) patients with musculoskeletal trauma referred as either in-patients or out-patients over a 40-day period beginning on 5 March 2020, the date of the first reported UK COVID-19 death, was performed. This time period encompassed social distancing measures. This group was compared to a group of patients referred over the same calendar period in 2019 and to publicly available mobility data from Google. Results. Orthopaedic trauma referrals reduced by 42% (1,056 compared to 1,820) during the study period, and by 58% (405 compared to 967) following national lockdown. Outpatient referrals reduced by 44%, and inpatient referrals by 36%, and the number of surgeries performed by 36%. The regional incidence of traumatic injury fell from 5.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.79 to 5.35) to 2.94 (95% CI 2.52 to 3.32) per 100,000 population per day. Significant reductions were seen in injuries related to sports and alcohol consumption. No admissions occurred relating to major trauma (Injury Severity Score > 16) or violence against the person. Changes in population mobility and trauma volume from baseline correlated significantly (Pearson’s correlation 0.749, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.85, p < 0.001). However, admissions related to fragility fractures remained unchanged compared to the 2019 baseline. Conclusion. The profound changes in social behaviour and mobility during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic have directly correlated with a significant decrease in orthopaedic trauma referrals, but fragility fractures remained unaffected and provision for these patients should be maintained. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:182–189

Aims. Minimally invasive fixation of pelvic fragility fractures is recommended to reduce pain and allow early mobilization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of two different stabilization techniques in bilateral fragility fractures of the sacrum (BFFS). Methods. A non-randomized, prospective study was carried out in a level 1 trauma centre. BFFS in 61 patients (mean age 80 years (SD 10); four male, 57 female) were treated surgically with bisegmental transsacral stablization (BTS; n = 41) versus spinopelvic fixation (SP; n = 20). Postoperative full weightbearing was allowed. The outcome was evaluated at two timepoints: discharge from inpatient treatment (TP1; Fitbit tracking, Zebris stance analysis), and ≥ six months (TP2; Fitbit tracking, Zebris analysis, based on modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Majeed Score (MS), and the 12-Item Short Form Survey 12 (SF-12). Fracture healing was assessed by CT. The primary outcome parameter of functional recovery was the per-day step count; the secondary parameter was the subjective outcome assessed by questionnaires. Results. Overall, no baseline differences were observed between the BTS and SP cohorts. In total, 58 (BTS = 19; SP = 39) and 37 patients (BTS = 14; SP = 23) could be recruited at TP1 and TP2, respectively. Mean steps per day at TP1 were median 308 (248 to 434) in the BTS group and 254 (196 to 446) in the SP group. At TP2, median steps per day were 3,759 (2,551 to 3,926) in the BTS group and 3,191 (2,872 to 3,679) in the SP group, each with no significant difference. A significant improvement was observed in each group (p < 0.001) between timepoints. BTS patients obtained better results than SP patients in ODI (p < 0.030), MS (p = 0.007), and SF-12 physical status (p = 0.006). In all cases, CT showed sufficient fracture healing of the posterior ring. Conclusion. Both groups showed significant outcome improvement and sufficient fracture healing. Both techniques can be recommended for BFFS, although BTS was superior with respect to subjective outcome. Step-count tracking represents a reliable method to evaluate the mobility level. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):462–468

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the current incidence and epidemiology of humeral diaphyseal fractures. The secondary aim was to explore variation in patient and injury characteristics by fracture location within the humeral diaphysis. Methods. Over ten years (2008 to 2017), all adult patients (aged ≥ 16 years) sustaining an acute fracture of the humeral diaphysis managed at the study centre were retrospectively identified from a trauma database. Patient age, sex, medical/social background, injury mechanism, fracture classification, and associated injuries were recorded and analyzed. Results. A total of 900 fractures (typical 88.9%, n = 800/900; pathological 8.3%, n = 75/900; periprosthetic 2.8%, n = 25/900) were identified in 898 patients (mean age 57 years (16 to 97), 55.5% (n = 498/898) female). Overall fracture incidence was 12.6/100,000/year. For patients with a typical fracture (n = 798, mean age 56 years (16 to 96), 55.1% (n = 440/798) female), there was a bimodal distribution in men and unimodal distribution in older women (Type G). A fall from standing was the most common injury mechanism (72.6%, n = 581/800). The majority of fractures involved the middle-third of the diaphysis (47.6%, n = 381/800) followed by the proximal- (30.5%, n = 244/800) and distal-thirds (n = 175/800, 21.9%). In all, 18 injuries (2.3%) were open and a radial nerve palsy occurred in 6.7% (n = 53/795). Fractures involving the proximal- and middle-thirds were more likely to occur in older (p < 0.001), female patients (p < 0.001) with comorbidities (p < 0.001) after a fall from standing (p < 0.001). Proximal-third fractures were also more likely to occur in patients with alcohol excess (p = 0.003) and to be classified as AO-Orthopaedic Trauma Association type B or C injuries (p < 0.001). Conclusion. This study updates the incidence and epidemiology of humeral diaphyseal fractures. Important differences in patient and injury characteristics were observed based upon fracture location. Injuries involving the proximal- and middle-thirds of the humeral diaphysis should be considered as fragility fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1475–1483

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

This multicentre prospective clinical trial aimed to determine whether early administration of alendronate (ALN) delays fracture healing after surgical treatment of fractures of the distal radius. The study population comprised 80 patients (four men and 76 women) with a mean age of 70 years (52 to 86) with acute fragility fractures of the distal radius requiring open reduction and internal fixation with a volar locking plate and screws. Two groups of 40 patients each were randomly allocated either to receive once weekly oral ALN administration (35 mg) within a few days after surgery and continued for six months, or oral ALN administration delayed until four months after surgery. Postero-anterior and lateral radiographs of the affected wrist were taken monthly for six months after surgery. No differences between groups was observed with regard to gender (p = 1.0), age (p = 0.916), fracture classification (p = 0.274) or bone mineral density measured at the spine (p = 0.714). The radiographs were assessed by three independent assessors. There were no significant differences in the mean time to complete cortical bridging observed between the ALN group (3.5 months (se 0.16)) and the no-ALN group (3.1 months (se 0.15)) (p = 0.068). All the fractures healed in the both groups by the last follow-up. Improvement of the Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score, grip strength, wrist range of movement, and tenderness over the fracture site did not differ between the groups over the six-month period. Based on our results, early administration of ALN after surgery for distal radius fracture did not appear to delay fracture healing times either radiologically or clinically.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1544–50.

Aims. Hip fracture is a common condition of the older, frailer person. This population is also at risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is important to understand the impact of coexistent hip fracture and SARS-CoV-2 for informed decision-making at patient and service levels. Methods. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies of older (> 60 years) people with fragility hip fractures and outcomes with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was early (30-day or in-hospital) mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay and key clinical characteristics known to be associated with outcomes after hip fracture. Results. A total of 14 cohort and five case series studies were included (692 SARS-CoV-2 positive, 2,585 SARS-CoV-2 negative). SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an overall risk ratio (RR) for early mortality of 4.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.42 to 5.82). Early mortality was 34% (95% CI 30% to 38%) and 9% (95% CI 8% to 10%) in the infected and noninfected groups respectively. Length of stay was increased in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (mean difference (MD) 5.2 days (3.2 to 7.2)). Age (MD 1.6 years (0.3 to 2.9)); female sex (RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.05)); admission from home (RR 0.51 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.00)); presence of dementia (RR 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.43)); and intracapsular fracture (RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.11)) were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There were statistically, but not clinically, significantly greater Nottingham Hip Fracture Scores in infected compared with non-infected patients (MD 0.7 (0.4 to 0.9)). Conclusion. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with worse outcomes after hip fracture. This is not explained by differences in patient characteristics. These data can be used to support informed decision-making and may help track the impact of widespread adoption of system-level and therapeutic changes in management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):314–322

Aims. We assessed the value of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the prediction of adverse outcome after hip fracture. Methods. Of 1,577 consecutive patients aged > 65 years with a fragility hip fracture admitted to one institution, for whom there were complete data, 1,255 (72%) were studied. Clinicians assigned CFS scores on admission. Audit personnel routinely prospectively completed the Standardised Audit of Hip Fracture in Europe form, including the following outcomes: 30-day survival; in-hospital complications; length of acute hospital stay; and new institutionalization. The relationship between the CFS scores and outcomes was examined graphically and the visual interpretations were tested statistically. The predictive values of the CFS and Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) to predict 30-day mortality were compared using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Results. Significant non-linear associations between CFS and outcomes were observed. Risk of death within 30 days rose linearly for CFS 1 to 5, but plateaued for CFS > 5. The incidence of complications and length of stay rose linearly for CFS 1 to 4, but plateaued for CFS > 4. In contrast, the risk of new institutionalization rose linearly for CFS 1 to 8. The AUCs for 30-day mortality for the CFS and NHFS were very similar: CFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69) and NHFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69). Conclusion. Use of the CFS may provide useful information on outcomes for fitter patients presenting with hip fracture, but completion of the CFS by the admitting orthopaedic team does not appear successful in distinguishing between higher CFS categories, which define patients with frailty. This makes a strong case for the role of the orthogeriatrician in the early assessment of these patients. Further work is needed to understand why patients assessed as being of mild, moderate, and severe frailty do not result in different outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):980–986

Aims

Current levels of hip fracture morbidity contribute greatly to the overall burden on health and social care services. Given the anticipated ageing of the population over the coming decade, there is potential for this burden to increase further, although the exact scale of impact has not been identified in contemporary literature. We therefore set out to predict the future incidence of hip fracture and help inform appropriate service provision to maintain an adequate standard of care.

Aims. Ankle fractures are common injuries and the third most common fragility fracture. In all, 40% of ankle fractures in the frail are open and represent a complex clinical scenario, with morbidity and mortality rates similar to hip fracture patients. They have a higher risk of complications, such as wound infections, malunion, hospital-acquired infections, pressure sores, veno-thromboembolic events, and significant sarcopaenia from prolonged bed rest. Methods. A modified Delphi method was used and a group of experts with a vested interest in best practice were invited from the British Foot and Ankle Society (BOFAS), British Orthopaedic Association (BOA), Orthopaedic Trauma Society (OTS), British Association of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgeons (BAPRAS), British Geriatric Society (BGS), and the British Limb Reconstruction Society (BLRS). Results. In the first stage, there were 36 respondents to the survey, with over 70% stating their unit treats more than 20 such cases per year. There was a 50:50 split regarding if the timing of surgery should be within 36 hours, as per the hip fracture guidelines, or 72 hours, as per the open fracture guidelines. Overall, 75% would attempt primary wound closure and 25% would utilize a local flap. There was no orthopaedic agreement on fixation, and 75% would permit weightbearing immediately. In the second stage, performed at the BLRS meeting, experts discussed the survey results and agreed upon a consensus for the management of open elderly ankle fractures. Conclusion. A mutually agreed consensus from the expert panel was reached to enable the best practice for the management of patients with frailty with an open ankle fracture: 1) all units managing lower limb fragility fractures should do so through a cohorted multidisciplinary pathway. This pathway should follow the standards laid down in the "care of the older or frail orthopaedic trauma patient" British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guideline. These patients have low bone density, and we should recommend full falls and bone health assessment; 2) all open lower limb fragility fractures should be treated in a single stage within 24 hours of injury if possible; 3) all patients with fragility fractures of the lower limb should be considered for mobilisation on the day following surgery; 4) all patients with lower limb open fragility fractures should be considered for tissue sparing, with judicious debridement as a default; 5) all patients with open lower limb fragility fractures should be managed by a consultant plastic surgeon with primary closure wherever possible; and 6) the method of fixation must allow for immediate unrestricted weightbearing. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(3):236–242

Aims. The purpose of this study was to determine the weightbearing practice of operatively managed fragility fractures in the setting of publically funded health services in the UK and Ireland. Methods. The Fragility Fracture Postoperative Mobilisation (FFPOM) multicentre audit included all patients aged 60 years and older undergoing surgery for a fragility fracture of the lower limb between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2019, and 1 February 2021 and 14 March 2021. Fractures arising from high-energy transfer trauma, patients with multiple injuries, and those associated with metastatic deposits or infection were excluded. We analyzed this patient cohort to determine adherence to the British Orthopaedic Association Standard, “all surgery in the frail patient should be performed to allow full weight-bearing for activities required for daily living”. Results. A total of 19,557 patients (mean age 82 years (SD 9), 16,241 having a hip fracture) were included. Overall, 16,614 patients (85.0%) were instructed to perform weightbearing where required for daily living immediately postoperatively (15,543 (95.7%) hip fracture and 1,071 (32.3%) non-hip fracture patients). The median length of stay was 12.2 days (interquartile range (IQR) 7.9 to 20.0) (12.6 days (IQR 8.2 to 20.4) for hip fracture and 10.3 days (IQR 5.5 to 18.7) for non-hip fracture patients). Conclusion. Non-hip fracture patients experienced more postoperative weightbearing restrictions, although they had a shorter hospital stay. Patients sustaining fractures of the shaft and distal femur had a longer median length of stay than demographically similar patients who received hip fracture surgery. We have shown a significant disparity in weightbearing restrictions placed on patients with fragility fractures, despite the publication of a national guideline. Surgeons intentionally restrict postoperative weightbearing in the majority of non-hip fractures, yet are content with unrestricted weightbearing following operations for hip fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):972–979

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

Introduction. Ankle fractures in the elderly have been increasing with an ageing but active population and bring with them specific challenges. Medical co-morbidities, a poor soft tissue envelope and a requirement for early mobilisation to prevent morbidity and mortality, all create potential pitfalls to successful treatment. As a result, different techniques have been employed to try and improve outcomes. Total contact casting, both standard and enhanced open reduction internal fixation, external fixation and most recently tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing have all been proposed as suitable treatment modalities. Over the past five years popular literature has begun to herald TTC nailing as an appropriate and contemporary solution to the complex problem of high-risk ankle fragility fractures. We sought to assess whether, within our patient cohort, the outcomes seen supported the statement that TTC has equal outcomes to more traditional open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) when used to treat the high-risk ankle fragility fracture. Materials & Methods. Results of ORIF versus TTC nailing without joint preparation for treatment of fragility ankle fractures were evaluated via retrospective cohort study of 64 patients with high-risk fragility ankle fractures without our trauma centre. We aimed to assess whether results within our unit were equal to those seen within other published studies. Patients were matched 1:1 based on gender, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and ASA score. Patient demographics, AO/OTA fracture classification, intra-operative and post-operative complications, discharge destination, union rates, FADI scores and patient mobility were recorded. Results. There were 32 patients within each arm. Mean age was 78.4 (TTC) and 78.3 (ORIF). The CCI was 5.9 in each group respectively with mean ASA 2.9 (TTC) and 2.8 (ORIF). There were two open fractures within each group. Median follow up duration was 26 months. Time to theatre from injury was 8.0 days (TTC) versus 3.3 days (ORIF). There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day, one year or overall mortality at final follow up. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis did however demonstrate that of those patients who died post-operatively the mean time to mortality was significantly shorter in those treated with TTC nailing versus ORIF (20.3 months versus 38.2 months, p=0.013). There was no statistical difference in the overall complication rate between the two groups (46.9% versus 25%, p=0.12). The re-operation rate was twice as high in patients treated with TTC nailing however this was not statistically significant. There was no statistical difference in the FADI scores at final follow up, 72.1±12.9 (TTC) versus 67.9±13.9 (ORIF) nor post-operative mobility status. Conclusions. Within our study TTC nailing with an unprepared joint demonstrated broadly equivalent results to ORIF in the management of high-risk ankle fragility fractures; this replicates findings of previous studies. We did however observe that mean survival was significantly shorter in the TTC group than those treated with ORIF. We believe this may have been contributed to by a delay to theatre due to TTC stabilisation being treated as a sub-specialist operation in our unit at the time. We propose that both TTC and ORIF are satisfactory techniques to stabilise the frail ankle fracture however, similarly to the other fragility fractures, the priority should be on an emergent operation in a timely fashion in order to minimise the associated morbidity and mortality. Further randomised control studies are needed within the area to establish definitive results and a working consensus

Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is an essential part of orthopaedic surgeries in preventing life-threatening thromboembolic events such as Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and Pulmonary Embolism (PE). Orthopaedic surgery has the highest incidence rate of thromboembolic events as compared to any other surgical specialities, making it an essential component in managing any orthopaedic case. At Queen's Medical Centre (QMC), a major trauma centre in the United Kingdom (UK), sees up to 750 NOF fracture cases annually, making it one of the busiest trauma and orthopaedic centres in the UK. Our study aims to evaluate how VTE Prophylaxis is conducted in a UK Major Trauma Centre for NOF and pelvic fragility fractures and how human factors can improve its efficacy. The Nottingham University Hospitals (NUH) Trust has implemented new guidelines from August 2019 that patients with fragility fractures such as NOF and pelvic fractures are prescribed with 28 days VTE prophylaxis with Enoxaparin, or their own anti-coagulants if risk of thrombosis exceed the risk of bleeding. This is an adaptation from the trust to align their guidelines closer to the NICE 2018 guidelines. We will be evaluating the initial compliance of VTE Prophylaxis, identify and utilise human factors, then re-analyse the department after implementing interventions on the same batch of junior doctors working in the department. Data of 100 patients with fragility fractures were collected, 50 consecutive patients in the pre-intervention window during August 2019 and 50 in the post-intervention window during November 2019. The pre-intervention data had 43 NOF and 7 Pelvic fractures. Our study showed that 93% of NOF fracture and 100% of pelvic fracture received the correct course of VTE prophylaxis. The data was presented at the local department junior doctor academic session. Three simple human factor interventions were implemented over the course of September and October: Education to the trauma and orthopaedic department on the new guideline, extended VTE labels on drug charts for patients with fragility fractures, VTE reminder labels at doctors' stations. Another 50 consecutive patients' data were collected during November 2019. Data shows that 97.8% of NOF (p>0.05) and 60% of pelvic fracture (p>0.05) received the correct course of VTE prophylaxis. Our data has shown an increase in correct VTE prescription for NOF fracture patients, which is the main bulk of our fragility fracture patients whilst we see a drop in pelvic fracture patients. Due to the limited time frame of four months where junior doctors in the UK rotate between specialities, we are only able to collect data during the first month, implement interventions between datasets and collect data on the final month of the four-month rotation. A future bigger study might provide a more significant result on the department. We believe that the key to achieving 100% VTE prophylaxis in the T&O department is optimising human factors, educating junior doctors, who are not orthopaedic trained, with sufficient information of the guidelines, and evidence of the risk and benefits of providing prolonged VTE prophylaxis for orthopaedic patients. In conclusion, we found that QMC, a major trauma centre with high patient volume and turnover, has a high level of compliance with VTE prophylaxis for fragility fractures and it is imperative that utilising human factors will inch the department closer to its goal of 100% VTE compliance

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

To evaluate the effects of 6 and 18 months of abaloparatide (ABL) compared with placebo (PBO) on bone mineral density (BMD) in the acetabular regions of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (OP). Acetabular bone loss, as may occur in OP, increases risk of acetabular fragility fractures. a. In total hip arthroplasty (THA), low acetabular BMD adversely affects primary stability, osseointegration, and migration of acetabular cups. c. ABL is an osteoanabolic agent for the treatment of men and postmenopausal women with OP at high risk for fracture. Effects of ABL on acetabular BMD are unknown. Hip DXA scans were obtained at baseline, 6, and 18 months from a random subgroup of postmenopausal women (aged 49–86 y) from the phase 3 ACTIVE trial randomized to either ABL 80 µg/d or PBO (n=250/group). Anatomical landmarks were identified in each DXA scan to virtually place a hemispherical shell model of an acetabular cup and define regions of interest corresponding to DeLee & Charnley zones 1 (R1), 2 (R2), and 3 (R3). BMD changes compared to baseline were calculated for each zone. Statistical P values were based on a repeated mixed measures model. BMD in all zones were similar at baseline in the ABL and PBO groups. BMD significantly increased in the ABL group at 6 and 18 months compared with PBO (all P<0.0001 vs PBO). BMD in the PBO group was relatively stable over time. ABL treatment resulted in rapid and progressive increases in BMD of all 3 acetabular zones. Increasing acetabular BMD has the potential to improve acetabular strength, which may reduce risk of acetabular fragility fractures. In bone health optimization prior to THA, increased acetabular BMD via ABL may provide better primary stability and longevity of acetabular cups in postmenopausal women with OP

Fragility ankles fractures in the geriatric population are challenging to manage, due to fracture instability, soft tissue compromise, patient co-morbidities. Traditional management options include open reduction internal fixation, or conservative treatment, both of which are fraught with high complication rates. We aimed to present functional outcomes of elderly patients with fragility ankle fractures treated with tibiotalocalcaneal nails. 171 patients received a tibiotalocalcaneal nail over a six-year period, but only twenty met the inclusion criteria of being over sixty and having poor bone stock, verified by radiological evidence of osteopenia or history of fragility fractures. Primary outcome was mortality risk from co-morbidities, according to the Charlson co-morbidity index (CCI), and patients’ post-operative mobility status compared to pre-operative mobility. Secondary outcomes include intra-operative and post-operative complications, six-month mortality rate, time to mobilisation and union. The mean age was 77.82 years old, five of whom are type 2 diabetics. The average CCI was 5.05. Thirteen patients returned to their pre-operative mobility state. Patients with low CCI are more likely to return to pre-operative mobility status (p=0.16; OR=4.00). Average time to bone union and mobilisation were 92.5 days and 7.63 days, respectively. Mean post-operative AOFAS ankle-hindfoot and Olerud-Molander scores were 53.0 (range 17-88) and 50.9 (range 20-85), respectively. There were four cases of broken distal locking screws, and four cases of superficial infection. Patients with high CCI were more likely to acquire superficial infections (p=0.264, OR=3.857). There were no deep infections, periprosthetic fractures, nail breakages, non-unions. TTC nailing is an effective treatment methodology for low-demand geriatric patients with fragility ankle fractures. This technique leads to low complication rates and early mobilisation. It is not a life-changing procedure, with many able to return to their pre-operative mobility status, which is important for preventing the loss of socioeconomic independence