Bridget Gray

Orthopaedic trauma research priority-setting exercise and development of a research network

INTRODUCTION Clinical practice should be informed by high quality evidence, of which randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard. Surgical trials are inherently difficult with potential problems around clinical equipoise and participant acceptability. This is often most true with trial designs comparing operative and non-operative treatments. It is hoped that research activity can be maximised by collaborating in (a) the identification of research questions and (b) involvement in clinical trials. Development of the national research networks can be utilised to provide support for research endeavours within the orthopaedic trauma community. AIMS To identify and prioritise the research questions felt to be of most importance by the orthopaedic trauma community. Research studies will be considered for questions given the highest priority. METHODS A Delphi approach was used to determine consensus between the faculty members of the AOUK. A two round process was used to elicit the research questions and then to rank them in order of priority. RESULTS 217 members of the AOUK Long Bone Faculty were asked to submit research questions, predominantly consultant orthopaedic surgeons. A 22% response rate generated 147 questions. These were collated and the most frequent 24 sent back out for ranking by mean scores. A 55% response to this second round identified 10 top questions. Literature searches for these 10 looked at current knowledge of the subject, completed and ongoing research projects. We also looked at the advantages and disadvantages of undertaking a study and the most appropriate methodology. CONCLUSION The response rates demonstrated a clear interest in developing a collaborative research strategy. This can be enhanced by utilising the support of the National Institute of Health Research Clinical Research Networks (NIHR CRN).

The treatment of stable paediatric forearm fractures using a cast that may be removed at home: Comparison with traditional management in a randomised controlled trial

We investigated whether, in the management of stable paediatric fractures of the forearm, flexible casts that can be removed at home are as clinically effective, cost-effective and acceptable to both patient and parent as management using a cast conventionally removed in hospital. A single-centre randomised controlled trial was performed on 317 children with a mean age of 9.3 years (2 to 16). No significant differences were seen in the change in Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire index score (p = 0.10) or EuroQol 5-Dimensions domain scores between the two groups one week after removal of the cast or the absolute scores at six months. There was a significantly lower overall median treatment cost in the group whose casts were removed at home (£150.88 (sem 1.90) vs £251.62 (sem 2.68); p < 0.001). No difference was seen in satisfaction between the two groups (p = 0.48).