Aims. Proximal femur fractures treatment can involve anterograde nailing with a single or double cephalic screw. An undesirable failure for this fixation is screw cut-out. In a single-screw nail, a tip-apex distance (TAD) greater than 25 mm has been associated with an increased risk of cut-out. The aim of the study was to examine the role of TAD as a risk factor in a cephalic double-screw nail. Methods. A retrospective study was conducted on 112 patients treated for intertrochanteric femur fracture with a double proximal screw nail (Endovis BA2; EBA2) from January to September 2021. The analyzed variables were age, sex, BMI, comorbidities, fracture type, side, time of surgery, quality of reduction, pre-existing therapy with bisphosphonate for osteoporosis, screw placement in two different views, and TAD. The last follow-up was at 12 months. Logistic regression was used to study the potential factors of screw cut-out, and receiver operating characteristic curve to identify the threshold value. Results. A total of 98 of the 112 patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 65 patients were female (66.3%), the mean age was 83.23 years (SD 7.07), and the mean follow-up was 378 days (SD 36). Cut-out was observed in five patients (5.10%). The variables identified by univariate analysis with p < 0.05 were included in the multivariate logistic regression model were screw placement and TAD. The TAD was significant with an odds ratio (OR) 5.03 (p = 0.012) as the screw placement with an OR 4.35 (p = 0.043) in the anteroposterior view, and OR 10.61 (p = 0.037) in the lateral view. The TAD threshold value identified was 29.50 mm. Conclusion. Our study confirmed the risk factors for cut-out in the double-screw nail are comparable to those in the single screw. We found a TAD value of 29.50 mm to be associated with a risk of cut-out in double-screw nails, when good fracture reduction is granted. This value is higher than the one reported with single-screw nails. Therefore, we suggest the role of TAD should be reconsidered in well-reduced fractures treated with double-screw intramedullary nail. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(6):457–463

Aims. To evaluate if, for orthopaedic trainees, additional cadaveric simulation training or standard training alone yields superior radiological and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation or hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture. Methods. This was a preliminary, pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group randomized controlled trial in nine secondary and tertiary NHS hospitals in England. Researchers were blinded to group allocation. Overall, 40 trainees in the West Midlands were eligible: 33 agreed to take part and were randomized, five withdrew after randomization, 13 were allocated cadaveric training, and 15 were allocated standard training. The intervention was an additional two-day cadaveric simulation course. The control group received standard on-the-job training. Primary outcome was implant position on the postoperative radiograph: tip-apex distance (mm) (DHS) and leg length discrepancy (mm) (hemiarthroplasty). Secondary clinical outcomes were procedure time, length of hospital stay, acute postoperative complication rate, and 12-month mortality. Procedure-specific secondary outcomes were intraoperative radiation dose (for DHS) and postoperative blood transfusion requirement (hemiarthroplasty). Results. Eight female (29%) and 20 male trainees (71%), mean age 29.4 years, performed 317 DHS operations and 243 hemiarthroplasties during ten months of follow-up. Primary analysis was a random effect model with surgeon-level fixed effects of patient condition, patient age, and surgeon experience, with a random intercept for surgeon. Under the intention-to-treat principle, for hemiarthroplasty there was better implant position in favour of cadaveric training, measured by leg length discrepancy ≤ 10 mm (odds ratio (OR) 4.08 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 14.22); p = 0.027). There were significantly fewer postoperative blood transfusions required in patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty by cadaveric-trained compared to standard-trained surgeons (OR 6.00 (95% CI 1.83 to 19.69); p = 0.003). For DHS, there was no significant between-group difference in implant position as measured by tip-apex distance ≤ 25 mm (OR 6.47 (95% CI 0.97 to 43.05); p = 0.053). No between-group differences were observed for any secondary clinical outcomes. Conclusion. Trainees randomized to additional cadaveric training performed hip fracture fixation with better implant positioning and fewer postoperative blood transfusions in hemiarthroplasty. This effect, which was previously unknown, may be a consequence of the intervention. Further study is required. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(8):602–611

Aims. To develop a core outcome set of measurements from postoperative radiographs that can be used to assess technical skill in performing dynamic hip screw (DHS) and hemiarthroplasty, and to validate these against Van der Vleuten’s criteria for effective assessment. Methods. A Delphi exercise was undertaken at a regional major trauma centre to identify candidate measurement items. The feasibility of taking these measurements was tested by two of the authors (HKJ, GTRP). Validity and reliability were examined using the radiographs of operations performed by orthopaedic resident participants (n = 28) of a multicentre randomized controlled educational trial (ISRCTN20431944). Trainees were divided into novice and intermediate groups, defined as having performed < ten or ≥ ten cases each for DHS and hemiarthroplasty at baseline. The procedure-based assessment (PBA) global rating score was assumed as the gold standard assessment for the purposes of concurrent validity. Intra- and inter-rater reliability testing were performed on a random subset of 25 cases. Results. In total, 327 DHS and 248 hemiarthroplasty procedures were performed by 28 postgraduate year (PGY) 3 to 5 orthopaedic trainees during the 2014 to 2015 surgical training year at nine NHS hospitals in the West Midlands, UK. Overall, 109 PBAs were completed for DHS and 80 for hemiarthroplasty. Expert consensus identified four ‘final product analysis’ (FPA) radiological parameters of technical success for DHS: tip-apex distance (TAD); lag screw position in the femoral head; flushness of the plate against the lateral femoral cortex; and eight-cortex hold of the plate screws. Three parameters were identified for hemiarthroplasty: leg length discrepancy; femoral stem alignment; and femoral offset. Face validity, content validity, and feasibility were excellent. For all measurements, performance was better in the intermediate compared with the novice group, and this was statistically significant for TAD (p < 0.001) and femoral stem alignment (p = 0.023). Concurrent validity was poor when measured against global PBA score. This may be explained by the fact that they are measuring difference facets of competence. Intra-and inter-rater reliability were excellent for TAD, moderate for lag screw position (DHS), and moderate for leg length discrepancy (hemiarthroplasty). Use of a large multicentre dataset suggests good generalizability of the results to other settings. Assessment using FPA was time- and cost-effective compared with PBA. Conclusion. Final product analysis using post-implantation radiographs to measure technical skill in hip fracture surgery is feasible, valid, reliable, and cost-effective. It can complement traditional workplace-based assessment for measuring performance in the real-world operating room . It may have particular utility in competency-based training frameworks and for assessing skill transfer from the simulated to live operating theatre. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:594–604