Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 10 | Pages 920 - 928
21 Oct 2024
Bell KR Oliver WM White TO Molyneux SG Graham C Clement ND Duckworth AD

Aims. The primary aim of this study is to quantify and compare outcomes following a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius in elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) who are managed conservatively versus with surgical fixation (open reduction and internal fixation). Secondary aims are to assess and compare upper limb-specific function, health-related quality of life, wrist pain, complications, grip strength, range of motion, radiological parameters, healthcare resource use, and cost-effectiveness between the groups. Methods. A prospectively registered (ISRCTN95922938) randomized parallel group trial will be conducted. Elderly patients meeting the inclusion criteria with a dorsally displaced distal radius facture will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to either conservative management (cast without further manipulation) or surgery. Patients will be assessed at six, 12, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks post intervention. The primary outcome measure and endpoint will be the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) at 52 weeks. In addition, the abbreviated version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire, pain score (visual analogue scale 1 to 10), complications, grip strength (dynamometer), range of motion (goniometer), and radiological assessments will be undertaken. A cost-utility analysis will be performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgery. We aim to recruit 89 subjects per arm (total sample size 178). Discussion. The results of this study will help guide treatment of dorsally displaced distal radial fractures in the elderly and assess whether surgery offers functional benefit to patients. This is an important finding, as the number of elderly distal radial fractures is estimated to increase in the future due to the ageing population. Evidence-based management strategies are therefore required to ensure the best outcome for the patient and to optimize the use of increasingly scarce healthcare resources. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(10):920–928


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 9 | Pages 736 - 741
4 Sep 2024
Farr S Mataric T Kroyer B Barik S

Aims. The paediatric trigger thumb is a distinct clinical entity with unique anatomical abnormalities. The aim of this study was to present the long-term outcomes of A1 pulley release in idiopathic paediatric trigger thumbs based on established patient-reported outcome measures. Methods. This study was a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study conducted at a tertiary care orthopaedic centre. All cases of idiopathic paediatric trigger thumbs which underwent A1 pulley release between 2004 and 2011 and had a minimum follow-up period of ten years were included in the study. The abbreviated version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH) was administered as an online survey, and ipsi- and contralateral thumb motion was assessed. Results. A total of 67 patients completed the survey, of whom 63 (94%) had full interphalangeal joint extension or hyperextension. Severe metacarpophalangeal joint hyperextension (> 40°) was documented in 15 cases (22%). The median QuickDASH score was 0 (0 to 61), indicating excellent function at a median follow-up of 15 years (10 to 19). Overall satisfaction was high, with 56 patients (84%) reporting the maximal satisfaction score of 5. Among 37 patients who underwent surgery at age ≤ two years, 34 (92%) reported the largest satisfaction, whereas this was the case for 22 of 30 patients (73%) with surgery at aged > two years (p = 0.053). Notta’s nodule resolved in 49 patients (73%) at final follow-up. No residual triggering or revision surgery was observed. Conclusion. Surgical release of A1 pulley in paediatric trigger thumb is an acceptable procedure with excellent functional long-term outcomes. There was a trend towards higher satisfaction with earlier surgery among the patients. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(9):736–741


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 9 | Pages 729 - 735
3 Sep 2024
Charalambous CP Hirst JT Kwaees T Lane S Taylor C Solanki N Maley A Taylor R Howell L Nyangoma S Martin FL Khan M Choudhry MN Shetty V Malik RA

Aims. Steroid injections are used for subacromial pain syndrome and can be administered via the anterolateral or posterior approach to the subacromial space. It is not currently known which approach is superior in terms of improving clinical symptoms and function. This is the protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare the clinical effectiveness of a steroid injection given via the anterolateral or the posterior approach to the subacromial space. Methods. The Subacromial Approach Injection Trial (SAInT) study is a single-centre, parallel, two-arm RCT. Participants will be allocated on a 1:1 basis to a subacromial steroid injection via either the anterolateral or the posterior approach to the subacromial space. Participants in both trial arms will then receive physiotherapy as standard of care for subacromial pain syndrome. The primary analysis will compare the change in Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) at three months after injection. Secondary outcomes include the change in OSS at six and 12 months, as well as the Pain Numeric Rating Scale (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain), Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH), and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (RAND) at three months, six months, and one year after injection. Assessment of pain experienced during the injection will also be determined. A minimum of 86 patients will be recruited to obtain an 80% power to detect a minimally important difference of six points on the OSS change between the groups at three months after injection. Conclusion. The results of this trial will demonstrate if there is a difference in shoulder pain and function after a subacromial space steroid injection between the anterolateral versus posterior approach in patients with subacromial pain syndrome. This will help to guide treatment for patients with subacromial pain syndrome. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(9):729–735