Routine Follow-Up Radiographs for Ankle Fractures Seldom Add Value to Clinical Decision-Making: A Retrospective, Observational Study.

Currently, the routine use of radiographs for uncomplicated ankle fractures represents good clinical practice. However, radiographs are associated with waiting time, radiation exposure, and costs. Studies have suggested that radiographs seldom alter the treatment strategy if no clinical indication for the imaging study was present. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effect of routine radiographs on the treatment strategy during the follow-up period of ankle fractures. All patients aged ≥18 years, who had visited 1 of the participating clinics with an eligible ankle fracture in 2012 and with complete follow-up data were included. The data were retrospectively analyzed. The sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and the number of, and indications for, the radiographs taken were collected from the medical records of the participating clinics. We assessed the changes in treatment strategy according to the radiographic findings. In 528 patients with an ankle fracture, 1174 radiographs were performed during the follow-up period. Of these radiographs, 936 (79.7%) were considered routine. Of the routine radiographs taken during the follow-up period, only 11 (1.2 %) resulted in changes to the treatment strategy. Although it is common practice to take radiographs routinely during the follow-up period for ankle fractures, the results from the present study suggest that routine radiographs seldom alter the treatment strategy. This limited clinical relevance should be weighed against the health care costs and radiation exposure associated with the use of routine radiographs. For a definitive recommendation, however, the results of our study should be confirmed by a prospective trial, which we are currently conducting.

Is reduction of routine radiograph use in patients with distal radius fractures cost effective? Analysis of data from the multicentre, randomised controlled WARRIOR trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost effectiveness of a reduced imaging follow-up protocol of distal radius fractures compared with usual care. DESIGN: An economical evaluation conducted alongside a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT). SETTING: Four level-one trauma centres in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 341 patients participated (usual care (n=172), reduced imaging (n=169)). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to usual care (routine radiography at 1, 2, 6 and 12 weeks) or a reduced imaging strategy (radiographs at 6 and 12 weeks only for a clinical indication). OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional outcome was assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EuroQol-5Dimensions-3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L). Costs were measured using self-reported questionnaires and medical records, and analysed from a societal perspective. Multiple imputation, seemingly unrelated regression analysis and bootstrapping were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Clinical overall outcomes of both groups were comparable. The difference in DASH was -2.03 (95% CI -4.83 to 0.77) and the difference in QALYs was 0.025 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.06). Patients in the reduced imaging group received on average 3.3 radiographs (SD: 1.9) compared with 4.2 (SD: 1.9) in the usual care group. Costs for radiographic imaging were significantly lower in the reduced imaging group than in the usual care group (€-48 per patient, 95% CI -68 to -27). There was no difference in total costs between groups (€-401 per patient, 95% CI -2453 to 1251). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for QALYs was -15 872; the ICER for the DASH was 198. The probability of reduced imaging being cost effective compared with usual care ranged from 0.8 to 0.9 at a willingness to pay of €20 000/QALY to €80 000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a reduced imaging strategy in the follow-up of distal radius fractures has a high probability of being cost effective for QALYs, without decreasing functional outcome. We, therefore, recommend imaging only when clinically indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The Netherlands trial register (NL4477).

Reduction of routine radiographs in the follow-up of distal radius and ankle fractures: Barriers and facilitators perceived by orthopaedic trauma surgeons.

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Studies suggest that routine radiographs during follow-up of distal radius and ankle fractures result in increased radiation exposure and health care costs, without influencing treatment strategies. Encouraging clinicians to omit these routine radiographs is challenging, and little is known about barriers and facilitators that influence this omission. Therefore, this study aims to identify barriers and facilitators among orthopaedic trauma surgeons that might prove valuable towards the design of a deimplementation strategy. METHODS: A mixed-method approach was used. First, interviews were conducted with orthopaedic trauma surgeons and patients (n = 16). Subsequently, a questionnaire was developed. This questionnaire was presented to 228 orthopaedic trauma surgeons in the Netherlands. Regression analyses were performed in order to identify which variables were independently associated to the decision to stop performing routine radiographs 6 and 12 weeks after trauma if proven not effective in a large randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: In total, 130 (57%) respondents completed the questionnaire. Of these, 71% indicated they would stop ordering routine radiographs if they were proven not effective. Three facilitators were independent predictors for the intention to omit routine radiographs: This will "lead to lower health care costs" (Odds Ratio [OR]: 5.38 and 4.38), the need for "incorporation in the regional protocol" (OR: 3.66 and 2.66), and this will "result in time savings for the patient" (OR: 4.84). CONCLUSIONS: We identified three facilitators that could provide backing for a deimplementation strategy aimed at a reduction of routine radiographs for patients with distal radius and ankle fractures.