Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 10 | Pages 801 - 807
23 Oct 2023
Walter N Szymski D Kurtz SM Lowenberg DW Alt V Lau EC Rupp M

Aims. This work aimed at answering the following research questions: 1) What is the rate of mechanical complications, nonunion and infection for head/neck femoral fractures, intertrochanteric fractures, and subtrochanteric fractures in the elderly USA population? and 2) Which factors influence adverse outcomes?. Methods. Proximal femoral fractures occurred between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2019 were identified from the Medicare Physician Service Records Data Base. The Kaplan-Meier method with Fine and Gray sub-distribution adaptation was used to determine rates for nonunion, infection, and mechanical complications. Semiparametric Cox regression model was applied incorporating 23 measures as covariates to identify risk factors. Results. Union failure occured in 0.89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 0.95) after head/neck fracturs, in 0.92% (95% CI 0.84 to 1.01) after intertrochanteric fracture and in 1.99% (95% CI 1.69 to 2.33) after subtrochanteric fractures within 24 months. A fracture-related infection was more likely to occur after subtrochanteric fractures than after head/neck fractures (1.64% vs 1.59%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.01 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.17); p < 0.001) as well as after intertrochanteric fractures (1.64% vs 1.13%, HR 1.31 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.52); p < 0.001). Anticoagulant use, cerebrovascular disease, a concomitant fracture, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, open fracture, and rheumatoid disease was identified as risk factors. Mechanical complications after 24 months were most common after head/neck fractures with 3.52% (95% CI 3.41 to 3.64; currently at risk: 48,282). Conclusion. The determination of complication rates for each fracture type can be useful for informed patient-clinician communication. Risk factors for complications could be identified for distinct proximal femur fractures in elderly patients, which are accessible for therapeutical treatment in the management. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(10):801–807


Displaced acetabular fractures in the older patient present significant treatment challenges. There is evidence the morbidity and mortality associated is similar to the fractured neck of femur cohort. Despite growing literature, there remains significant controversy regarding treatment algorithms; varying between conservative management, to fracture fixation and finally surgical fixation and simultaneous THA to allow immediate full weight bearing. £250k NIHR, Research for Patient Benefit (Ref: PB-PG-0815-20054). Trial ethical approval (17/EE/0271). After national consultation, 3 arms included; conservative management, fracture fixation and simultaneous fracture fixation with THA. Statistical analysis required minimum 12 patients/3 arms to show feasibility, with an optimum 20/arm. Inclusion criteria; patients >60 years & displaced acetabular fracture. Exclusion criteria: open fracture, THA in situ, pre-injury immobility, polytrauma. Primary outcome measure - ability recruit & EQ-5D-5L at 6 months. Secondary outcome measures (9 months); OHS, Disability Rating Index, radiographs, perioperative physiological variables including surgery duration, blood loss, complications and health economics. 11 UK level 1 major trauma centres enrolled into the trial, commenced December 2017. Failure surgical equipoise was identified as an issue regarding recruitment. Full trial recruitment (60 patients) achieved; 333 patients screened. 66% male, median age 76 (range 63–93), median BMI 25 (range 18–37), 87% full mental capacity, 77% admitted from own home. 75% fall from standing height. 60% fractures; anterior column posterior hemi-transverse. Trial feasibility confirmed December 2020. Presented data- secondary outcomes that are statistically significant in improvement from baseline for only the fix and replace arm, with acceptable trial complications. Issues are highlighted with conservative management in this patient cohort. Our unique RCT informs design and sample size calculation for a future RCT. It represents the first opportunity to understand the intricacies of these treatment modalities. This RCT provides clinicians with information on how best to provide management for this medically complex patient cohort


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1136 - 1145
14 Sep 2020
Kayani B Onochie E Patil V Begum F Cuthbert R Ferguson D Bhamra JS Sharma A Bates P Haddad FS

Aims

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients continue to require urgent surgery for hip fractures. However, the impact of COVID-19 on perioperative outcomes in these high-risk patients remains unknown. The objectives of this study were to establish the effects of COVID-19 on perioperative morbidity and mortality, and determine any risk factors for increased mortality in patients with COVID-19 undergoing hip fracture surgery.

Methods

This multicentre cohort study included 340 COVID-19-negative patients versus 82 COVID-19-positive patients undergoing surgical treatment for hip fractures across nine NHS hospitals in Greater London, UK. Patients in both treatment groups were comparable for age, sex, body mass index, fracture configuration, and type of surgery performed. Predefined perioperative outcomes were recorded within a 30-day postoperative period. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to identify risk factors associated with increased risk of mortality.


Objectives

The annual incidence of hip fracture is 620 000 in the European Union. The cost of this clinical problem has been estimated at 1.75 million disability-adjusted life years lost, equating to 1.4% of the total healthcare burden in established market economies. Recent guidance from The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) states that research into the clinical and cost effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a treatment for hip fracture is a priority. We asked the question: can a trial investigating THA for hip fracture currently be delivered in the NHS?

Methods

We performed a contemporaneous process evaluation that provides a context for the interpretation of the findings of WHiTE Two – a randomised study of THA for hip fracture. We developed a mixed methods approach to situate the trial centre within the context of wider United Kingdom clinical practice. We focused on fidelity, implementation, acceptability and feasibility of both the trial processes and interventions to stakeholder groups, such as healthcare providers and patients.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 96-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1472 - 1477
1 Nov 2014
Vioreanu MH Parry MC Haddad FS Duncan CP

The Unified Classification System (UCS) emphasises the key principles in the assessment and management of peri-prosthetic fractures complicating partial or total joint replacement.

We tested the inter- and intra-observer agreement for the UCS as applied to the pelvis and femur using 20 examples of peri-prosthetic fracture in 17 patients. Each subtype of the UCS was represented by at least one case. Specialist orthopaedic surgeons (experts) and orthopaedic residents (pre-experts) assessed reliability on two separate occasions.

For the pelvis, the UCS showed inter-observer agreement of 0.837 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.798 to 0.876) for the experts and 0.728 (95% CI 0.689 to 0.767) for the pre-experts. The intra-observer agreement for the experts was 0.861 (95% CI 0.760 to 0.963) and 0.803 (95% 0.688 to 0.918) for the pre-experts. For the femur, the UCS showed an inter-observer kappa value of 0.805 (95% CI 0.765 to 0.845) for the experts and a value of 0.732 (95% CI 0.690 to 0.773) for the pre-experts. The intra-observer agreement was 0.920 (95% CI 0.867 to 0.973) for the experts, and 0.772 (95% CI 0.652 to 0.892) for the pre-experts. This corresponds to a substantial and ‘almost perfect’ inter- and intra-observer agreement for the UCS for peri-prosthetic fractures of the pelvis and femur.

We hope that unifying the terminology of these injuries will assist in their assessment, treatment and outcome.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1472–7.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 96-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1185 - 1191
1 Sep 2014
Middleton RG Uzoigwe CE Young PS Smith R Gosal HS Holt G

We aimed to determine whether cemented hemiarthroplasty is associated with a higher post-operative mortality and rate of re-operation when compared with uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Data on 19 669 patients, who were treated with a hemiarthroplasty following a fracture of the hip in a nine-year period from 2002 to 2011, were extracted from NHS Scotland’s acute admission database (Scottish Morbidity Record, SMR01). We investigated the rate of mortality at day 0, 1, 7, 30, 120 and one-year post-operatively using 12 case-mix variables to determine the independent effect of the method of fixation. At day 0, those with a cemented hemiarthroplasty had a higher rate of mortality (p < 0.001) compared with those with an uncemented hemiarthroplasty, equivalent to one extra death per 424 procedures. By day one this had become one extra death per 338 procedures. Increasing age and the five-year co-morbidity score were noted as independent risk factors. By day seven, the cumulative rate of mortality was less for cemented hemiarthroplasty though this did not reach significance until day 120. The rate of re-operation was significantly higher for uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Despite adjusting for 12 confounding variables, these only accounted for 15% of the observed variability.

The debate about the choice of the method of fixation for a hemiarthroplasty with respect to the rate of mortality or the risk of re-operation may be largely superfluous. Our results suggest that uncemented hemiarthroplasties may have a role to play in elderly patients with significant co-morbid disease.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1185–91.