The comparison of functional bracing of humeral shaft fractures: thermoplastic custom against preprepared commercial braces.

BACKGROUND: Functional humeral bracing of midshaft humeral fractures has been widely accepted as a gold standard for nonoperative treatment. Despite reported high union rates, there is no proven superiority of any orthosis. Here we aim to compare the outcomes after the use of custom-made thermoplastic vs. commercial humeral brace with regard to time to union, nonunion rates, types of nonunion, and conversion to surgery. METHODS: Patients with humeral fractures treated between 2018 and 2021 were identified retrospectively by electronic records. Only diaphyseal humerus fractures (AO 12) were included in the study. Proximal (AO 11) or distal (AO 13) fractures, open fractures, pathologic fractures, bilateral fractures, multiple fractures, and patients lost to follow-up were excluded. Patients attending one center received a custom-made thermoplastic splint, whereas those at the other center had an off-the-shelf humeral brace applied. Radiologic union was defined as healing of at least 3 of 4 cortices determined from follow-up radiographs. Data calculations were performed using the χ2 test. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients treated with a thermoplastic brace and 43 with a commercial brace were identified. A total of 52 men were included, and the cohort's mean age was 60.1 years (standard deviation: 16.1 years). Both groups had similar gender and age distributions. More patients achieved union with a thermoplastic brace (79.2%) than those with a commercial brace (76.7%), which was statistically significant (χ2, P = .04). Although time to union was similar both clinically and radiologically, patients with a commercial brace converted to surgical treatment more frequently (11 vs. 14 cases). CONCLUSION: Thermoplastic custom-made braces provide better fracture stability, allowing for statistically significantly higher rates of fracture union during a similar treatment period to commercially available splints. Patients wearing a commercial splint were significantly more likely to develop hypertrophic nonunion requiring surgery.

Total hip replacement for displaced intracapsular neck of femur fracture. Are current guidelines appropriate for all patients? Five-year retrospective analysis of 315 cases.

BACKGROUND: According to the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD), in 2018 31.4% of patients with displaced intracapsular neck of femur (NOF) fracture who, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) viewed eligible for total hip replacement (THR), received this operation. We aimed to identify the compliance of performing THR for those patients in our unit and identify the reasons for proceeding with the alternative type of surgery. METHODS: A five-year retrospective review of eligible patients was conducted between January 2014 and Dec 2018. Statistical analysis was performed between groups who did or didn't receive THR. Reasons for not performing THR were identified from pre-operative ward rounds notes. RESULTS: In 2018 our unit performed THR for 44% of eligible cases. This was the highest result over five-years and higher than the national average. Out of the 348 eligible cases, pathological or undisplaced intracapsular fractures were excluded. Reminder received THR (138), hip hemiarthroplasty (166) or internal fixation (11). The average age was 77. Younger patients were more likely to receive THR than 80 years or older (p<0.05). THR group scored 0.4 points higher on AMTS and 0.2 lower on ASA scale then non-THR group (9.8 vs. 9.4 and 2.7 vs. 2.5 respectively). Mean time to surgery was 1.24 days with no significant difference between THR and non-THR group (1.6 vs. 1.1) but a slight delay to surgery during the weekends was noted (1.3 vs 1.8 days). Reasons for not performing THR were well documented as a combination of mobility restrictions and serious medical comorbidities. Retrospectively we judged the surgical decision making to be correct in 95% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Annual NHFD report comments on poor national and individual hospital's compliance with NICE guidelines without allowing surgeons to justify their choice of the procedure undertaken. Surgical decisions are made in a highly specialised multi-disciplinary environment taking into consideration individual patient's frailty and potential morbidity. Details of those discussions should be collected in NHFD to allow further analysis of reasons why surgeons decide not to offer THR to a patient NHFD views as eligible for this procedure. This could help in understanding the complex factors impacting on decision making in those cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.