Best practice guidelines for clinical and radiological assessment of patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Results from the ISHA International Delphi Consensus Project-Phase 2.

In 2018, the International Society for Hip Preservation Surgery (ISHA) initiated a series of Delphi consensus studies to identify the global hip preservation community's current opinion on best practices for different facets of hip preservation surgery. Arthroscopic procedures to treat hip pathologies, such as femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) are now established in mainstream orthopaedic practice. This study establishes recommendations for the investigation of patients with suspected FAIS. The investigation has focused on the three phases of the diagnostic process-patient history, physical examination and special investigations. Our expert panel consisted of 174 international orthopaedic surgeons with expertise in hip preservation surgery, thereby making recommendations generalisable across the globe. After three rounds of survey and analysis with 174 participants per round, our study achieved consensus at a minimum agreement threshold of 80.0% on 55 statements pertaining to the assessment of patients with FAIS. We encourage our junior and senior hip arthroscopy colleagues internationally to consider these statements both to standardize the clinical and radiological assessment of patients with FAIS and to aid in the design of future research.

Anterior knee pain patients without structural knee abnormalities and normal lower limb skeletal alignment have a higher prevalence of cam-femoroacetabular impingement syndrome than the general population.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to ascertain the prevalence of cam femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (cam-FAIS) in anterior knee pain (AKP) patients devoid of both structural patellofemoral joint abnormalities and lower limb skeletal malalignment. A secondary objective was to examine pain and disability differences between AKP patients with and without cam-FAIS. METHODS: A total of 209 AKP patients were screened for eligibility. Inclusion criteria were normal imaging studies and normal lower limb alignment, and exclusion criteria were previous knee surgery and knee and/or hip osteoarthritis. Of those, 49 (23.4%) were eligible and this number matched a previous power analysis to detect statistically significant differences in prevalence of cam-FAIS in a population of AKP patients. The first step in the study sequence was to ask the patient whether they had groin pain. If so, the impingement test was done. Then, the femoral cam morphology defined by an alpha angle greater than or equal to 55° in a 45° Dunn axial view of the hip was ruled out. Additionally, patients completed Kujala and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) functional knee scores for disability assessment. General population control group was obtained from literature. RESULTS: The study included 9 males and 40 females, with an average age of 36 (20-50, ±SD 8.03) years. Groin pain and positive impingement test were found in 26/49 patients (53%). An alpha angle ≥55° was observed in 35/49 patients (71%). A combination of groin pain, positive impingement test and an alpha angle ≥55° was seen in 18/49 patients (37%). The AKP patients with groin pain, a positive impingement test and an alpha angle ≥55° exhibited statistically similar pain and disability levels as AKP patients without cam-FAIS. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that AKP patients without structural abnormalities in the patellofemoral joint and without lower limbs malalignment have a statistically significantly higher prevalence of cam-FAIS than the general population. Moreover, AKP patients with cam-FAIS have a statistically similar degree of pain and disability than AKP patients without it. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Hip fracture surgery performed by cadaveric simulation-trained versus standard-trained orthopaedic trainees: a preliminary multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Aims: To evaluate if, for orthopaedic trainees, additional cadaveric simulation training or standard training alone yields superior radiological and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation or hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture. Methods: This was a preliminary, pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group randomized controlled trial in nine secondary and tertiary NHS hospitals in England. Researchers were blinded to group allocation. Overall, 40 trainees in the West Midlands were eligible: 33 agreed to take part and were randomized, five withdrew after randomization, 13 were allocated cadaveric training, and 15 were allocated standard training. The intervention was an additional two-day cadaveric simulation course. The control group received standard on-the-job training. Primary outcome was implant position on the postoperative radiograph: tip-apex distance (mm) (DHS) and leg length discrepancy (mm) (hemiarthroplasty). Secondary clinical outcomes were procedure time, length of hospital stay, acute postoperative complication rate, and 12-month mortality. Procedure-specific secondary outcomes were intraoperative radiation dose (for DHS) and postoperative blood transfusion requirement (hemiarthroplasty). Results: Eight female (29%) and 20 male trainees (71%), mean age 29.4 years, performed 317 DHS operations and 243 hemiarthroplasties during ten months of follow-up. Primary analysis was a random effect model with surgeon-level fixed effects of patient condition, patient age, and surgeon experience, with a random intercept for surgeon. Under the intention-to-treat principle, for hemiarthroplasty there was better implant position in favour of cadaveric training, measured by leg length discrepancy ≤ 10 mm (odds ratio (OR) 4.08 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 14.22); p = 0.027). There were significantly fewer postoperative blood transfusions required in patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty by cadaveric-trained compared to standard-trained surgeons (OR 6.00 (95% CI 1.83 to 19.69); p = 0.003). For DHS, there was no significant between-group difference in implant position as measured by tip-apex distance ≤ 25 mm (OR 6.47 (95% CI 0.97 to 43.05); p = 0.053). No between-group differences were observed for any secondary clinical outcomes. Conclusion: Trainees randomized to additional cadaveric training performed hip fracture fixation with better implant positioning and fewer postoperative blood transfusions in hemiarthroplasty. This effect, which was previously unknown, may be a consequence of the intervention. Further study is required.

Ankle fracture internal fixation performed by cadaveric simulation-trained versus standard-trained orthopaedic trainees: a preliminary, multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Aims: Ankle fracture fixation is commonly performed by junior trainees. Simulation training using cadavers may shorten the learning curve and result in a technically superior surgical performance. Methods: We undertook a preliminary, pragmatic, single-blinded, multicentre, randomized controlled trial of cadaveric simulation versus standard training. Primary outcome was fracture reduction on postoperative radiographs. Results: Overall, 139 ankle fractures were fixed by 28 postgraduate year three to five trainee surgeons (mean age 29.4 years; 71% males) during ten months' follow-up. Under the intention-to-treat principle, a technically superior fixation was performed by the cadaveric-trained group compared to the standard-trained group, as measured on the first postoperative radiograph against predefined acceptability thresholds. The cadaveric-trained group used a lower intraoperative dose of radiation than the standard-trained group (mean difference 0.011 Gym2, 95% confidence interval 0.003 to 0.019; p = 0.009). There was no difference in procedure time. Conclusion: Trainees randomized to cadaveric training performed better ankle fracture fixations and irradiated patients less during surgery compared to standard-trained trainees. This effect, which was previously unknown, is likely to be a consequence of the intervention. Further study is required.

Moderators, Mediators, and Prognostic Indicators of Treatment With Hip Arthroscopy or Physical Therapy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: Secondary Analyses From the Australian FASHIoN Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although randomized controlled trials comparing hip arthroscopy with physical therapy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome have emerged, no studies have investigated potential moderators or mediators of change in hip-related quality of life. PURPOSE: To explore potential moderators, mediators, and prognostic indicators of the effect of hip arthroscopy and physical therapy on change in 33-item international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) score for FAI syndrome. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Overall, 99 participants were recruited from the clinics of orthopaedic surgeons and randomly allocated to treatment with hip arthroscopy or physical therapy. Change in iHOT-33 score from baseline to 12 months was the dependent outcome for analyses of moderators, mediators, and prognostic indicators. Variables investigated as potential moderators/prognostic indicators were demographic variables, symptom duration, alpha angle, lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), Hip Osteoarthritis MRI Scoring System (HOAMS) for selected magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features, and delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) score. Potential mediators investigated were change in chosen bony morphology measures, HOAMS, and dGEMRIC score from baseline to 12 months. For hip arthroscopy, intraoperative procedures performed (femoral ostectomy ± acetabular ostectomy ± labral repair ± ligamentum teres debridement) and quality of surgery graded by a blinded surgical review panel were investigated for potential association with iHOT-33 change. For physical therapy, fidelity to the physical therapy program was investigated for potential association with iHOT-33 change. RESULTS: A total of 81 participants were included in the final moderator/prognostic indicator analysis and 85 participants in the final mediator analysis after exclusion of those with missing data. No significant moderators or mediators of change in iHOT-33 score from baseline to 12 months were identified. Patients with smaller baseline LCEA (ß = -0.82; P = .034), access to private health care (ß = 12.91; P = .013), and worse baseline iHOT-33 score (ß = -0.48; P < .001) had greater iHOT-33 improvement from baseline to 12 months, irrespective of treatment allocation, and thus were prognostic indicators of treatment response. Unsatisfactory treatment fidelity was associated with worse treatment response (ß = -24.27; P = .013) for physical therapy. The quality of surgery and procedures performed were not associated with iHOT-33 change for hip arthroscopy (P = .460-.665 and P = .096-.824, respectively). CONCLUSION: No moderators or mediators of change in hip-related quality of life were identified for treatment of FAI syndrome with hip arthroscopy or physical therapy in these exploratory analyses. Patients who accessed the Australian private health care system, had smaller LCEAs, and had worse baseline iHOT-33 scores, experienced greater iHOT-33 improvement, irrespective of treatment allocation.

Group sequential designs in pragmatic trials: feasibility and assessment of utility using data from a number of recent surgical RCTs.

BACKGROUND: Assessing the long term effects of many surgical interventions tested in pragmatic RCTs may require extended periods of participant follow-up to assess effectiveness and use patient-reported outcomes that require large sample sizes. Consequently the RCTs are often perceived as being expensive and time-consuming, particularly if the results show the test intervention is not effective. Adaptive, and particularly group sequential, designs have great potential to improve the efficiency and cost of testing new and existing surgical interventions. As a means to assess the potential utility of group sequential designs, we re-analyse data from a number of recent high-profile RCTs and assess whether using such a design would have caused the trial to stop early. METHODS: Many pragmatic RCTs monitor participants at a number of occasions (e.g. at 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery) during follow-up as a means to assess recovery and also to keep participants engaged with the trial process. Conventionally one of the outcomes is selected as the primary (final) outcome, for clinical reasons, with others designated as either early or late outcomes. In such settings, novel group sequential designs that use data from not only the final outcome but also from early outcomes at interim analyses can be used to inform stopping decisions. We describe data from seven recent surgical RCTs (WAT, DRAFFT, WOLLF, FASHION, CSAW, FIXDT, TOPKAT), and outline possible group sequential designs that could plausibly have been proposed at the design stage. We then simulate how these group sequential designs could have proceeded, by using the observed data and dates to replicate how information could have accumulated and decisions been made for each RCT. RESULTS: The results of the simulated group sequential designs showed that for two of the RCTs it was highly likely that they would have stopped for futility at interim analyses, potentially saving considerable time (15 and 23 months) and costs and avoiding patients being exposed to interventions that were either ineffective or no better than standard care. We discuss the characteristics of RCTs that are important in order to use the methodology we describe, particularly the value of early outcomes and the window of opportunity when early stopping decisions can be made and how it is related to the length of recruitment period and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results for five of the RCTs tested showed that group sequential designs using early outcome data would have been feasible and likely to provide designs that were at least as efficient, and possibly more efficient, than the original fixed sample size designs. In general, the amount of information provided by the early outcomes was surprisingly large, due to the strength of correlations with the primary outcome. This suggests that the methods described here are likely to provide benefits more generally across the range of surgical trials and more widely in other application areas where trial designs, outcomes and follow-up patterns are structured and behave similarly.

Arthroscopic hip surgery offers better early patient-reported outcome measures than targeted physiotherapy programs for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Targeted physiotherapy programs (TPP), and surgery, using either open surgical hip dislocation or hip arthroscopy (HA), are the treatment modalities available for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Randomized controlled trials have recently been performed to compare these treatment options. This review was performed to provide a focused synthesis of the available evidence regarding the relative value of treatment options. A systematic search was performed of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials comparing treatment methods. The Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool (RoB2) was used to assess the selected studies. A meta-analysis was performed between homogenous studies. Four trials were identified including 749 patients (392 males). The mean ages of the cohorts ranged between 30.1 and 36.2 years old. Three hundred thirty-five patients underwent HA by 46 surgeons among all trials. Fifty-two patients crossed over from the TPP to the HA group. One of the trials was found to have a high risk of bias, while the other three were between low risk and some concerns. The iHOT-33 was the most commonly used patient-reported outcome measure followed by the HOS ADL and EQ-5D-5L. Others scores were also identified. Scores from two trials could be pooled together for meta-analysis. Apart from SF-12 and GRC, all other scores have shown significantly better outcomes with HA in comparison to TPP at 8- and 12-months follow-up points. HA offers better patient-reported outcomes than TPP for management of FAIS at 8- and 12-months follow-up.

Randomised controlled trial comparing intraoperative cell salvage and autotransfusion with standard care in the treatment of hip fractures: a protocol for the WHITE 9 study.

INTRODUCTION: People who sustain a hip fracture are typically elderly, frail and require urgent surgery. Hip fracture and the urgent surgery is associated with acute blood loss, compounding patients' pre-existing comorbidities including anaemia. Approximately 30% of patients require a donor blood transfusion in the perioperative period. Donor blood transfusions are associated with increased rates of infections, allergic reactions and longer lengths of stay. Furthermore, there is a substantial cost associated with the use of donor blood. Cell salvage and autotransfusion is a technique that recovers, washes and transfuses blood lost during surgery back to the patient. The objective of this study is to determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of intraoperative cell salvage, compared with standard care, in improving health related quality-of-life of patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multicentre, parallel group, two-arm, randomised controlled trial. Patients aged 60 years and older with a hip fracture treated with surgery are eligible. Participants will be randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to either undergo cell salvage and autotransfusion or they will follow the standard care pathway. Otherwise, all care will be in accordance with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. A minimum of 1128 patients will be recruited to obtain 90% power to detect a 0.075-point difference in the primary endpoint: EuroQol-5D-5L HRQoL at 4 months post injury. Secondary outcomes will include complications, postoperative delirium, residential status, mobility, allogenic blood use, mortality and resource use. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: NHS ethical approval was provided on 14 August 2019 (19/WA/0197) and the trial registered (ISRCTN15945622). After the conclusion of this trial, a manuscript will be prepared for peer-review publication. Results will be disseminated in lay form to participants and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15945622.

Arthroscopic hip surgery compared with personalised hip therapy in people over 16 years old with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: UK FASHIoN RCT.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome is an important cause of hip pain in young adults. It can be treated by arthroscopic hip surgery or with physiotherapist-led conservative care. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hip arthroscopy with best conservative care. DESIGN: The UK FASHIoN (full trial of arthroscopic surgery for hip impingement compared with non-operative care) trial was a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial that was carried out at 23 NHS hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were included if they had femoroacetabular impingement, were aged ≥ 16 years old, had hip pain with radiographic features of cam or pincer morphology (but no osteoarthritis) and were believed to be likely to benefit from hip arthroscopy. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly allocated (1 : 1) to receive hip arthroscopy followed by postoperative physiotherapy, or personalised hip therapy (i.e. an individualised physiotherapist-led programme of conservative care). Randomisation was stratified by impingement type and recruiting centre using a central telephone randomisation service. Outcome assessment and analysis were masked. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was hip-related quality of life, measured by the patient-reported International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) 12 months after randomisation, and analysed by intention to treat. RESULTS: Between July 2012 and July 2016, 648 eligible patients were identified and 348 participants were recruited. In total, 171 participants were allocated to receive hip arthroscopy and 177 participants were allocated to receive personalised hip therapy. Three further patients were excluded from the trial after randomisation because they did not meet the eligibility criteria. Follow-up at the primary outcome assessment was 92% (N = 319; hip arthroscopy, n = 157; personalised hip therapy, n = 162). At 12 months, mean International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) score had improved from 39.2 (standard deviation 20.9) points to 58.8 (standard deviation 27.2) points for participants in the hip arthroscopy group, and from 35.6 (standard deviation 18.2) points to 49.7 (standard deviation 25.5) points for participants in personalised hip therapy group. In the primary analysis, the mean difference in International Hip Outcome Tool scores, adjusted for impingement type, sex, baseline International Hip Outcome Tool score and centre, was 6.8 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 12.0) points in favour of hip arthroscopy (p = 0.0093). This estimate of treatment effect exceeded the minimum clinically important difference (6.1 points). Five (83%) of six serious adverse events in the hip arthroscopy group were related to treatment and one serious adverse event in the personalised hip therapy group was not. Thirty-eight (24%) personalised hip therapy patients chose to have hip arthroscopy between 1 and 3 years after randomisation. Nineteen (12%) hip arthroscopy patients had a revision arthroscopy. Eleven (7%) personalised hip therapy patients and three (2%) hip arthroscopy patients had a hip replacement within 3 years. LIMITATIONS: Study participants and treating clinicians were not blinded to the intervention arm. Delays were encountered in participants accessing treatment, particularly surgery. Follow-up lasted for 3 years. CONCLUSION: Hip arthroscopy and personalised hip therapy both improved hip-related quality of life for patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Hip arthroscopy led to a greater improvement in quality of life than personalised hip therapy, and this difference was clinically significant at 12 months. This study does not demonstrate cost-effectiveness of hip arthroscopy compared with personalised hip therapy within the first 12 months. Further follow-up will reveal whether or not the clinical benefits of hip arthroscopy are maintained and whether or not it is cost-effective in the long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN64081839. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

In some people, the ball and the socket of the hip joint develop so that they do not fit together properly. This is called hip impingement, and is an important cause of hip and groin pain in young and middle-aged adults. Treatments include physiotherapy and surgery. Physiotherapy typically involves a programme of 6­10 outpatient consultations that aim to strengthen the muscles around the hip: we called this personalised hip therapy. Surgery can be carried out by a keyhole operation, called a hip arthroscopy, which aims to reshape the hip to prevent impingement. Surgery is normally followed by some physiotherapy. We performed a research study to compare the results of hip arthroscopy and personalised hip therapy in people with hip impingement. A total of 348 people with painful hip impingement in 23 hospitals in the UK agreed to take part. About half were treated with hip arthroscopy and half with personalised hip therapy. We used questionnaires to ask participants about pain in the hip and their ability to do everyday things at 6 months and 1 year after entering the study. At 2 and 3 years, we asked if patients required any additional treatments. We found that both groups improved, but those treated with hip arthroscopy improved a moderate amount more than those treated with personalised hip therapy. However, these improvements were not cost-effective compared with personalised hip therapy at 1 year. We need to see whether or not this difference continues after several years, but the results, so far, suggest that if a person has painful hip impingement, then hip arthroscopy offers greater improvements than personalised hip therapy.

Multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing arthroscopic hip surgery to physiotherapist-led care for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome on hip cartilage metabolism: the Australian FASHIoN trial.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI) is known to lead to self-reported symptom improvement. In the context of surgical interventions with known contextual effects and no true sham comparator trials, it is important to ascertain outcomes that are less susceptible to placebo effects. The primary aim of this trial was to determine if study participants with FAI who have hip arthroscopy demonstrate greater improvements in delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of cartilage (dGEMRIC) index between baseline and 12 months, compared to participants who undergo physiotherapist-led management. METHODS: Multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial comparing physiotherapist-led management to hip arthroscopy for FAI. FAI participants were recruited from participating orthopaedic surgeons clinics, and randomly allocated to receive either physiotherapist-led conservative care or surgery. The surgical intervention was arthroscopic FAI surgery. The physiotherapist-led conservative management was an individualised physiotherapy program, named Personalised Hip Therapy (PHT). The primary outcome measure was change in dGEMRIC score between baseline and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included a range of patient-reported outcomes and structural measures relevant to FAI pathoanatomy and hip osteoarthritis development. Interventions were compared by intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-nine participants were recruited, of mean age 33 years and 58% male. Primary outcome data were available for 53 participants (27 in surgical group, 26 in PHT). The adjusted group difference in change at 12 months in dGEMRIC was -59 ms (95%CI - 137.9 to - 19.6) (p = 0.14) favouring PHT. Hip-related quality of life (iHOT-33) showed improvements in both groups with the adjusted between-group difference at 12 months showing a statistically and clinically important improvement in arthroscopy of 14 units (95% CI 5.6 to 23.9) (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The primary outcome of dGEMRIC showed no statistically significant difference between PHT and arthroscopic hip surgery at 12 months of follow-up. Patients treated with surgery reported greater benefits in symptoms at 12 months compared to PHT, but these benefits are not explained by better hip cartilage metabolism. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry reference: ACTRN12615001177549 . Trial registered 2/11/2015.

Open reduction and internal fixation versus nonoperative treatment for closed, displaced, intra-articular fractures of the calcaneus: long-term follow-up from the HeFT randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: We report the long-term outcomes of the UK Heel Fracture Trial (HeFT), a pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial. METHODS: HeFT recruited 151 patients aged over 16 years with closed displaced, intra-articular fractures of the calcaneus. Patients with significant deformity causing fibular impingement, peripheral vascular disease, or other significant limb injuries were excluded. Participants were randomly allocated to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or nonoperative treatment. We report Kerr-Atkins scores, self-reported difficulty walking and fitting shoes, and additional surgical procedures at 36, 48, and 60 months. RESULTS: Overall, 60-month outcome data were available for 118 patients (78%; 52 ORIF, 66 nonoperative). After 60 months, mean Kerr-Atkins scores were 79.2 (SD 21.5) for ORIF and 76.4 (SD 22.5) for nonoperative. Mixed effects regression analysis gave an estimated effect size of -0.14 points (95% confidence interval -8.87 to 8.59; p = 0.975) in favour of ORIF. There were no between group differences in difficulty walking (p = 0.175), or on the type of shoes worn (p = 0.432) at 60 months. Additional surgical procedures were conducted on ten participants allocated ORIF, compared to four in the nonoperative group (p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: ORIF of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures, not causing fibular impingement, showed no difference in outcomes at 60 months compared to nonoperative treatment, but with an increased risk of additional surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1040-1046.

Assessment of technical skill in hip fracture surgery using the postoperative radiograph: pilot development and validation of a final product analysis core outcome set.

AIMS: To develop a core outcome set of measurements from postoperative radiographs that can be used to assess technical skill in performing dynamic hip screw (DHS) and hemiarthroplasty, and to validate these against Van der Vleuten's criteria for effective assessment. METHODS: A Delphi exercise was undertaken at a regional major trauma centre to identify candidate measurement items. The feasibility of taking these measurements was tested by two of the authors (HKJ, GTRP). Validity and reliability were examined using the radiographs of operations performed by orthopaedic resident participants (n = 28) of a multicentre randomized controlled educational trial (ISRCTN20431944). Trainees were divided into novice and intermediate groups, defined as having performed < ten or ≥ ten cases each for DHS and hemiarthroplasty at baseline. The procedure-based assessment (PBA) global rating score was assumed as the gold standard assessment for the purposes of concurrent validity. Intra- and inter-rater reliability testing were performed on a random subset of 25 cases. RESULTS: In total, 327 DHS and 248 hemiarthroplasty procedures were performed by 28 postgraduate year (PGY) 3 to 5 orthopaedic trainees during the 2014 to 2015 surgical training year at nine NHS hospitals in the West Midlands, UK. Overall, 109 PBAs were completed for DHS and 80 for hemiarthroplasty. Expert consensus identified four 'final product analysis' (FPA) radiological parameters of technical success for DHS: tip-apex distance (TAD); lag screw position in the femoral head; flushness of the plate against the lateral femoral cortex; and eight-cortex hold of the plate screws. Three parameters were identified for hemiarthroplasty: leg length discrepancy; femoral stem alignment; and femoral offset. Face validity, content validity, and feasibility were excellent. For all measurements, performance was better in the intermediate compared with the novice group, and this was statistically significant for TAD (p < 0.001) and femoral stem alignment (p = 0.023). Concurrent validity was poor when measured against global PBA score. This may be explained by the fact that they are measuring difference facets of competence. Intra-and inter-rater reliability were excellent for TAD, moderate for lag screw position (DHS), and moderate for leg length discrepancy (hemiarthroplasty). Use of a large multicentre dataset suggests good generalizability of the results to other settings. Assessment using FPA was time- and cost-effective compared with PBA. CONCLUSION: Final product analysis using post-implantation radiographs to measure technical skill in hip fracture surgery is feasible, valid, reliable, and cost-effective. It can complement traditional workplace-based assessment for measuring performance in the real-world operating room . It may have particular utility in competency-based training frameworks and for assessing skill transfer from the simulated to live operating theatre.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:594-604.

Teamwork in hip preservation: the ISHA 2019 Annual Scientific Meeting.

Hip preservation surgery is now an established part of orthopedic surgery and sports medicine. This report describes the key findings of the 11th Annual Scientific Meeting of International Society for Hip Arthroscopy-the International Hip Preservation Society-in Madrid, Spain from 16 to 19 October 2019. Lectures, seminars and debates explored the most up-to-date and expert views on a wide variety of subjects, including: diagnostic problems in groin pain, buttock pain and low back pain; surgical techniques in acetabular dysplasia, hip instability, femoroacetabular impingement syndrome, labral repair and reconstruction, cartilage defects, adolescent hips and gluteus medius and hamstring tears; and new ideas about femoral torsion, hip-spine syndrome, hip capsule surgery, impact of particular sports on hip injuries, registries, robotics and training for hip preservation specialists. Surgeons, sports physicians, radiologists and physiotherapists looking after young people with hip problems have an increasingly sophisticated armoury of ideas and techniques with which to help their patients. The concept of hip preservation has developed incredibly fast over the last decade; now it is clear that the best results can only be achieved by a multidisciplinary team working together. The 2020s will be the decade of 'Teamwork in Hip Preservation'.

Analysis of Tools Used in Assessing Technical Skills and Operative Competence in Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgical Training: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Robust assessment of skills acquisition and surgical performance during training is vital to ensuring operative competence among orthopaedic surgeons. A move to competency-based surgical training requires the use of tools that can assess surgical skills objectively and systematically. The aim of this systematic review was to describe the evidence for the utility of assessment tools used in evaluating operative performance in trauma and orthopaedic surgical training. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar databases to June 2019. From eligible studies we abstracted data on study aim, assessment format (live theater or simulated setting), skills assessed, and tools or metrics used to assess surgical performance. The strengths, limitations, and psychometric properties of the assessment tools are reported on the basis of previously defined utility criteria. RESULTS: One hundred and five studies published between 1990 and 2019 were included. Forty-two studies involved open orthopaedic surgical procedures, and 63 involved arthroscopy. The majority (85%) were used in the simulated environment. There was wide variation in the type of assessment tools in used, the strengths and weaknesses of which are assessor and setting-dependent. CONCLUSIONS: Current technical skills-assessment tools in trauma and orthopaedic surgery are largely procedure-specific and limited to research use in the simulated environment. An objective technical skills-assessment tool that is suitable for use in the live operative theater requires development and validation, to ensure proper competency-based assessment of surgical performance and readiness for unsupervised clinical practice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Trainers and trainees can gain further insight into the technical skills assessment tools that they use in practice through the utility evidence provided.

Cadaveric simulation versus standard training for postgraduate trauma and orthopaedic surgical trainees: protocol for the CAD:TRAUMA study multicentre randomised controlled educational trial.

INTRODUCTION: The quantity and quality of surgical training in the UK has been negatively affected by reduced working hours and National Health Service (NHS) financial pressures. Traditionally surgical training has occurred by the master-apprentice model involving a process of graduated responsibility, but a modern alternative is to use simulation for the early stages of training. It is not known if simulation training for junior trainees can safeguard patients and improve clinical outcomes. This paper details the protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled educational trial of a cadaveric simulation training intervention versus standard training for junior postgraduate orthopaedic surgeons-in-training. This is the first study to assess the effect of cadaveric simulation training for open surgery on patient outcome. The feasibility of delivering cadaveric training, use of radiographic and clinical outcome measures to assess impact and the challenges of upscaling provision will be explored. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will recruit postgraduate orthopaedic surgeons-in-training in the first 3 years (of 8) of the specialist training programme. Participants will be block randomised and allocated to either cadaveric simulation or standard 'on-the-job' training, learning three common orthopaedic procedures, each of which is a substudy within the trial. The procedures are (1) dynamic hip screw, (2) hemiarthroplasty and (3) ankle fracture fixation. These procedures have been selected as they are very common procedures which are routinely performed by junior surgeons-in-training. A pragmatic approach to sample size is taken in lieu of a formal power calculation as this is novel exploratory work with no a priori estimate of effect size to reference. The primary outcome measure is the technical success of the surgery performed on patients by the participating surgeons-in-training during the follow-up period for the three substudy procedures, as measured by the implant position on the postoperative radiograph. The secondary outcome measures are procedure time, postoperative complication rate and patient health state at 4 months postoperation (EQ-5D-substudies 1 and 2 only). ETHICS, REGISTRATION AND DISSEMINATION: National research ethics approval was granted for this study by the NHS Research Authority South Birmingham Research Ethics Committee (15/WM/0464). Confidentiality Advisory Group approval was granted for accessing radiographic and outcome data without patient consent on 27 February 2017 (16/CAG/0125). The results of this trial will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and will inform educational and clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20431944.

How Does Cadaveric Simulation Influence Learning in Orthopedic Residents?

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to understand how cadaveric simulation impacts learning in orthopedic residents, why it is a useful training tool, and how skills learnt in the simulated environment translate into the workplace. DESIGN: This is a qualitative research study using in-depth, semistructured interviews with orthopedic residents who underwent an intensive cadaveric simulation training course. SETTING: The study was conducted at the University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire, a tertiary care center with integrated cadaveric training laboratory in England, United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: Orthopedic surgery residents in the intervention group of a randomized controlled trial comparing intensive cadaveric simulation training with standard "on the job" training were invited to participate. Eleven of 14 eligible residents were interviewed (PGY 3-6, 8 male and 3 female). RESULTS: Learning from cadaveric simulation can be broadly categorized into intrinsic, surgeon-driven factors, and extrinsic environmental factors. Intrinsic factors include participant ability to "buy-in" to the simulation exercise, willingness to push one's own learning boundaries in a "safe space" and take out on resident experience and self-reported confidence, with the greatest learning gains seen at around the PGY4 stage in individuals who reported low preintervention operative confidence. Extrinsic factors included; the opportunity to perform operations in their entirety without external pressures or attending "take-over," leading to subjective improvement in participant operative fluency and confidence. The intensive supervision of subspecialist attending surgeons giving real-time performance feedback, tips and tricks, and the opportunity to practice unusual approaches was highly valued by participants, as was paired learning with alternating roles as primary surgeon/assistant and multidisciplinary involvement of scrub-staff and radiographers. Cadaveric simulation added educational value beyond that obtained in low-fidelity simulation training by "stirring into practice" and "becoming through doing." In providing ultrarealistic representation of the space, ritualism, and costuming of the operating theater, cadaveric simulation training also enabled the development of a range of nontechnical skills and sociocultural "nontechnical" lessons of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Cadaveric simulation enhances learning in both technical and nontechnical skills in junior orthopedic residents within a single training package. Direct transfer of skills learnt in the simulation training to the real-world operating theater, with consequent patient benefit, was reported. Cadaveric simulation in the UK training system of orthopedics may be of greatest utility at around the PGY 4 stage, at which point operative fluency, independence, and confidence can be rapidly improved in the cadaveric laboratory, to enable the attainment of competence in index trauma operations.

Consensus recommendations on the classification, definition and diagnostic criteria of hip-related pain in young and middle-aged active adults from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018.

There is no agreement on how to classify, define or diagnose hip-related pain-a common cause of hip and groin pain in young and middle-aged active adults. This complicates the work of clinicians and researchers. The International Hip-related Pain Research Network consensus group met in November 2018 in Zurich aiming to make recommendations on how to classify, define and diagnose hip disease in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain as the main symptom. Prior to the meeting we performed a scoping review of electronic databases in June 2018 to determine the definition, epidemiology and diagnosis of hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain. We developed and presented evidence-based statements for these to a panel of 37 experts for discussion and consensus agreement. Both non-musculoskeletal and serious hip pathological conditions (eg, tumours, infections, stress fractures, slipped capital femoral epiphysis), as well as competing musculoskeletal conditions (eg, lumbar spine) should be excluded when diagnosing hip-related pain in young and middle-aged active adults. The most common hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without a distinct osseous morphology (labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions), and that these terms are used in research and clinical practice. Clinical examination and diagnostic imaging have limited diagnostic utility; a comprehensive approach is therefore essential. A negative flexion-adduction-internal rotation test helps rule out hip-related pain although its clinical utility is limited. Anteroposterior pelvis and lateral femoral head-neck radiographs are the initial diagnostic imaging of choice-advanced imaging should be performed only when requiring additional detail of bony or soft-tissue morphology (eg, for definitive diagnosis, research setting or when planning surgery). We recommend clear, detailed and consistent methodology of bony morphology outcome measures (definition, measurement and statistical reporting) in research. Future research on conditions with hip-related pain as the main symptom should include high-quality prospective studies on aetiology and prognosis. The most common hip conditions in active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) FAI syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without distinct osseous morphology including labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions. The last category should not be confused with the incidental imaging findings of labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres pathology in asymptomatic people. Future research should refine our current recommendations by determining the clinical utility of clinical examination and diagnostic imaging in prospective studies.

Physiotherapist-led treatment for young to middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain: consensus recommendations from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018.

The 1st International Hip-related Pain Research Network meeting discussed four prioritised themes concerning hip-related pain in young to middle-aged adults: (1) diagnosis and classification of hip-related pain; (2) patient-reported outcome measures for hip-related pain; (3) measurement of physical capacity for hip-related pain; (4) physiotherapist-led treatment for hip-related pain. Thirty-eight expert researchers and clinicians working in the field of hip-related pain attended the meeting. This manuscript relates to the theme of physiotherapist-led treatments for hip-related pain. A systematic review on the efficacy of physiotherapist-led interventions for hip-related pain (published separately) was conducted and found that strong evidence for physiotherapist-led treatments was lacking. Prior to the meeting, draft consensus recommendations for consideration in the meeting were also developed based on the systematic review. The draft consensus recommendations were presented to all of the meeting participants via email, at least 1 week prior to the meeting. At the meeting, these recommendations were discussed, revised and voted on. Six recommendations for clinical practice and five recommendations for research were included and all gained consensus. Recommendations for clinical practice were that (i) Exercise-based treatments are recommended for people with hip-related pain. (ii) Exercise-based treatment should be at least 3 months duration. (iii) Physiotherapist-led rehabilitation after hip surgery should be undertaken. (iv) Patient-reported outcome measures, measures of physical impairment and measures of psychosocial factors should be used to monitor response to treatment. (v) Physical activity (that may include sport) is recommended for people with hip-related pain. (vi) Clinicians should discuss patient expectations, use shared-decision making and provide education. Recommendations for research were (i) Reporting of exercise programmes: Exercise descriptors such as load magnitude, number of repetitions and sets, duration of whole programme, duration of contractile element of exercise, duration of one repetition, time under tension, rest between repetitions, range of motion through which the exercise is performed, and rest between exercise sessions should be reported. (ii) Research should investigate the optimal frequency, intensity, time, type, volume and progression of exercise therapy. (iii) Research should examine the effect of patient education in people with hip-related pain. (iv) Research should investigate the effect of other treatments used in people with hip-related pain (for example: manual therapy, medications, injections). (v) Research should examine the impact of comorbidities and social determinants on treatment effectiveness in people with hip-related pain. Clinicians and researchers working with young to middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain may use these consensus recommendations to guide, develop, test and implement individualised, evidence-based physiotherapist-led rehabilitation programmes.

Best practice guidelines for arthroscopic intervention in femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: results from an International Delphi Consensus Project-Phase 1.

Arthroscopic procedures to treat hip pathologies such as femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome are now established in mainstream orthopaedic practice. Surgical techniques, rehabilitation protocols and outcomes are widely published. However, consensus on standards of practice remains to be determined. The International Hip Preservation Society (ISHA) has undertaken a research study to identify current areas of consensus across the global hip preservation community. The study focussed on consensus statements on the operative steps in the arthroscopic treatment of FAI syndrome. The study methodology was an online Delphi consensus method to collect aggregate opinions from hip preservation surgeons worldwide. Phase 1 of the planned three-phase study is presented here-focusing on consensus statements on the operative steps in the arthroscopic treatment of FAI syndrome. Ninety-nine statements achieved >80% consensus from a panel of 165 surgeons from six continents. This study is the first to evaluate global consensus on the arthroscopic treatment of FAI syndrome, as well as highlighting areas of contention and avenues for future research.

Negative-pressure wound therapy versus standard dressings for adults with an open lower limb fracture: the WOLLF RCT.

BACKGROUND: Open fractures of the lower limb occur when a broken bone penetrates the skin and is exposed to the outside environment. These are life-changing injuries. The risk of deep infection may be as high as 27%. The type of dressing applied after surgical debridement could potentially reduce the risk of infection in the open-fracture wound. OBJECTIVES: To assess the disability, rate of deep infection, quality of life and resource use in patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb treated with negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) versus standard wound management after the first surgical debridement of the wound. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty-four specialist trauma hospitals in the UK Major Trauma Network. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 460 patients aged ≥ 16 years with a severe open fracture of the lower limb were recruited from July 2012 through to December 2015. Patients were excluded if they presented more than 72 hours after their injury or were unable to complete questionnaires. INTERVENTIONS: Negative-pressure wound therapy (n = 226) where an 'open-cell' solid foam or gauze was placed over the surface of the wound and connected to a suction pump which created a partial vacuum over the dressing versus standard dressings not involving negative pressure (n = 234). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disability Rating Index (DRI) - a score of 0 (no disability) to 100 (completely disabled) at 12 months was the primary outcome measure, with a minimal clinically important difference of 8 points. The secondary outcomes were deep infection, quality of life and resource use collected at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months post randomisaton. RESULTS: There was no evidence of a difference in the patients' DRI at 12 months. The mean DRI in the NPWT group was 45.5 points [standard deviation (SD) 28.0 points] versus 42.4 points (SD 24.2 points) in the standard dressing group, giving a difference of -3.9 points (95% confidence interval -8.9 to 1.2 points) in favour of standard dressings (p = 0.132). There was no difference in HRQoL and no difference in the number of surgical site infections or other complications at any point in the 12 months after surgery. NPWT did not reduce the cost of treatment and it was associated with a low probability of cost-effectiveness. LIMITATIONS: Owing to the emergency nature of the interventions, we anticipated that some patients who were randomised into the trial would subsequently be unable or unwilling to take part. Such post-randomisation withdrawal of patients could have posed a risk to the external validity of the trial. However, the great majority of these patients (85%) were found to be ineligible after randomisation. Therefore, we can be confident that the patients who took part were representative of the population with severe open fractures of the lower limb. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to the existing literature and current clinical guidelines, NPWT dressings do not provide a clinical or an economic benefit for patients with an open fracture of the lower limb. FUTURE WORK: Future work should investigate alternative strategies to reduce the incidence of infection and improve outcomes for patients with an open fracture of the lower limb. Two specific areas of potentially great benefit are (1) the use of topical antibiotic preparations in the open-fracture wound and (2) the role of orthopaedic implants with antimicrobial coatings when fixing the associated fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33756652 and UKCRN Portfolio ID 11783. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 73. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.