To explore whether orthopaedic surgeons have adopted the Proximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation (PROFHER) trial results routinely into clinical practice. A questionnaire was piloted with six orthopaedic surgeons using a ‘think aloud’ process. The final questionnaire contained 29 items and was distributed online to surgeon members of the British Orthopaedic Association and British Elbow and Shoulder Society. Descriptive statistics summarised the sample characteristics and fracture treatment of respondents overall, and grouped them by whether they changed practice based on PROFHER trial findings. Free-text responses were analysed qualitatively for emerging themes using Framework Analysis principles.Objectives
Methods
Approximately half of all hip fractures are displaced intracapsular fractures. The standard treatment for these fractures is either hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty. The recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on hip fracture management recommends the use of ‘proven’ cemented stem arthroplasty with an Orthopaedic Device Evaluation Panel (ODEP) rating of at least 3B (97% survival at three years). The Thompsons prosthesis is currently lacking an ODEP rating despite over 50 years of clinical use, likely due to the paucity of implant survival data. Nationally, adherence to these guidelines is varied as there is debate as to which prosthesis optimises patient outcomes. This study design is a multi-centre, multi-surgeon, parallel, two arm, standard-of-care pragmatic randomised controlled trial. It will be embedded within the WHiTE Comprehensive Cohort Study (ISRCTN63982700). The main analysis is a two-way equivalence comparison between Hemi-Thompson and Hemi-Exeter polished taper with Unitrax head. Secondary outcomes will include radiological leg length discrepancy measured as per Bidwai and Willett, mortality, re-operation rate and indication for re-operation, length of index hospital stay and revision at four months. This study will be supplemented by the NHFD (National Hip Fracture Database) dataset.Background
Design
The National Institute for Health and Clinical
Excellence (NICE) has thus far relied on historical data and predominantly
industry-sponsored trials to provide evidence for venous thromboembolic
(VTE) prophylaxis in joint replacement patients. We argue that the
NICE guidelines may be reliant on assumptions that are in need of
revision. Following the publication of large scale, independent
observational studies showing little difference between low-molecular-weight
heparins and aspirin, and recent changes to the guidance provided
by other international bodies, should NICE reconsider their recommendations? Cite this article:
To review the current best surgical practice and detail a multi-disciplinary
approach that could further reduce joint replacement infection. Review of relevant literature indexed in PubMed.Objectives
Methods
