Introduction. Hip fracture is a worldwide problem, not only as far as epidemiology is concerned but also regarding economical issues. Surgery is the current standard treatment. However owing to age, and patients co-morbidities complications are common. Surgical site infection is directly related to operative procedure, and surgeons' experience may be very important when making plans for outcome improvement. In this paper we study the role of hip surgeons versus general orthopaedic surgeons in relation to postoperative site infection. Operative hypothesis determines that hip surgeons have less infection rates than general orthopaedic surgeons. Null hypothesis that infection rates are rather the same. Material and Methods. In a prospective controlled cohort study 820 patients presenting with a hip fracture were randomizelly operated on by a group of orthopaedic surgeons of the same Hospital Department. Patients were then classified according to surgeons adscription either to a Hip Unit (Group A=215 cases) or not (Group B=605). Variables studied included age, gender, treatment (osteosynthesis or joint replacement), co-morbidities (according to Charlson, s index), and infection rate. Fisher, and Ranksum statistical tests, and simple and multiple logistic regression, for univariate and multivariate, analysis was performed. Results. 237 (28,93 %) patients were male, and 583 (71,06 %) females. Mean age for both groups was 77,58 years (r=16−105; group A=78, group B=81). 215 patients were included in group A, and 605 in group B. 534 (65.12%) underwent an osteosynthesis, and 272 (33,17%) a joint replacement. 14 patients were not operated. Both groups were homogeneous regarding gender, surgical technique, Charlson's index, and functional outcome (Fisher test p=0,777). 17 patients (2,073%) sustained a surgical site infection (group A=7 cases out of 215 [3,27%], and group B=10 cases out of 605 [1,65%]). Multivariate logistic regression showed that there was no relation between gender, surgical site infection, Charlson index, surgical technique, or groups (A or B). Only age was a determinant factor (Raksum test p=0,003; OR 95% CI=1,08, p=0,005). Conclusion. Since there are no differences in the outcomes between surgeons dedicated to a Hip Unit and general orthopaedic surgeons as far as postoperative surgical site infection is concerned, delaying operative treatment for hip fracture or creating a special Unit for that is unworthy. Only age appears as a significant variable

The aim of this retrospective study was to review a series of patients with ipsilateral fractures of the neck of the scapula and of the clavicle. Between 1991 and 1996 a total of 79 general and orthopaedic surgeons treated 46 patients with a floating shoulder in The Netherlands. The records and radiographs of these patients were studied. Of the 35 patients available for follow-up, 31 had initially been treated conservatively and four by operation; three underwent secondary reconstructive surgery. The mean Constant score for the 28 patients treated conservatively was 76 and for the seven treated operatively it was 71 at a mean follow-up of 35 months. In six of the 28 patients treated conservatively the glenoid was dislocated caudally at the end of treatment; they had a score of 42. In the 22 patients without this dislocation the score was 85. We conclude that this rare injury is not inherently unstable and, in the absence of caudal dislocation of the glenoid, conservative treatment gives a good functional outcome

Aims

To compare results of institutional preferences with regard to treatment of soft tissues in the setting of open tibial shaft fractures.

We present our experience of managing patients with iatropathic brachial plexus injury after delayed fixation of a fracture of the clavicle. It is a retrospective cohort study of patients treated at our peripheral nerve injury unit and a single illustrative case report. We identified 21 patients in whom a brachial plexus injury occurred as a direct consequence of fixation of a fracture of the clavicle between September 2000 and September 2011.

The predominant injury involved the C5/C6 nerves, upper trunk, lateral cord and the suprascapular nerve. In all patients, the injured nerve was found to be tethered to the under surface of the clavicle by scar tissue at the site of the fracture and was usually associated with pathognomonic neuropathic pain and paralysis.

Delayed fixation of a fracture of the clavicle, especially between two and four weeks after injury, can result in iatropathic brachial plexus injury. The risk can be reduced by thorough release of the tissues from the inferior surface of the clavicle before mobilisation of the fracture fragments. If features of nerve damage appear post-operatively urgent specialist referral is recommended.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:106–10.