This study reviews the past 30 years of research from the Canadian Orthopedic Trauma Society (COTS), to identify predictive factors that delay or accelerate the course of randomized controlled trials in orthopaedic trauma. We conducted a methodological review of all papers published through the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society or its affiliates. Data abstracted included: year of publication; journal of publication; study type; number of study sites; sample size; and achievement of sample size goals. Information about the study timelines was also collected, including: the date of study proposal to COTS; date recruitment began; date recruitment ended; and date of publication.Aims
Methods
Heterotopic ossification (HO) of the hip after injury to the central nervous system can lead to
We performed a systematic review of the literature
pertaining to the functional outcomes of the surgical management
of acetabular fractures. A total of 69 articles met our inclusion
criteria, revealing that eight generic outcome instruments were
used, along with five specific instruments. The majority of studies
reported outcomes using a version of the d’Aubigne and Postel score,
which has not been validated for use in acetabular fracture. Few validated
outcome measures were reported. No psychometric testing of outcome
instruments was performed. The current assessment of outcomes in
surgery for acetabular fractures lacks scientific rigour, and does
not give reliable outcome data for either scientific comparison
or patient counselling. Take home message: The use of non-validated functional outcome
measures is a major limitation of the current literature pertaining
to surgical management of acetabular fractures; future studies should
use validated outcome measures to ensure the legitimacy of the reported
results. Cite this article:
We performed a systematic review of the literature
to evaluate the use and interpretation of generic and disease-specific
functional outcome instruments in the reporting of outcome after
the surgical treatment of disruptions of the pelvic ring. A total
of 28 papers met our inclusion criteria, with eight reporting only
generic outcome instruments, 13 reporting only pelvis-specific outcome
instruments, and six reporting both. The Short-Form 36 (SF-36) was
by far the most commonly used generic outcome instrument, used in
12 papers, with widely variable reporting of scores. The pelvis-specific
outcome instruments were used in 19 studies; the Majeed score in
ten, Iowa pelvic score in six, Hannover pelvic score in two and
the Orlando pelvic score in one. Four sets of authors, all testing construct
validity based on correlation with the SF-36, performed psychometric
testing of three pelvis-specific instruments (Majeed, IPS and Orlando
scores). No testing of responsiveness, content validity, criterion
validity, internal consistency or reproducibility was performed. The existing literature in this area is inadequate to inform
surgeons or patients in a meaningful way about the functional outcomes
of these fractures after fixation.