Accelerated surgery versus standard care in hip fracture (HIP ATTACK): an international, randomised, controlled trial

© 2020 Elsevier Ltd Background: Observational studies have suggested that accelerated surgery is associated with improved outcomes in patients with a hip fracture. The HIP ATTACK trial assessed whether accelerated surgery could reduce mortality and major complications. Methods: HIP ATTACK was an international, randomised, controlled trial done at 69 hospitals in 17 countries. Patients with a hip fracture that required surgery and were aged 45 years or older were eligible. Research personnel randomly assigned patients (1:1) through a central computerised randomisation system using randomly varying block sizes to either accelerated surgery (goal of surgery within 6 h of diagnosis) or standard care. The coprimary outcomes were mortality and a composite of major complications (ie, mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism, sepsis, pneumonia, life-threatening bleeding, and major bleeding) at 90 days after randomisation. Patients, health-care providers, and study staff were aware of treatment assignment, but outcome adjudicators were masked to treatment allocation. Patients were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02027896). Findings: Between March 14, 2014, and May 24, 2019, 27 701 patients were screened, of whom 7780 were eligible. 2970 of these were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive accelerated surgery (n=1487) or standard care (n=1483). The median time from hip fracture diagnosis to surgery was 6 h (IQR 4–9) in the accelerated-surgery group and 24 h (10–42) in the standard-care group (p\u3c0·0001). 140 (9%) patients assigned to accelerated surgery and 154 (10%) assigned to standard care died, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·91 (95% CI 0·72 to 1·14) and absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 1% (−1 to 3; p=0·40). Major complications occurred in 321 (22%) patients assigned to accelerated surgery and 331 (22%) assigned to standard care, with an HR of 0·97 (0·83 to 1·13) and an ARR of 1% (−2 to 4; p=0·71). Interpretation: Among patients with a hip fracture, accelerated surgery did not significantly lower the risk of mortality or a composite of major complications compared with standard care. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Rationale and design of the HIP fracture Accelerated surgical TreaTment And Care tracK (HIP ATTACK) Trial : a protocol for an international randomised controlled trial evaluating early surgery for hip fracture patients

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Training improves interobserver reliability for the diagnosis of scaphoid fracture displacement

Background The diagnosis of displacement in scaphoid fractures is notorious for poor interobserver reliability.Questions/purposes We tested whether training can improve interobserver reliability and sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the diagnosis of scaphoid fracture displacement on radiographs and CT scans.Methods Sixty-four orthopaedic surgeons rated a set of radiographs and CT scans of 10 displaced and 10 nondisplaced scaphoid fractures for the presence of displacement, using a web-based rating application. Before rating, observers were randomized to a training group (34 observers) and a nontraining group (30 observers). The training group received an online training module before the rating session, and the nontraining group did not. Interobserver reliability for training and nontraining was assessed by Siegel&rsquo;s multirater kappa and the Z-test was used to test for significance.Results There was a small, but significant difference in the interobserver reliability for displacement ratings in favor of the training group compared with the nontraining group. Ratings of radiographs and CT scans combined resulted in moderate agreement for both groups. The average sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of diagnosing displacement of scaphoid fractures were, respectively, 83%, 85%, and 84% for the nontraining group and 87%, 86%, and 87% for the training group. Assuming a 5% prevalence of fracture displacement, the positive predictive value was 0.23 in the nontraining group and 0.25 in the training group. The negative predictive value was 0.99 in both groups.Conclusions Our results suggest training can improve interobserver reliability and sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the diagnosis of scaphoid fracture displacement, but the improvements are slight. These findings are encouraging for future research regarding interobserver variation and how to reduce it further.<br /