94 research outputs found

    Communicating Study Results to Our Patients: Which Way Is Best?

    Get PDF
    Before we are able to communicate evidence and evidence results to patients we must first be familiar with the common ways by which results may be presented to our patients. We describe five approaches (relative risk, risk reduction, odds ratio, absolute risk difference and number needed to treat) of transforming the results of an orthopaedic study for communication with patients

    Tibial Shaft Fractures:challenges in Diagnosis and Management

    Get PDF
    Tibial shaft fractures are common injuries but present substantial challenges in management. My thesis reviews major advances over time in their management including an analysis of the more severe complications of infection and compartment syndrome. I review the use of different and new techniques in management such as nailing in extension, nailing off the fracture table, and the use of reaming, as well as multiple statistical methods to evaluate the patient and injury factors associated with infection

    Internet Versus Mailed Questionnaires: A Randomized Comparison (2)

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND Low response rates among surgeons can threaten the validity of surveys. Internet technologies may reduce the time, effort, and financial resources needed to conduct surveys. OBJECTIVE We investigated whether using Web-based technology could increase the response rates to an international survey. METHODS We solicited opinions from the 442 surgeon–members of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association regarding the treatment of femoral neck fractures. We developed a self-administered questionnaire after conducting a literature review, focus groups, and key informant interviews, for which we used sampling to redundancy techniques. We administered an Internet version of the questionnaire on a Web site, as well as a paper version, which looked similar to the Internet version and which had identical content. Only those in our sample could access the Web site. We alternately assigned the participants to receive the survey by mail (n=221) or an email invitation to participate on the Internet (n=221). Non-respondents in the mail arm received up to three additional copies of the survey, while non-respondents in the Internet arm received up to three additional requests, including a final mailed copy. All participants in the Internet arm had an opportunity to request an emailed Portable Document Format (PDF) version. RESULTS The Internet arm demonstrated a lower response rate (99/221, 45%) than the mail questionnaire arm (129/221, 58%) (absolute difference 13%, 95% confidence interval 4%-22%, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS. Our Internet-based survey to surgeons resulted in a significantly lower response rate than a traditional mailed survey. Researchers should not assume that the widespread availability and potential ease of Internet-based surveys will translate into higher response rates.Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canad

    Reaming Does Not Affect Functional Outcomes after Open and Closed Tibial Shaft Fractures: The Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

    Get PDF
    © Copyright 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Objectives: We sought to determine the effect of reaming on 1-year 36-item short-form general health survey (SF-36) and short musculoskeletal function assessment (SMFA) scores from the Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in patients with Tibial Fractures. Design: Prospective randomized controlled trial.1319 patients were randomized to reamed or unreamed nails. Fractures were categorized as open or closed. Setting: Twenty-nine academic and community health centers across the US, Canada, and the Netherlands. Patients/Participants: One thousand three hundred and nineteen skeletally mature patients with closed and open diaphyseal tibia fractures. Intervention: Reamed versus unreamed tibial nails. Main Outcome Measurements: SF-36 and the SMFA. Outcomes were obtained during the initial hospitalization to reflect preinjury status, and again at the 2-week, 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year follow-up. Repeated measures analyses were performed with P \u3c 0.05 considered significant. Results: There were no differences between the reamed and unreamed groups at 12 months for either the SF-36 physical component score [42.9 vs. 43.4, P 0.54, 95% Confidence Interval for the difference (CI) -2.1 to 1.1] or the SMFA dysfunction index (18.0 vs. 17.6, P 0.79. 95% CI, -2.2 to 2.9). At one year, functional outcomes were significantly below baseline for the SF-36 physical componentf score, SMFA dysfunction index, and SMFA bothersome index (P \u3c 0.001). Time and fracture type were significantly associated with functional outcome. Conclusions: Reaming does not affect functional outcomes after intramedullary nailing for tibial shaft fractures. Patients with open fractures have worse functional outcomes than those with a closed injury. Patients do not reach their baseline function by 1 year after surgery

    Low intensity pulsed ultrasonography for fractures: systematic review of randomised controlled trials

    Get PDF
    Objective To determine the efficacy of low intensity pulsed ultrasonography for healing of fractures

    Ipsilateral Proximal Femur and Shaft Fractures Treated With Hip Screws and a Reamed Retrograde Intramedullary Nail

    Get PDF
    Although not common, proximal femoral fractures associated with ipsilateral shaft fractures present a difficult management problem. A variety of surgical options have been employed with varying results

    Re-evaluation of low intensity pulsed ultrasound in treatment of tibial fractures (TRUST): Randomized clinical trial

    Get PDF
    Objective: To determine whether low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS), compared with sham treatment, accelerates functional recovery and radiographic healing in patients with operatively managed tibial fractures. Design: A concealed, randomized, blinded, sham controlled clinical trial with a parallel group design of 501 patients, enrolled between October 2008 and September 2012, and followed for one year. Setting: 43 North American academic trauma centers. Participants: Skeletally mature men or women with an open or closed tibial fracture amenable to intramedullary nail fixation. Exclusions comprised pilon fractures, tibial shaft fractures that extended into the joint and required reduction, pathological fractures, bilateral tibial fractures, segmental fractures, spiral fractures \u3e7.5 cm in length, concomitant injuries that were likely to impair function for at least as long as the patient\u27s tibial fracture, and tibial fractures that showed 1 cm gap after surgical fixation. 3105 consecutive patients who underwent intramedullary nailing for tibial fracture were assessed, 599 were eligible and 501 provided informed consent and were enrolled. Interventions: Patients were allocated centrally to self administer daily LIPUS (n=250) or use a sham device (n=251) until their tibial fracture showed radiographic healing or until one year after intramedullary fixation. Main outcom e measures: Primary registry specified outcome was time to radiographic healing within one year of fixation; secondary outcome was rate of non-union. Additional protocol specified outcomes included short form-36 (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) scores, return to work, return to household activities, return to ≥80% of function before injury, return to leisure activities, time to full weight bearing, scores on the health utilities index (mark 3), and adverse events related to the device. Results: SF-36 PCS data were acquired from 481/501 (96%) patients, for whom we had 2303/2886 (80%) observations, and radiographic healing data were acquired from 482/501 (96%) patients, of whom 82 were censored. Results showed no impact on SF-36 PCS scores between LIPUS and control groups (mean difference 0.55, 95% confidence interval -0.75 to 1.84; P=0.41) or for the interaction between time and treatment (P=0.30); minimal important difference is 3-5 points) or in other functional measures. There was also no difference in time to radiographic healing (hazard ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.34; P=0.55). There were no differences in safety outcomes between treatment groups. Patient compliance was moderate; 73% of patients administered ≥50% of all recommended treatments. Conclusions: Postoperative use of LIPUS after tibial fracture fixation does not accelerate radiographic healing and fails to improve functional recovery. Study registration: ClinicalTrialGov Identifier: NCT00667849

    Upper extremity fractures due to intimate partner violence versus accidental causes

    Get PDF
    This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or be any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV)-related upper extremity fractures (UEF) in women presenting to US emergency departments (ED) and compare their anatomic location to those due to accidental falls or strikes. METHODS: An Institutional Review Board exempt, retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System's All Injury Program data from 2005 through 2015 for all UEF sustained in women 15 to 54 years old. Injuries based on reported IPV versus accidental falls or strikes were analyzed accounting for the weighted, stratified nature of the data. RESULTS: IPV-related UEF represented 1.7% of all UEF and 27.2% of all IPV fractures. The finger was the most common fracture site in IPV (34.3%) and accidental striking (53.3%) but accounted for only 10% of fall-related UEF. There was a higher proportion of shoulder fractures in IPV (9.2%) compared to accidental falls (7.4%) or strikes (2.9%). The odds of a finger fracture were 4.32 times greater in IPV than falling and of a shoulder fracture were 3.65 greater in IPV than accidental striking (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: While the finger is the most common site for IPV UEF, it is also the most common location for accidental striking. A lower proportion of finger fractures in fall and of shoulder/forearm fractures in accidental striking should prompt the radiologist to discuss the possibility of IPV with the ED physician in any woman presenting with a finger fracture due to fall and a shoulder/forearm fracture with a vague history of accidental striking

    A Trial of Wound Irrigation in the Initial Management of Open Fracture Wounds

    Get PDF
    Copyright © 2015 Massachusetts Medical Society. BACKGROUND The management of open fractures requires wound irrigation and dridement to remove contaminants, but the effectiveness of various pressures and solutions for irrigation remains controversial. We investigated the effects of castile soap versus normal saline irrigation delivered by means of high, low, or very low irrigation pressure. METHODS In this study with a 2-by-3 factorial design, conducted at 41 clinical centers, we randomly assigned patients who had an open fracture of an extremity to undergo irrigation with one of three irrigation pressures (high pressure [\u3e20 psi], low pressure [5 to 10 psi], or very low pressure [1 to 2 psi]) and one of two irrigation solutions (castile soap or normal saline). The primary end point was reoperation within 12 months after the index surgery for promotion of wound or bone healing or treatment of a wound infection. RESULTS A total of 2551 patients underwent randomization, of whom 2447 were deemed eligible and included in the final analyses. Reoperation occurred in 109 of 826 patients (13.2%) in the high-pressure group, 103 of 809 (12.7%) in the low-pressure group, and 111 of 812 (13.7%) in the very-low-pressure group. Hazard ratios for the three pairwise comparisons were as follows: for low versus high pressure, 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.20; P = 0.53), for high versus very low pressure, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.78 to 1.33; P = 0.89), and for low versus very low pressure, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.23; P = 0.62). Reoperation occurred in 182 of 1229 patients (14.8%) in the soap group and in 141 of 1218 (11.6%) in the saline group (hazard ratio, 1.32, 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.66; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS The rates of reoperation were similar regardless of irrigation pressure, a finding that indicates that very low pressure is an acceptable, low-cost alternative for the irrigation of open fractures. The reoperation rate was higher in the soap group than in the saline group. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; FLOW ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00788398
    corecore