Self-Assessment of Competence and Referral Behavior for Musculoskeletal Injections among Dutch General Practitioners.

General practitioners (GPs) are qualified and trained to administer therapeutic musculoskeletal injections when indicated. However, it is unknown to what extend Dutch GPs feel competent to administer these injections in clinical practice. Reluctance among GPs to inject might lead to unnecessary and costly referral to secondary care. An online and offline questionnaire was spread among Dutch GPs, querying demographics, GPs' self-assessment of injection competence, the number of administered/referred injections and management strategy for musculoskeletal injections. A total of 355 GPs responded. In total, 81% of the GPs considered themselves competent in administering musculoskeletal injections. Self-assessed incompetent GPs performed less injections the last month than self-assessed competent GPs (1.2 ± 1.4 vs 4.8 ± 4.6 injections, P < 0.001). Additionally, they referred four times more often to a colleague GP (0.4 ± 1.0 vs 0.1 ± 0.6 injections per month, P < 0.001) and twice as often to secondary care (1.0 ± 1.3 vs 0.5 ± 0.9 injections per month, P = 0.001). Self-assessed incompetence was associated with female sex (OR [95% CI] = 4.94 [2.39, 10.21]) and part-time work (OR [95% CI] = 2.58 [1.43, 4.66]). The most frequently addressed barriers were a lack of confidence in injection skills, lack of practical training, and uncertainty about the effectiveness and diagnosis of musculoskeletal injections. Although most GPs considered themselves competent to administer musculoskeletal injections, the referral rate to secondary care for several injections was strikingly high. To decrease secondary care referrals, addressing some of the most frequently indicated barriers is highly recommended

Diagnostic accuracy of history taking, physical examination and imaging for phalangeal, metacarpal and carpal fractures: a systematic review update.

BACKGROUND: The standard diagnostic work-up for hand and wrist fractures consists of history taking, physical examination and imaging if needed, but the supporting evidence for this work-up is limited. The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the diagnostic accuracy of tests for hand and wrist fractures. METHODS: A systematic search for relevant studies was performed. Methodological quality was assessed and sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were extracted from the eligible studies. RESULTS: Of the 35 eligible studies, two described the diagnostic accuracy of history taking for hand and wrist fractures. Physical examination with or without radiological examination for diagnosing scaphoid fractures (five studies) showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 15 to 100%, 13-98%, 55-73%, 14-73% and 75-100%, respectively. Physical examination with radiological examination for diagnosing other carpal bone fractures (one study) showed a Se of 100%, with the exception of the triquetrum (75%). Physical examination for diagnosing phalangeal and metacarpal fractures (one study) showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 26 to 55%, 13-89%, 45-76%, 41-77% and 63-75%, respectively. Imaging modalities of scaphoid fractures showed predominantly low values for PPV and the highest values for Sp and NPV (24 studies). Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT), Ultrasonography (US) and Bone Scintigraphy (BS) were comparable in diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing a scaphoid fracture, with an accuracy ranging from 85 to 100%, 79-100%, 49-100% and 86-97%, respectively. Imaging for metacarpal and finger fractures showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 73 to 100%, 78-100%, 70-100%, 79-100% and 70-100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Only two studies were found on the diagnostic accuracy of history taking for hand and wrist fractures in the current review. Physical examination was of moderate use for diagnosing a scaphoid fracture and of limited use for diagnosing phalangeal, metacarpal and remaining carpal fractures. MRI, CT and BS were found to be moderately accurate for the definitive diagnosis of clinically suspected carpal fractures

Diagnostic accuracy of history taking, physical examination and imaging for phalangeal, metacarpal and carpal fractures: a systematic review update

BACKGROUND: The standard diagnostic work-up for hand and wrist fractures consists of history taking, physical examination and imaging if needed, but the supporting evidence for this work-up is limited. The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the diagnostic accuracy of tests for hand and wrist fractures. METHODS: A systematic search for relevant studies was performed. Methodological quality was assessed and sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were extracted from the eligible studies. RESULTS: Of the 35 eligible studies, two described the diagnostic accuracy of history taking for hand and wrist fractures. Physical examination with or without radiological examination for diagnosing scaphoid fractures (five studies) showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 15 to 100%, 13-98%, 55-73%, 14-73% and 75-100%, respectively. Physical examination with radiological examination for diagnosing other carpal bone fractures (one study) showed a Se of 100%, with the exception of the triquetrum (75%). Physical examination for diagnosing phalangeal and metacarpal fractures (one study) showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 26 to 55%, 13-89%, 45-76%, 41-77% and 63-75%, respectively. Imaging modalities of scaphoid fractures showed predominantly low values for PPV and the highest values for Sp and NPV (24 studies). Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT), Ultrasonography (US) and Bone Scintigraphy (BS) were comparable in diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing a scaphoid fracture, with an accuracy ranging from 85 to 100%, 79-100%, 49-100% and 86-97%, respectively. Imaging for metacarpal and finger fractures showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 73 to 100%, 78-100%, 70-100%, 79-100% and 70-100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Only two studies were found on the diagnostic accuracy of history taking for hand and wrist fractures in the current review. Physical examination was of moderate use for diagnosing a scaphoid fracture and of limited use for diagnosing phalangeal, metacarpal and remaining carpal fractures. MRI, CT and BS were found to be moderately accurate for the definitive diagnosis of clinically suspected carpal fractures

3066 consecutive Gamma Nails. 12 years experience at a single centre

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Fixation of trochanteric hip fractures using the Gamma Nail has been performed since 1988 and is today well established and wide-spread. However, a number of reports have raised serious concerns about the implant's complication rate. The main focus has been the increased risk of a subsequent femoral shaft fracture and some authors have argued against its use despite other obvious advantages, when this implant is employed.</p> <p>Through access to a uniquely large patient data base available, which is available for analysis of trochanteric fractures; we have been able to evaluate the performance of the Gamma Nail over a twelve year period.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>3066 consecutive patients were treated for trochanteric fractures using Gamma Nails between 1990 and 2002 at the Centre de Traumatologie et de l'Orthopedie (CTO), Strasbourg, France. These patients were retrospectively analysed. Information on epidemiological data, intra- and postoperative complications and patients' outcome was retrieved from patient notes. All available radiographs were assessed by a single reviewer (AJB).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results showed a low complication rate with the use of the Gamma Nail. There were 137 (4.5%) intraoperative fracture-related complications. Moreover 189 (6.2%) complications were detected postoperatively and during follow-up. Cut-out of the lag screw from the femoral head was the most frequent mechanical complication (57 patients, 1.85%), whereas a postoperative femoral shaft fracture occurred in 19 patients (0.6%). Other complications, such as infection, delayed healing/non-union, avascular femoral head necrosis and distal locking problems occurred in 113 patients (3.7%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The use of the Gamma Nail in trochanteric hip fractures is a safe method with a low complication rate. In particular, a low rate of femoral shaft fractures was reported. The low complication rate reported in this series can probably be explained by strict adherence to a proper surgical technique.</p

Raming van behoefte aan MMT-inzet in de regio Rijnmond van Traumacentrum Zuid West Nederland.

Item does not contain fulltex

The Holland nail: a universal implant for fractures of the proximal femur and the femoral shaft.

OBJECTIVE: To study the possibilities and outcomes for hip and femoral fractures treated with the universal Holland nail((R)). DESIGN: Retrospective study from November 1998 to December 2001. SETTING: Department of Traumatology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam. SUBJECTS: 112 patients with 115 fractures of the proximal femur and/or the femoral shaft, due to traumatic causes or to metastatic disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Implant possibilities of the Holland nail((R)) and observed complications. RESULTS: 110 patients presented for primary fracture treatment. Two patients were treated secondarily. In three patients, both femora were fractured. Nineteen patients suffered a pathological (impending) fracture. During operation we dealt with 27 minor difficulties. Postoperatively, in 80% of the cases full weight-bearing was allowed. Three patients developed wound infection. In follow-up, 14 patients were lost and two died. The remaining 77 patients (80 fractures) were available for follow-up with regard to fracture healing. Overall consolidation was achieved in 89% of the patients within 12 months. Two patients developed perforation of the femoral head, necessitating removal of the hip screws, and in two patients failure of the nail was seen. Overall, 19 patients needed a non-planned secondary intervention, of which 12 were deemed a minor procedure (e.g. 'dynamisation by distal screw removal'). CONCLUSION: The Holland nail((R)) is technically easy to use for any type of hip and femoral-shaft fracture

Running behavior and symptoms of respiratory tract infection during the COVID-19 pandemic: A large prospective Dutch cohort study

Objectives: To explore changes in running behavior due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, assess presence of symptoms suggestive for COVID-19 and identify whether there is an association between running behavior and COVID-19. Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: For this study we used a cohort of runners participating in an ongoing randomized controlled trial on running injury prevention among recreational runners. At baseline, demographic and training variables were collected. Seven weeks after starting the lockdown, information on running behavior (interval training, training with partner and physical distancing during training) and running habits (training frequency, duration, distance and speed) were obtained. Furthermore, healthcare utilization and symptoms suggestive for COVID-19 were assessed. To determine the association between running and symptoms suggestive for COVID-19, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: Of the 2586 included participants, 2427 (93.9%) participants continued running during lockdown with no significant changes in mean weekly training variables. A total of 253 participants (9.8%) experienced symptoms suggestive for COVID-19 and 10 participants tested positive for COVID-19. Two participants were admitted to hospital due to COVID-19 with both one day of admission. Running behavior and running habits were not associated with the onset of symptoms suggestive for COVID-19. Conclusions: The large majority of runners in the Netherlands did not change their running habits during lockdown. No association between running behavior or running habits and onset of symptoms suggestive for COVID-19 was identified. This implicates that running outdoor during lockdown does not negatively affect health of runners