Objectives . A rigorous approach to developing, delivering and documenting rehabilitation within randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions is required to underpin the generation of reliable and usable evidence. This article describes the key processes used to ensure provision of good quality and comparable rehabilitation to all participants of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing surgery with conservative treatment of proximal humeral fractures in adults. Methods . These processes included the development of a patient information leaflet on self-care during sling immobilisation, the development of a basic treatment physiotherapy protocol that received input and endorsement by specialist physiotherapists providing patient care, and establishing an expectation for the provision of home exercises. Specially designed forms were also developed to facilitate reliable reporting of the physiotherapy care that patients received. Results. All three initiatives were successfully implemented, alongside the measures to optimise the documentation of physiotherapy. Thus, all participating sites that recruited patients provided the sling immobilisation leaflet, all adhered to the physiotherapy protocol and all provided home exercises. There was exemplary completion of the physiotherapy forms that often reflected a complex patient care pathway. These data demonstrated equal and high access to and implementation of physiotherapy between groups, including the performance of home exercises. Conclusion . In order to increase the validity and relevance of the evidence from trials of surgical interventions and meet international reporting standards, careful attention to study design, conduct and reporting of the intrinsic rehabilitation components is required. The involvement of rehabilitation specialists is crucial to achieving this. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:335–40

Background

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.

Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. Controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment for independent patients with displaced intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur. The recognised alternatives are hemiarthroplasty and total hip replacement. At present there is no established standard of care, with both types of arthroplasty being used in many centres. The principal advantages of total hip replacement are a functional benefit over hemiarthroplasty and a reduced risk of revision surgery. The principal criticism is the increased risk of dislocation. We believe that an alternative acetabular component may reduce the risk of dislocation but still provide the functional benefit of total hip replacement in these patients. We therefore propose to investigate the dislocation risk of a dual-mobility acetabular component compared with standard polyethylene component in total hip replacement for independent patients with displaced intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur within the framework of the larger WHiTE (Warwick Hip Trauma Evaluation) Comprehensive Cohort Study.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:210–13.

Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. Controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment for patients with unstable trochanteric proximal femoral fractures. The recognised treatment alternatives are extramedullary fixation usually with a sliding hip screw and intramedullary fixation with a cephalomedullary nail. Current evidence suggests that best results and lowest complication rates occur using a sliding hip screw. Complications in these difficult fractures are relatively common regardless of type of treatment. We believe that a novel device, the X-Bolt dynamic plating system, may offer superior fixation over a sliding hip screw with lower reoperation risk and better function. We therefore propose to investigate the clinical effectiveness of the X-bolt dynamic plating system compared with standard sliding hip screw fixation within the framework of a the larger WHiTE (Warwick Hip Trauma Evaluation) Comprehensive Cohort Study.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:206–9.

Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. The National Hip Fracture Audit currently provides a framework for service evaluation. This evaluation is based upon the assessment of process rather than assessment of patient-centred outcome and therefore it fails to provide meaningful data regarding the clinical effectiveness of treatments. This study aims to capture data from the cohort of patients who present with a fracture of the proximal femur at a single United Kingdom Major Trauma Centre. Patient-centred outcomes will be recorded and provide a baseline cohort within which to test the clinical effectiveness of experimental interventions.