Eric Bohm

Above and below-the-elbow plaster casts for distal forearm fractures in children. A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Closed fractures of the distal third of the forearm are the most common fractures of childhood, but the method of immobilization after closed reduction is controversial. This study was undertaken to determine whether below-the-elbow casts are as effective as above-the-elbow casts in immobilizing these types of fractures and to identify patient and treatment considerations that are related to loss of reduction. METHODS We designed a blinded, randomized, controlled trial. The criteria for reduction and remanipulation were set a priori. The primary outcome measure was fracture immobilization as reflected by reangulation in the cast and by the need for remanipulation. Exploratory analysis with use of stepwise logistic regression analysis was undertaken to search for factors predictive of loss of reduction. RESULTS A total of 102 children were enrolled in the study and were allocated to two groups: the above-the-elbow cast group (fifty-six children) and the below-the-elbow cast group (forty-six children). The mean age was 8.6 years, and sixty-one patients were boys. The groups did not differ with respect to the initial fracture angulation, postreduction angulation, reangulation during cast immobilization, and angulation of the fracture at the time of cast removal. In the above-the-elbow cast group, twenty-three (42%) of fifty-five children with adequate radiographs met the criteria for remanipulation compared with fourteen (31%) of forty-five children with adequate radiographs in the below-the-elbow cast group (p = 0.27); only four of these thirty-seven children actually underwent remanipulation. Children with fractures of both the radius and ulna (p = 0.01) and those with residual angulation after reduction (p = 0.0001) were at the highest risk of meeting the criteria for remanipulation. The rates of complications related to the cast did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS Below-the-elbow casts perform as well as above-the-elbow casts in maintaining reduction of fractures in the distal third of the forearm in children, and the complication rates are similar. Factors that are associated with a higher risk of loss of reduction include combined radial and ulnar fractures and residual angulation of the fracture after the initial reduction.

Aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin for extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND The role of aspirin in thromboprophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is controversial. OBJECTIVE To compare extended prophylaxis with aspirin and dalteparin for prevention of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) after THA. DESIGN Multicenter randomized, controlled trial with a noninferiority design based on a minimal clinically important difference of 2.0%. Randomization was electronically generated; patients were assigned to a treatment group through a Web-based program. Patients, physicians, study coordinators, health care team members, outcome adjudicators, and data analysts were blinded to interventions. (Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN11902170). SETTING 12 tertiary care orthopedic referral centers in Canada. PATIENTS 778 patients who had elective unilateral THA between 2007 and 2010. INTERVENTION After an initial 10 days of dalteparin prophylaxis after elective THA, patients were randomly assigned to 28 days of dalteparin (n = 400) or aspirin (n = 386). MEASUREMENTS Symptomatic VTE confirmed by objective testing (primary efficacy outcome) and bleeding. RESULTS Five of 398 patients (1.3%) randomly assigned to dalteparin and 1 of 380 (0.3%) randomly assigned to aspirin had VTE (absolute difference, 1.0 percentage point [95% CI, -0.5 to 2.5 percentage points]). Aspirin was noninferior (P < 0.001) but not superior (P = 0.22) to dalteparin. Clinically significant bleeding occurred in 5 patients (1.3%) receiving dalteparin and 2 (0.5%) receiving aspirin. The absolute between-group difference in a composite of all VTE and clinically significant bleeding events was 1.7 percentage points (CI, -0.3 to 3.8 percentage points; P = 0.091) in favor of aspirin. LIMITATION The study was halted prematurely because of difficulty with patient recruitment. CONCLUSION Extended prophylaxis for 28 days with aspirin was noninferior to and as safe as dalteparin for the prevention of VTE after THA in patients who initially received dalteparin for 10 days. Given its low cost and greater convenience, aspirin may be considered a reasonable alternative for extended thromboprophylaxis after THA. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Use of patient-reported outcomes in the context of different levels of data.

There is increasing interest in measuring patient-reported outcomes as part of routine medical practice, particularly in fields like total joint replacement surgery, where pain relief, satisfaction, function, and health-related quality of life, as perceived by the patient, are primary outcomes. We review some well-known outcome instruments, measurement issues, and early experiences with large-scale collection of patient-reported outcome measures in joint registries. The patient-reported outcome measures are reviewed in the context of multidimensional outcome assessment that includes the traditional clinical outcome parameters as well as disease-specific and general patient-reported outcome measures.

Appropriateness of healthcare interventions: Concepts and scoping of the published literature

OBJECTIVES This report is a scoping review of the literature with the objective of identifying definitions, conceptual models and frameworks, as well as the methods and range of perspectives, for determining appropriateness in the context of healthcare delivery. METHODS To lay groundwork for future, intervention-specific research on appropriateness, this work was carried out as a scoping review of published literature since 1966. Two reviewers, with two screens using inclusion/exclusion criteria based on the objective, focused the research and articles chosen for review. RESULTS The first screen examined 2,829 abstracts/titles, with the second screen examining 124 full articles, leaving 37 articles deemed highly relevant for data extraction and interpretation. Appropriateness is defined largely in terms of net clinical benefit to the average patient and varies by service and setting. The most widely used method to assess appropriateness of healthcare services is the RAND/UCLA Model. There are many related concepts such as medical necessity and small-areas variation. CONCLUSIONS A broader approach to determining appropriateness for healthcare interventions is possible and would involve clinical, patient and societal perspectives.

Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries Report of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries Part II. Recommendations for selection, administration, and analysis.

Abstract — The International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Working Group have evaluated and recommended best practices in the selection, administration, and interpretation of PROMs for hip and knee arthroplasty registries. The 2 generic PROMs in common use are the Short Form health surveys (SF-36 or SF-12) and EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D). The Working Group recommends that registries should choose specific PROMs that have been appropriately developed with good measurement properties for arthroplasty patients. The Working Group recommend the use of a 1-item pain question (“During the past 4 weeks, how would you describe the pain you usually have in your [right/left] [hip/knee]?”; response: none, very mild, mild, moderate, or severe) and a single-item satisfaction outcome (“How satisfied are you with your [right/left] [hip/knee] replacement?”; response: very unsatisfied, dissatisfied, neutral, satisfied, or very satisfied). Survey logistics include patient instructions, paper- and electronic-based data collection, reminders for follow-up, centralized as opposed to hospital-based follow-up, sample size, patient- or joint-specific evaluation, collection intervals, frequency of response, missing values, and factors in establishing a PROMs registry program. The Working Group recommends including age, sex, diagnosis at joint, general health status preoperatively, and joint pain and function score in case-mix adjustment models. Interpretation and statistical analysis should consider the absolute level of pain, function, and general health status as well as improvement, missing data, approaches to analysis and case-mix adjustment, minimal clinically important difference, and minimal detectable change. The Working Group recommends data collection immediately before and 1 year after surgery, a threshold of 60% for acceptable frequency of response, documentation of non-responders, and documentation of incomplete or missing data.

Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries: Report of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty RegistriesPart I. Overview and rationale for patient-reported outcome measures

Abstract The International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) Steering Committee established the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Working Group to convene, evaluate, and advise on best practices in the selection, administration, and interpretation of PROMs and to support the adoption and use of PROMs for hip and knee arthroplasty in registries worldwide. The 2 main types of PROMs include generic (general health) PROMs, which provide a measure of general health for any health state, and specific PROMs, which focus on specific symptoms, diseases, organs, body regions, or body functions. The establishment of a PROM instrument requires the fulfillment of methodological standards and rigorous testing to ensure that it is valid, reliable, responsive, and acceptable to the intended population. A survey of the 41 ISAR member registries showed that 8 registries administered a PROMs program that covered all elective hip or knee arthroplasty patients and 6 registries collected PROMs for sample populations; 1 other registry had planned but had not started collection of PROMs. The most common generic instruments used were the EuroQol 5 dimension health outcome survey (EQ-5D) and the Short Form 12 health survey (SF-12) or the similar Veterans RAND 12-item health survey (VR-12). The most common specific PROMs were the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and the University of California at Los Angeles Activity Score (UCLA).

Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries

Abstract The International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) Steering Committee established the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Working Group to convene, evaluate, and advise on best practices in the selection, administration, and interpretation of PROMs and to support the adoption and use of PROMs for hip and knee arthroplasty in registries worldwide. The 2 main types of PROMs include generic (general health) PROMs, which provide a measure of general health for any health state, and specific PROMs, which focus on specific symptoms, diseases, organs, body regions, or body functions. The establishment of a PROM instrument requires the fulfillment of methodological standards and rigorous testing to ensure that it is valid, reliable, responsive, and acceptable to the intended population. A survey of the 41 ISAR member registries showed that 8 registries administered a PROMs program that covered all elective hip or knee arthroplasty patients and 6 registries collected PROMs for sample populations; 1 other registry had planned but had not started collection of PROMs. The most common generic instruments used were the EuroQol 5 dimension health outcome survey (EQ-5D) and the Short Form 12 health survey (SF-12) or the similar Veterans RAND 12-item health survey (VR-12). The most common specific PROMs were the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and the University of California at Los Angeles Activity Score (UCLA).

Randomized Trial of Computer-Assisted Knee Arthroplasty: Impact on Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes

Computer-assisted surgery in knee arthroplasty is gaining popularity; however, the resulting outcome improvement is controversial. A double-blinded trial was performed with subjects randomized to undergo surgery with either computer-assisted or nonassisted instruments. Postoperatively, limb and implant alignment and rotation were assessed using both full-length radiographs and computed tomography in addition to clinical scores. One hundred twenty patients (141 knees) were randomized. No differences in Western Ontario MacMaster Osteoarthritis Score, Short Form-36, or flexion were seen. More varus limb alignment was seen in the computer-assisted group (1.9°) vs the nonassisted group (0.9°, P = .04) with no improvement in alignment precision. Rotational alignment of the components did not differ between groups. Computer-assisted surgery appeared to have minimal effect on knee implant arthroplasty with no improvement in limb alignment or early functional outcome.

The effect of total hip arthroplasty on employment.

This study was undertaken to investigate the impact of total hip arthroplasty on a patients work ability. Fifty-four patients who were in the workforce completed a questionnaire 1 year after total hip arthroplasty. Thirty-eight (86%) of 44 patients working preoperatively were working 1 year after surgery, whereas only 2 (20%) of 10 patients who were not working preoperatively resumed work. Those who resumed work were younger and reported better Oxford-12 and physical function scores. Patients who resumed working had improvements in their ability to meet workplace physical demands and in productivity. Total hip arthroplasty has positive effects on work capacity in patients who return to work. To help patients remain in the workforce, surgery should be undertaken before a patients hip dysfunction forces them off work.

Does Adding Antibiotics to Cement Reduce the Need for Early Revision in Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundThere is considerable debate about whether antibiotic-loaded bone cement should be used for fixation of TKAs. While antibiotics offer the theoretical benefit of lowering early revision due to infection, they may weaken the cement and thus increase the likelihood of aseptic loosening, perhaps resulting in a higher revision rate.Questions/purposesWe (1) compared the frequency of early knee revision arthroplasty in patients treated with antibiotic-loaded or non-antibiotic-loaded cement for initial fixation, (2) determined effects of age, sex, comorbidities, and surgeons’ antibiotic-loaded cement usage patterns on revision rate, and (3) compared causes of revision (aseptic or septic) between groups.MethodsOur study sample was taken from the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry and Canada’s Hospital Morbidity Database and included cemented TKAs performed between April 1, 2003, and March 31, 2008, including 20,016 TKAs inserted with non-antibiotic-loaded cement and 16,665 inserted with antibiotic-loaded cement. Chi-square test was used to compare the frequency of early revisions between groups. Cox regression modeling was used to determine whether revision rate would change by age, sex, comorbidities, or use of antibiotic-loaded cement. Similar Cox regression modeling was used to compare cause of revision between groups.ResultsTwo-year revision rates were similar between the groups treated with non-antibiotic-loaded cement and antibiotic-loaded cement (1.40% versus 1.51%, p = 0.41). When controlling for age, sex, comorbidities, diabetes, and surgeons’ antibiotic-loaded cement usage patterns, the revision risk likewise was similar between groups. Revision rates for infection were similar between groups; however, there were more revisions for aseptic loosening in the group treated with non-antibiotic-loaded cement (p = 0.02).ConclusionsThe use of antibiotic-loaded cement in TKAs performed for osteoarthritis has no clinically significant effect on reducing revision within 2 years in patients who received perioperative antibiotics. Longer followup and confirmation of these findings with other national registries are warranted.Level of EvidenceLevel III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.