L.M.G. Geeraedts

Femoral neck shortening after internal fixation of a femoral neck fracture.

This study assesses femoral neck shortening and its effect on gait pattern and muscle strength in patients with femoral neck fractures treated with internal fixation. Seventy-six patients from a multicenter randomized controlled trial participated. Patient characteristics and Short Form 12 and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were collected. Femoral neck shortening, gait parameters, and maximum isometric forces of the hip muscles were measured and differences between the fractured and contralateral leg were calculated. Variables of patients with little or no shortening, moderate shortening, and severe shortening were compared using univariate and multivariate analyses. Median femoral neck shortening was 1.1 cm. Subtle changes in gait pattern, reduced gait velocity, and reduced abductor muscle strength were observed. Age, weight, and Pauwels classification were risk factors for femoral neck shortening. Femoral neck shortening decreased gait velocity and seemed to impair gait symmetry and physical functioning. In conclusion, internal fixation of femoral neck fractures results in permanent physical limitations. The relatively young and healthy patients in our study seem capable of compensating. Attention should be paid to femoral neck shortening and proper correction with a heel lift, as inadequate correction may cause physical complaints and influence outcome.

The effect of tertiary surveys on missed injuries in trauma: a systematic review

BackgroundTrauma tertiary surveys (TTS) are advocated to reduce the rate of missed injuries in hospitalized trauma patients. Moreover, the missed injury rate can be a quality indicator of trauma care performance. Current variation of the definition of missed injury restricts interpretation of the effect of the TTS and limits the use of missed injury for benchmarking. Only a few studies have specifically assessed the effect of the TTS on missed injury. We aimed to systematically appraise these studies using outcomes of two common definitions of missed injury rates and long-term health outcomes.MethodsA systematic review was performed. An electronic search (without language or publication restrictions) of the Cochrane Library, Medline and Ovid was used to identify studies assessing TTS with short-term measures of missed injuries and long-term health outcomes. ‘Missed injury’ was defined as either: Type I) any injury missed at primary and secondary survey and detected by the TTS; or Type II) any injury missed at primary and secondary survey and missed by the TTS, detected during hospital stay. Two authors independently selected studies. Risk of bias for observational studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.ResultsTen observational studies met our inclusion criteria. None was randomized and none reported long-term health outcomes. Their risk of bias varied considerably. Nine studies assessed Type I missed injury and found an overall rate of 4.3%. A single study reported Type II missed injury with a rate of 1.5%. Three studies reported outcome data on missed injuries for both control and intervention cohorts, with two reporting an increase in Type I missed injuries (3% vs. 7%, P<0.01), and one a decrease in Type II missed injuries (2.4% vs. 1.5%, P=0.01).ConclusionsOverall Type I and Type II missed injury rates were 4.3% and 1.5%. Routine TTS performance increased Type I and reduced Type II missed injuries. However, evidence is sub-optimal: few observational studies, non-uniform outcome definitions and moderate risk of bias. Future studies should address these issues to allow for the use of missed injury rate as a quality indicator for trauma care performance and benchmarking.

What is the effect of a formalised trauma tertiary survey procedure on missed injury rates in multi-trauma patients? Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BackgroundMissed injury is commonly used as a quality indicator in trauma care. The trauma tertiary survey (TTS) has been proposed to reduce missed injuries. However a systematic review assessing the effect of the TTS on missed injury rates in trauma patients found only observational studies, only suggesting a possible increase in early detection and reduction in missed injuries, with significant potential biases. Therefore, more robust methods are necessary to test whether implementation of a formal TTS will increase early in-hospital injury detection, decrease delayed diagnosis and decrease missed injuries after hospital discharge.Methods/DesignWe propose a cluster-randomised, controlled trial to evaluate trauma care enhanced with a formalised TTS procedure. Currently, 20 to 25% of trauma patients routinely have a TTS performed. We expect this to increase to at least 75%. The design is for 6,380 multi-trauma patients in approximately 16 hospitals recruited over 24 months. In the first 12 months, patients will be randomised (by hospital) and allocated 1:1 to receive either the intervention (Group 1) or usual care (Group 2). The recruitment for the second 12 months will entail Group 1 hospitals continuing the TTS, and the Group 2 hospitals beginning it to enable estimates of the persistence of the intervention. The intervention is complex: implementation of formal TTS form, small group education, and executive directive to mandate both. Outcome data will be prospectively collected from (electronic) medical records and patient (telephone follow-up) questionnaires. Missed injuries will be adjudicated by a blinded expert panel. The primary outcome is missed injuries after hospital discharge; secondary outcomes are maintenance of the intervention effect, in-hospital missed injuries, tertiary survey performance rate, hospital and ICU bed days, interventions required for missed injuries, advanced diagnostic imaging requirements, readmissions to hospital, days of work and quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L) and mortality.DiscussionThe findings of this study may alter the delivery of international trauma care. If formal TTS is (cost-) effective this intervention should be implemented widely. If not, where already partly implemented, it should be abandoned. Study findings will be disseminated widely to relevant clinicians and health funders.Trial registrationANZCTR: ACTRN12613001218785, prospectively registered, 5 November 2013

Implant removal after internal fixation of a femoral neck fracture: Effects on physical functioning

Objectives: The effect of implant removal after internal fixation of a femoral neck fracture on physical functioning was analyzed. Characteristics of patients who had their implant removed were studied, as it is currently unknown from which type of patients implants are removed and what effect removal has on function. Design: Secondary cohort study alongside a randomized controlled trial. Setting: Multicenter study in 14 hospitals. Patients and Intervention: Patients who had their implant removed after internal fixation of a femoral neck fracture are compared with patients who did not. Main outcome measurements: Patient characteristics and quality of life (Short Form 12, Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index) were compared. Matched pairs were selected based on patient/fracture characteristics and prefracture physical functioning. Results: Of 162 patients, 37 (23%) had their implant removed. These patients were younger (median age: 67 vs. 72 years, P = 0.024) and more often independently ambulatory prefracture (100% vs. 84%, P = 0.008) than patients who did not. They more often had evident implant back-out on x-rays (54% vs. 34%, P = 0.035), possibly related to a higher rate of Pauwels 3 fractures (41% vs. 22%, P = 0.032). In time, quality of life improved more in implant removal patients [+2 vs. −4 points, Short Form 12 (physical component), P = 0.024; +9 vs. 0 points, Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index, P = 0.019]. Conclusions: Implant removal after internal fixation of a femoral neck fracture positively influenced quality of life. Implant removal patients were younger and more often independently ambulatory prefracture, more often had a Pauwels 3 fracture, and an evident implant back-out. Implant removal should be considered liberally for these patients if pain persists or functional recovery is unsatisfactory. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Vitamin D use and health outcomes after surgery for hip fracture

Daily administration of vitamin D is important for maintaining bone homeostasis. The orthopedic community has shown increased interest in vitamin D supplementation and patient outcomes after fracture. The current study used data from a large hip fracture trial to determine the proportion of patients who consistently used vitamin D after hip fracture surgery and to determine whether supplementation was associated with improved health-related quality of life and reduced reoperation rates. The FAITH study is a multicenter trial of elderly patients with femoral neck fracture treated with internal fixation. The current study asked a subset of patients included in the FAITH study about vitamin D supplementation and categorized them as consistent users, inconsistent users, or nonusers. This study also evaluated whether supplementation was associated with improved quality of life and reduced reoperation rates. The final analysis included 573 patients (mean age, 74.1 years; female, 66.3%; nondis-placed fractures, 72.4%). A total of 18.7% of participants reported no use of vitamin D, 35.6% reported inconsistent use, and 45.7% reported consistent use. Adjusted analysis found that consistent supplementation was associated with a 2.42 increase of the Short Form-12 physical component score 12 months postoperatively (P=.033). However, supplementation was not associated with reduced reoperation rates (P=.386). Despite guidelines recommending vitamin D supplementation, a low proportion of elderly patients with hip fracture use vitamin D consistently, suggesting a need for additional strategies to promote compliance. This study found that the use of vitamin D was associated with a statistically significant but not clinically significant improvement in health-related quality of life after hip fracture. Further research is needed to confirm these findings. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(5):e868-e875.].