SHE mapping report Lessons learnt from policies and practices of SHE member countries

The Schools for Health in Europe Network Foundation mapping (SHE mapping) survey is a cross-national study to map the level of implementation of health promotion in schools of the SHE member countries and how this implementation is carried out. SHE mapping collected international data on: the integration of the national Health Promoting School (HPS) policy into other national policies; how national policies frame school practices in the whole school approach of HPS; how national policies contribute to a healthy physical environment in the school setting; the contributions of national policies to a school’s social environment, favourable to health promotion; the guidelines, tools and resources for a school to become a HPS; the national process of monitoring / evaluation of HPS; health topics included in the national HPS policy; health promoting school label; sources of funding for national HPS; main expectations of the SHE national coordinators for their national HPS scheme; number of HPS in SHE member countries; HPS facilities; how inclusion of health promotion is done in the school curriculum; health topics worked regularly in HPS; learning methods / strategies in HPS; practices and suggestions for the SHE School Manual and its two accompanying tools; facilitating factors and barriers faced by HPS in the SHE member countries. Data were collected using the Survey Monkey. All SHE national and regional coordinators from the 37 SHE member countries were invited to complete a questionnaire, upon completion of a statement of informed consent. Data were received from 75.7% of countries, but after removal of the incomplete questionnaires and two SHE regional coordinators who responded in duplicate for their country, because it was not possible to gather information from regions as there were only three regional coordinators who answered, 64.9% of countries were analysed.Este trabalho é financiado por Fundos Nacionais através da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia no âmbito do projeto do CIEC (Centro de Investigação em Estudos da Criança da Universidade do Minho) com a referência UID/CED/00317/2019

A novel push-pull central-lever mechanism reduces peak forces and energy-cost compared to hand-rim wheelchair propulsion during a controlled lab-based experiment

BACKGROUND: Hand-rim wheelchair propulsion is straining and mechanically inefficient, often leading to upper limb complaints. Previous push–pull lever propulsion mechanisms have shown to perform better or equal in efficiency and physiological strain. Propulsion biomechanics have not been evaluated thus far. A novel push–pull central-lever propulsion mechanism is compared to conventional hand-rim wheelchair propulsion, using both physiological and biomechanical outcomes under low-intensity steady-state conditions on a motor driven treadmill. METHODS: In this 5 day (distributed over a maximum of 21 days) between-group experiment, 30 able-bodied novices performed 60 min (5 × 3 × 4 min) of practice in either the push–pull central lever wheelchair (n = 15) or the hand-rim wheelchair (n = 15). At the first and final sessions cardiopulmonary strain, propulsion kinematics and force production were determined in both instrumented propulsion mechanisms. Repeated measures ANOVA evaluated between (propulsion mechanism type), within (over practice) and interaction effects. RESULTS: Over practice, both groups significantly improved on all outcome measures. After practice the peak forces during the push and pull phase of lever propulsion were considerably lower compared to those in the handrim push phase (42 ± 10 & 46 ± 10 vs 63 ± 21N). Concomitantly, energy expenditure was found to be lower as well (263 ± 45 vs 298 ± 59W), on the other hand gross mechanical efficiency (6.4 ± 1.5 vs 5.9 ± 1.3%), heart-rate (97 ± 10 vs 98 ± 10 bpm) and perceived exertion (9 ± 2 vs 10 ± 1) were not significantly different between modes. CONCLUSION: The current study shows the potential benefits of the newly designed push–pull central-lever propulsion mechanism over regular hand rim wheelchair propulsion. The much lower forces and energy expenditure might help to reduce the strain on the upper extremities and thus prevent the development of overuse injury. This proof of concept in a controlled laboratory experiment warrants continued experimental research in wheelchair-users during daily life

Subtalar versus triple arthrodesis after intra-articular calcaneal fractures

Depending upon initial treatment, between 2 and 30% of patients with a displaced intra-articular calcaneal fracture require a secondary arthrodesis. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of subtalar versus triple arthrodesis on functional outcome. A total of 33 patients with 37 secondary arthrodeses (17 subtalar and 20 triple) with a median follow-up of 116 months were asked to complete questionnaires regarding disease-specific functional outcome (Maryland Foot Score, MFS), quality of life (SF-36) and overall satisfaction with the treatment (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS). Patient groups were comparable considering median age at fracture, initial treatment (conservative or operative), time to arthrodesis, median follow-up, and post-arthrodesis radiographic angles. The MFS score was similar after subtalar versus triple arthrodesis (59 vs. 56 points; P = 0.79). No statistically significant difference was found for the SF-36 (84 vs. 83 points; P = 0.67) and the VAS (5 vs. 6; P = 0.21). Smoking was statistically significantly associated with a non-union (χ2 = 6.60, P = 0.017). The current study suggests that there is no significant difference in functional outcome between an in situ subtalar or triple arthrodesis as a salvage technique for symptomatic arthrosis after an intra-articular calcaneal fracture. Smoking is a risk factor for non-union

Long-term outcomes of slipped capital femoral epiphysis treated with in situ pinning

PURPOSE: Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is the commonest hip disorder in adolescents. In situ pinning is commonly performed, yet lately there has been an increase in procedures with open reduction and internal fixation. These procedures, however, are technically demanding with relatively high complication rates and unknown long-term outcomes. Nevertheless, reports on long-term results of in situ fixation are not equivocal. This study evaluates the possible higher risk of worse outcome after in situ pinning of SCFE. METHODS: All patients treated for SCFE with in situ fixation between 1980 and 2002 in four different hospitals were asked to participate. Patients were divided into three groups, based on severity of the slip. Patients were invited to the outpatient clinic for physical examination and X-rays, and to fill out the questionnaires HOOS, EQ5D, and SF36. ANOVA and chi-squared tests were used to analyze differences between groups. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients with 78 slips filled out the questionnaires. Patients with severe slips had worse scores on HOOS, EQ5D, and SF36. 75 % of patients with severe slips had severe osteoarthritis, compared to 2 % of mild and 11 % of moderate slips. CONCLUSION: Hips with mild and moderate SCFE generally had good functional and radiological outcome at a mean follow-up of 18 years, and for these hips there seems to be no indication for open procedures. However, severe slips have a significantly worse outcome, and open reduction and internal fixation could therefore be considered

Treatment and outcome of fracture-related infection of the clavicle

Introduction: The number of operatively treated clavicle fractures has increased over the past decades. Consequently, this has led to an increase in secondary procedures required to treat complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI). The primary objective of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of patients treated for FRI of the clavicle. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the healthcare costs and propose a standardized protocol for the surgical management of this complication. Methods: All patients with a clavicle fracture who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) between 1 January 2015 and 1 March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. This study included patients with an FRI who were diagnosed and treated according to the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Results: We evaluated 626 patients with 630 clavicle fractures who underwent ORIF. In total, 28 patients were diagnosed with an FRI. Of these, eight (29%) underwent definitive implant removal, five (18%) underwent debridement, antimicrobial treatment and implant retention, and fourteen patients (50%) had their implant exchanged in either a single-stage procedure, a two-stage procedure or after multiple revisions. One patient (3.6%) underwent resection of the clavicle. Twelve patients (43%) underwent autologous bone grafting (tricortical iliac crest bone graft (n = 6), free vascularized fibular graft (n = 5), cancellous bone graft (n = 1)) to reconstruct the bone defect. The median follow-up was 32.3 (P25-P75: 23.9–51.1) months. Two patients (7.1%) experienced a recurrence of infection. The functional outcome was satisfactory, with 26 out of 28 patients (93%) having full range of motion. The median healthcare cost was € 11.506 (P25-P75: € 7.953–23.798) per patient. Conclusion: FRI is a serious complication that can occur after the surgical treatment of clavicle fractures. In our opinion, when treated adequately using a multidisciplinary patient-specific approach, the outcome of patients with an FRI of the clavicle is good. The median healthcare costs of these patients are up to 3.5 times higher compared to non-infected operatively treated clavicle fractures. Although not studied individually, we consider factors such as the size of the bone defect, condition of the soft tissue, and patient demand important when it comes to guiding our surgical decision making in cases of osseous defects.</p

Treatment and outcome of fracture-related infection of the clavicle

Introduction: The number of operatively treated clavicle fractures has increased over the past decades. Consequently, this has led to an increase in secondary procedures required to treat complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI). The primary objective of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of patients treated for FRI of the clavicle. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the healthcare costs and propose a standardized protocol for the surgical management of this complication. Methods: All patients with a clavicle fracture who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) between 1 January 2015 and 1 March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. This study included patients with an FRI who were diagnosed and treated according to the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Results: We evaluated 626 patients with 630 clavicle fractures who underwent ORIF. In total, 28 patients were diagnosed with an FRI. Of these, eight (29%) underwent definitive implant removal, five (18%) underwent debridement, antimicrobial treatment and implant retention, and fourteen patients (50%) had their implant exchanged in either a single-stage procedure, a two-stage procedure or after multiple revisions. One patient (3.6%) underwent resection of the clavicle. Twelve patients (43%) underwent autologous bone grafting (tricortical iliac crest bone graft (n = 6), free vascularized fibular graft (n = 5), cancellous bone graft (n = 1)) to reconstruct the bone defect. The median follow-up was 32.3 (P25-P75: 23.9–51.1) months. Two patients (7.1%) experienced a recurrence of infection. The functional outcome was satisfactory, with 26 out of 28 patients (93%) having full range of motion. The median healthcare cost was € 11.506 (P25-P75: € 7.953–23.798) per patient. Conclusion: FRI is a serious complication that can occur after the surgical treatment of clavicle fractures. In our opinion, when treated adequately using a multidisciplinary patient-specific approach, the outcome of patients with an FRI of the clavicle is good. The median healthcare costs of these patients are up to 3.5 times higher compared to non-infected operatively treated clavicle fractures. Although not studied individually, we consider factors such as the size of the bone defect, condition of the soft tissue, and patient demand important when it comes to guiding our surgical decision making in cases of osseous defects.</p

Treatment and outcome of fracture-related infection of the clavicle

Introduction: The number of operatively treated clavicle fractures has increased over the past decades. Consequently, this has led to an increase in secondary procedures required to treat complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI). The primary objective of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of patients treated for FRI of the clavicle. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the healthcare costs and propose a standardized protocol for the surgical management of this complication. Methods: All patients with a clavicle fracture who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) between 1 January 2015 and 1 March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. This study included patients with an FRI who were diagnosed and treated according to the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Results: We evaluated 626 patients with 630 clavicle fractures who underwent ORIF. In total, 28 patients were diagnosed with an FRI. Of these, eight (29%) underwent definitive implant removal, five (18%) underwent debridement, antimicrobial treatment and implant retention, and fourteen patients (50%) had their implant exchanged in either a single-stage procedure, a two-stage procedure or after multiple revisions. One patient (3.6%) underwent resection of the clavicle. Twelve patients (43%) underwent autologous bone grafting (tricortical iliac crest bone graft (n = 6), free vascularized fibular graft (n = 5), cancellous bone graft (n = 1)) to reconstruct the bone defect. The median follow-up was 32.3 (P25-P75: 23.9–51.1) months. Two patients (7.1%) experienced a recurrence of infection. The functional outcome was satisfactory, with 26 out of 28 patients (93%) having full range of motion. The median healthcare cost was € 11.506 (P25-P75: € 7.953–23.798) per patient. Conclusion: FRI is a serious complication that can occur after the surgical treatment of clavicle fractures. In our opinion, when treated adequately using a multidisciplinary patient-specific approach, the outcome of patients with an FRI of the clavicle is good. The median healthcare costs of these patients are up to 3.5 times higher compared to non-infected operatively treated clavicle fractures. Although not studied individually, we consider factors such as the size of the bone defect, condition of the soft tissue, and patient demand important when it comes to guiding our surgical decision making in cases of osseous defects.</p

Treatment and outcome of fracture-related infection of the clavicle

Introduction: The number of operatively treated clavicle fractures has increased over the past decades. Consequently, this has led to an increase in secondary procedures required to treat complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI). The primary objective of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of patients treated for FRI of the clavicle. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the healthcare costs and propose a standardized protocol for the surgical management of this complication. Methods: All patients with a clavicle fracture who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) between 1 January 2015 and 1 March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. This study included patients with an FRI who were diagnosed and treated according to the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Results: We evaluated 626 patients with 630 clavicle fractures who underwent ORIF. In total, 28 patients were diagnosed with an FRI. Of these, eight (29%) underwent definitive implant removal, five (18%) underwent debridement, antimicrobial treatment and implant retention, and fourteen patients (50%) had their implant exchanged in either a single-stage procedure, a two-stage procedure or after multiple revisions. One patient (3.6%) underwent resection of the clavicle. Twelve patients (43%) underwent autologous bone grafting (tricortical iliac crest bone graft (n = 6), free vascularized fibular graft (n = 5), cancellous bone graft (n = 1)) to reconstruct the bone defect. The median follow-up was 32.3 (P25-P75: 23.9–51.1) months. Two patients (7.1%) experienced a recurrence of infection. The functional outcome was satisfactory, with 26 out of 28 patients (93%) having full range of motion. The median healthcare cost was € 11.506 (P25-P75: € 7.953–23.798) per patient. Conclusion: FRI is a serious complication that can occur after the surgical treatment of clavicle fractures. In our opinion, when treated adequately using a multidisciplinary patient-specific approach, the outcome of patients with an FRI of the clavicle is good. The median healthcare costs of these patients are up to 3.5 times higher compared to non-infected operatively treated clavicle fractures. Although not studied individually, we consider factors such as the size of the bone defect, condition of the soft tissue, and patient demand important when it comes to guiding our surgical decision making in cases of osseous defects.</p