Aims. To assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compares three treatments for acetabular fractures in older patients: surgical fixation, surgical fixation and hip arthroplasty (fix-and-replace), and non-surgical treatment. Methods. Patients were recruited from seven UK NHS centres and randomized to a three-arm pilot trial if aged older than 60 years and had a displaced acetabular fracture.
This study sought to compare the rate of deep surgical site infection (SSI), as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition, after surgery for a fracture of the hip between patients treated with standard dressings and those treated with incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT). Secondary objectives included determining the rate of recruitment and willingness to participate in the trial. The study was a two-arm multicentre randomized controlled feasibility trial that was embedded in the World Hip Trauma Evaluation cohort study. Any patient aged > 65 years having surgery for hip fracture at five recruitment centres in the UK was considered to be eligible. They were randomly allocated to have either a standard dressing or iNPWT after closure of the wound. The primary outcome measure was deep SSI at 30 and 90 days, diagnosed according to the CDC criteria. Secondary outcomes were: rate of recruitment; further surgery within 120 days; health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the EuroQol five-level five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L); and related complications within 120 days as well as mobility and residential status at this time.Aims
Methods
Distal radial fractures are the most common fracture sustained by the adult population. Most can be treated using cast immobilization without the need for surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a definitive trial comparing the commonly used fibreglass cast immobilization with an alternative product called Woodcast. Woodcast is a biodegradable casting material with theoretical benefits in terms of patient comfort as well as benefits to the environment. This was a multicentre, two-arm, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled feasibility trial. Patients with a fracture of the distal radius aged 16 years and over were recruited from four centres in the UK and randomized (1:1) to receive a Woodcast or fibreglass cast. Data were collected on participant recruitment and retention, clinical efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full-scale, appropriately powered, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing internal fracture fixation and distal femoral replacement (DFR) for distal femoral fractures in older patients. Seven centres recruited patients into the study. Patients were eligible if they were greater than 65 years of age with a distal femoral fracture, and if the surgeon felt that they were suitable for either form of treatment. Outcome measures included the patients’ willingness to participate, clinicians’ willingness to recruit, rates of loss to follow-up, the ability to capture data, estimates of standard deviation to inform the sample size calculation, and the main determinants of cost. The primary clinical outcome measure was the EuroQol five-dimensional index (EQ-5D) at six months following injury.Aims
Patients and Methods
Outcome measures quantifying aspects of health in a precise,
efficient, and user-friendly manner are in demand. Computer adaptive
tests (CATs) may overcome the limitations of established fixed scales
and be more adept at measuring outcomes in trauma. The primary objective
of this review was to gain a comprehensive understanding of the
psychometric properties of CATs compared with fixed-length scales
in the assessment of outcome in patients who have suffered trauma
of the upper limb. Study designs, outcome measures and methodological
quality are defined, along with trends in investigation. A search of multiple electronic databases was undertaken on 1
January 2017 with terms related to “CATs”, “orthopaedics”, “trauma”,
and “anatomical regions”. Studies involving adults suffering trauma
to the upper limb, and undergoing any intervention, were eligible.
Those involving the measurement of outcome with any CATs were included.
Identification, screening, and eligibility were undertaken, followed
by the extraction of data and quality assessment using the Consensus-Based
Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) criteria.
The review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria and reg istered (PROSPERO: CRD42016053886).Aims
Materials and Methods
