Aims. To compare the cost-effectiveness of high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement versus single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. Methods. Using data from a multicentre randomized controlled trial (World Hip Trauma Evaluation 8 (WHiTE-8)) in the UK, a within-trial economic evaluation was conducted. Resource usage was measured over 120 days post randomization, and cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), gained from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective in the base-case analysis. Methodological uncertainty was addressed using sensitivity analysis, while decision uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. The base-case analysis showed that high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement had a significantly higher mean cost (£224 (95% confidence interval (CI) -408 to 855)) and almost the same QALYs (0.001 (95% CI -0.002 to 0.003)) relative to single-antibiotic cement from the UK NHS and PSS perspective. The probability of the high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement being cost-effective was less than 0.3 at alternative cost-effectiveness thresholds, and its net monetary benefit was negative. This finding remained robust in the sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. This study shows that high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement is unlikely to be cost-effective compared to single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(10):1070–1077

Aims. This study aimed to compare the change in health-related quality of life of patients receiving a traditional cemented monoblock Thompson hemiarthroplasty compared with a modern cemented modular polished-taper stemmed hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular hip fractures. Patients and Methods. This was a pragmatic, multicentre, multisurgeon, two-arm, parallel group, randomized standard-of-care controlled trial. It was embedded within the WHiTE Comprehensive Cohort Study. The sample size was 964 patients. The setting was five National Health Service Trauma Hospitals in England. A total of 964 patients over 60 years of age who required hemiarthroplasty of the hip between February 2015 and March 2016 were included. A standardized measure of health outcome, the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, was carried out on admission and at four months following the operation. Results. Of the 964 patients enrolled, 482 died or were lost to follow-up (50%). No significant differences were noted in EQ-5D between groups, with a mean difference at four months of 0.037 in favour of the Exeter/Unitrax implant (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.014 to 0.087, p = 0.156), rising to 0.045 (95% CI 0.007 to 0.098, p = 0.09) when patients who died were excluded. The minimum clinically important difference for EQ-5D-5L used in this study is 0.08, therefore any benefit between implants is unlikely to be noticeable to the patient. There was no difference in mortality or mobility score. Conclusion. Allowing for the high rate of loss to follow-up, the use of the traditional Thompson hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of the displaced intracapsular hip fracture shows no difference in health outcome when compared with a modern cemented hemiarthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:352–60

We compared a new fixation system, the Targon Femoral Neck (TFN) hip screw, with the current standard treatment of cannulated screw fixation. This was a single-centre, participant-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Patients aged 65 years and over with either a displaced or undisplaced intracapsular fracture of the hip were eligible. The primary outcome was the risk of revision surgery within one year of fixation.

A total of 174 participants were included in the trial. The absolute reduction in risk of revision was of 4.7% (95% CI 14.2 to 22.5) in favour of the TFN hip screw (chi-squared test, p = 0.741), which was less than the pre-specified level of minimum clinically important difference. There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcome measures.

We found no evidence of a clinical difference in the risk of revision surgery between the TFN hip screw and cannulated screw fixation for patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:652–7.

A total of 455 patients aged over 70 years with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the proximal femur was randomised to be treated either by hemiarthroplasty or internal fixation. The preoperative characteristics of the patients in both groups were similar.

Internal fixation has a shorter length of anaesthesia (36 minutes versus 57 minutes, p < 0.0001), lower operative blood loss (28 ml versus 177 ml, p < 0.0001) and lower transfusion requirements (0.04 units versus 0.39 units, p < 0.0001). In the internal fixation group 90 patients required 111 additional surgical procedures while only 15 additional operations on the hip were needed in 12 patients in the arthroplasty group. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the groups at one year (61/226 versus 63/229, p = 0.91), but there was a tendency for an improved survival in the older less mobile patients treated by internal fixation. For the survivors assessed at one, two and three years from injury there were no differences with regard to the outcome for pain and mobility. Limb shortening was more common after internal fixation (7.0 mm versus 3.6 mm, p = 0.004).

We recommend that displaced intracapsular fractures in the elderly should generally be treated by arthroplasty but that internal fixation may be appropriate for those who are very frail.