Aims

Patients with A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures represent a substantial proportion of trauma caseload, and national guidelines recommend that sliding hip screws (SHS) should be used for these injuries. Despite this, intramedullary nails (IMNs) are routinely implanted in many hospitals, at extra cost and with unproven patient outcome benefit. We have used data from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) to examine the use of SHS and IMN for A1 and A2 hip fractures at a national level, and to define the cost implications of management decisions that run counter to national guidelines.

The primary aim of this study was to undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of acute fixation versus conservative management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. The secondary aim was to conduct a sensitivity analysis of patient characteristics that may influence a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained (QALY).

A CEA was conducted from a randomised control trial comparing conservative management (n=92) to acute plate fixation (n=86) of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to express the cost per QALY. The short form 6-dimensional (SF-6D) score was the preference based index to calculate the cost per QALY.

The 12-month SF-6D advantage of acute fixation over conservative management was 0.0085 (p=0.464) with a mean cost difference of £4,096.22 and resultant ICER of £481,908.24/QALY. For a threshold of £20,000/QALY the benefit of acute fixation would need to be present for 24.1 years. Linear regression analysis identified nonunion as the only independent factor to influence the SF-6D at 12-months (p<0.001). Conservatively managed fractures that resulted in a nonunion (n=16) had a significantly worse SF-6D compared to acute fixation (0.0723, p=0.001) with comparable healthcare cost at 12-months (£170.12 difference). Modelling the ICER of acute fixation against those complicated by a nonunion proved to be cost effective at £2,352.97/QALY at 12-months.

Routine plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures is not cost-effective. Patients with nonunion after conservative management have increased morbidity with comparable expense to those undergoing acute fixation which suggests targeting these patients is a more cost-effective strategy.

We compared a new fixation system, the Targon Femoral Neck (TFN) hip screw, with the current standard treatment of cannulated screw fixation. This was a single-centre, participant-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Patients aged 65 years and over with either a displaced or undisplaced intracapsular fracture of the hip were eligible. The primary outcome was the risk of revision surgery within one year of fixation.

A total of 174 participants were included in the trial. The absolute reduction in risk of revision was of 4.7% (95% CI 14.2 to 22.5) in favour of the TFN hip screw (chi-squared test, p = 0.741), which was less than the pre-specified level of minimum clinically important difference. There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcome measures.

We found no evidence of a clinical difference in the risk of revision surgery between the TFN hip screw and cannulated screw fixation for patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:652–7.

Background. Randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) are generally accepted as the “gold standard” for the provision of the most unbiased measures of the efficacy of interventions but are often criticized for the lack of external validity. We assessed the external validity of a RCT examining the efficacy of local infiltration analgesia (LIA) compared with continuous epidural infusion after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. During a one-year period, all patients consecutively admitted for elective, unilateral, primary TKA were identified as potential participants. All underwent eligibility screening to determine who were eligible for participation in a randomized controlled trial. We investigated the distribution of preoperative characteristics and postoperative variables among excluded patients, non-consenters, and enrolled and randomized participants. Results. In all 157 patients were identified as potential participants. Only 49 patients (31%) were enrolled and randomized. A significant difference was found in both preoperative characteristics and clinical outcome variables. Non-participants were less healthy and needed more help from the home care service than did participants. Furthermore, they were hospitalized longer. Interpretation. Our findings demonstrate the importance of reporting the results of RCTs in a way that allows clinicians to judge to whom the results can reasonably be applied

Aims

Hip fracture commonly affects the frailest patients, of whom many are care-dependent, with a disproportionate risk of contracting COVID-19. We examined the impact of COVID-19 infection on hip fracture mortality in England.

Introduction. The degeneration of the adjacent segment in lumbar spine with spondylodesis is well known, though the exact incidence and the mechanism is not clear. Several implants with semi rigid or dynamic behavior are available to reduce the biomechanical loads and to prevent an adjacent segment disease (ASD). Randomized controlled trials are not published. We investigated the biomechanical influence of dynamic and semi rigid implants on the adjacent segment in cadaver lumbar spine with monosegmental fusion (MF). Materials and Methods. 14 fresh cadaver lumbar spines were prepared; capsules and ligaments were kept intact. Pure rotanional moments of ±7.5 Nm were applied with a Zwick 1456 universal testing machine without preload in lateral bending and flexion/extension. The intradiscal pressure (IDP) and the range of motion (ROM) were measured in the segments L2/3 and L3/4 in following situations: in the native spine, monosegmental fusion L4/5 (MF), MF with dynamic rod to L3/4 (Dynabolt), MF with interspinous implant L3/4 (Coflex), and semi rigid fusion with PEEK rod (CD Horizon Legacy) L3-L5. Results. Under flexion load all implants reduced the IDP of segment L2/L3, whereas the IDP in the segment L3/4 was increased using interspinous implants in comparison to the other groups. The IDP was reduced in extension in both segments for all semi rigid or dynamic implants. Compared under extension to the native spine the MF had no influence on the IDP of the adjacent disc. The rod instrumentation (Dynabolt, PEEK rod) lead to a decreased IDP in lateral bending tests. The ROM in L3 was reduced in all groups compared to the native spine. The dynamic and semi rigid stabilization in the segment L3/4 limited the ROM more than the MF. Discussion. The MF reduced the ROM in all directions, whereas the IDP of the adjacent segment remained unaffected. The support of the adjacent segment by semi rigid and dynamic implants decreased the IDP of both segments in extension mainly. This fact is an agreement with other studies. Compared to our data, no significant effect on the adjacent levels was observed. Interestingly, in our study, the IDP of the adjacent segment is unaffected by MF. The biomechanical influence in the view of an ASD could be comprehended, but is not completely clear. The fact of persistent IDP in the adjacent segment suggests that MF has a lower effect on the adjacent segment degeneration as presumed. Biomechanical studies with human cadaver lumbar spines are limited and depend on age and degenerative situation. The effect on supporting implants on adjacent segment disease in lumbar spine surgery has to be investigated in clinical long term studies