Establishing surgical volume benchmarks for Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)-accredited fellowship training.

INTRODUCTION: Case volumes of trauma centers and surgeons influence clinical outcomes following orthopaedic trauma surgery. This study quantifies surgical volume benchmarks for Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA)-accredited fellowship training in the United States. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of orthopaedic trauma fellows graduating between 2018 and 2019 to 2022-2023. Case volume percentiles were calculated across categories and variability defined as the fold-difference between 90th and 10th percentiles. Temporal trends were assessed with linear regression. RESULTS: 446 orthopaedic trauma fellows were included in this study. Mean reported case volume increased from 898 ± 245 in 2018-2019 to 974 ± 329 in 2022-2023 (P = 0.066). Mean case volume was 924 over the study period and mostly consisted of other (418 cases, 45 %), subtrochanteric/intertrochanteric femoral neck (84 cases, 9 %), open fracture debridement (72 cases, 8 %), pelvic ring disruption / fracture (55 cases, 6 %), acetabular fracture (41 cases, 4 %), tibial shaft fracture (39 cases, 4 %), and femoral shaft fracture (38 cases, 4 %) cases. Overall variability in total reported case volume was 2.0. Variability was greatest in distal radius fracture (14.8), amputation (9.5), fasciotomy (8.0), and proximal humerus repair (5.0). CONCLUSION: Graduates from OTA-accredited fellowship training perform 924 cases on average, which exceeds the current minimum requirement of 600 cases. Case volume benchmarks can assist trainees and faculty align training goals with fellowship program strengths. More research is needed to determine evidence-based case minimum requirements for core competency training in orthopaedic trauma surgery.

Analysis of the diversity pipeline for the orthopedic trauma surgeon workforce in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of research on the state of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce. The purpose of this study was to analyze the training pathway for diverse candidates in orthopedic trauma as it relates to race, ethnicity, and sex. METHODS: Self-reported demographic data were compared among allopathic medical students, orthopedic surgery residents, orthopedic trauma fellows, and the general population in the United States (2013-2022). Race categories consisted of White, Asian, Black, and Native American/Alaskan Native (NA/AN), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NH/PI). Ethnicity categories were Hispanic/Latino or non-Hispanic/Latino. Sex categories were male and female. Representation was calculated at each stage of accredited training. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) quantified the equitable representation of demographic groups in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce relative to the US population. PPR thresholds were used to classify representation as overrepresented (PPR > 1.2), equitable (PPR = 0.8-1.2), and underrepresented (PPR < 0.8). RESULTS: Relative to medical school and orthopedic surgery residency, fewer female (48.5 % vs 16.7 % vs 18.7 %, P < 0.001), Hispanic (6.1 % vs 4.5 % vs 2.6 %, P < 0.001), Black (6.9 % vs 5.0 % vs 3.1 %, P < 0.001), and Asian (24.0 % vs 14.3 % vs 12.2 %, P < 0.001) trainees existed in orthopedic trauma fellowship training. In contrast, more male (51.5 % vs 83.3 % vs 81.3 %, P < 0.001) and White (62.8 % vs 79.1 % vs 84.0 %, P < 0.001) trainees existed in orthopedic trauma fellowship relative to earlier training stages. There were zero NA/AN or NH/PI trainees in orthopedic trauma (PPR = 0). Relative to the US population, Hispanic (PPR = 0.14), Black (PPR = 0.25), and female (PPR = 0.37) trainees were underrepresented in orthopedic trauma. In contrast, Asian (PPR = 2.04), male (PPR = 1.64), and White (PPR = 1.36) trainees were overrepresented in orthopedic trauma. CONCLUSION: Women, racial, and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the emerging orthopedic trauma workforce relative to the US population, and earlier stages of training. Targeted recruitment and guided mentorship of these groups may lead to greater interest, engagement, and diversity in orthopedic trauma.

Venous thromboembolism testing practices after orthopaedic trauma: prophylaxis regimen does not influence testing patterns.

Objectives: To determine venous thromboembolism (VTE) testing patterns in an orthopaedic trauma population and to evaluate for differences in VTE surveillance by prophylaxis regimen through a secondary analysis of the ADAPT trial. Design: Prospective randomized trial. Setting: Level I trauma center. Patients: Three hundred twenty-nine adult (18 years and older) trauma patients presenting with an operative extremity fracture proximal to the metatarsals/carpals or any pelvic or acetabular fracture requiring VTE prophylaxis. Intervention: VTE imaging studies recorded within 90 days post injury. Main Outcome Measurements: Percentage of patients tested for VTE were compared between treatment groups using Fisher's exact test. Subsequently, multivariable regression was used to determine patient factors significantly associated with risk of receiving a VTE imaging study. Results: Sixty-seven patients (20.4%) had VTE tests ordered during the study period. Twenty (29.9%) of these 67 patients with ordered VTE imaging tests had a positive finding. No difference in proportion of patients tested for VTE by prophylaxis regimen (18.8% on aspirin vs. 22.0% on LMWH, P = 0.50) was observed. Factors associated with increased likelihood of VTE testing included White race (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.26-5.42), increased Injury Severity Score (aOR for every 1-point increase: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.05-1.15), and lower socioeconomic status based on the Area Deprivation Index (aOR for every 10-point increase: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.00-1.30). Conclusions: VTE surveillance did not significantly differ by prophylaxis regimen. Patient demographic factors including race, injury severity, and socioeconomic status were associated with differences in VTE surveillance. Level of Evidence: Level I, Therapeutic.

Fix or Replace? Patient Preferences for the Treatment of Geriatric Lower Extremity Fractures: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Introduction: When considering treatment options for geriatric patients with lower extremity fractures, little is known about which outcomes are prioritized by patients. This study aimed to determine the patient preferences for outcomes after a geriatric lower extremity fracture. Materials and Methods: We administered a discrete choice experiment survey to 150 patients who were at least 60 years of age and treated for a lower extremity fracture at a Level I trauma center. The discrete choice experiment presented study participants with 8 sets of hypothetical outcome comparisons, including joint preservation (yes or no), risk of reoperation at 6 months and 24 months, postoperative weightbearing status, disposition, and function as measured by return to baseline walking distance. We estimated the relative importance of these potential outcomes using multinomial logit modeling. Results: The strongest patient preference was for maintained function after treatment (59%, P < .001), followed by reoperation within 6 months (12%, P < .001). Although patients generally favored joint preservation, patients were willing to change their preference in favor of joint replacement if it increased function (walking distance) by 13% (SE, 66%). Reducing the short-term reoperation risk (12%, P < .001) was more important to patients than reducing long-term reoperation risk (4%, P = .33). Disposition and weightbearing status were lesser priorities to patients (9%, P < .001 and 7%, P < .001, respectively). Discussion: After a lower extremity fracture, geriatric patients prioritized maintained walking function. Avoiding short-term reoperation was more important than avoiding long-term reoperation. Joint preservation through fracture fixation was the preferred treatment of geriatric patients unless arthroplasty or arthrodesis provides a meaningful functional benefit. Hospital disposition and postoperative weightbearing status were less important to patients than the other included outcomes. Conclusions: Geriatric patients strongly prioritize function over other outcomes after a lower extremity fracture.

Effect of Aspirin Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Thromboprophylaxis on Medication Satisfaction and Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis after orthopaedic trauma. However, recent evidence suggests that aspirin is similar in efficacy and safety. To understand patients' experiences with these medications, we compared patients' satisfaction and out-of-pocket costs after thromboprophylaxis with aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the PREVENTion of CLots in Orthopaedic Trauma (PREVENT CLOT) trial, conducted at 21 trauma centers in the U.S. and Canada. We included adult patients with an operatively treated extremity fracture or a pelvic or acetabular fracture. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) twice daily or 81 mg of aspirin twice daily for thromboprophylaxis. The duration of the thromboprophylaxis, including post-discharge prescription, was based on hospital protocols. The study outcomes included patient satisfaction with and out-of-pocket costs for their thromboprophylactic medication measured on ordinal scales. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 12,211 patients (mean age and standard deviation [SD], 45 ± 18 years; 62% male), 9725 of whom completed the question regarding their satisfaction with the medication and 6723 of whom reported their out-of-pocket costs. The odds of greater satisfaction were 2.6 times higher for patients assigned to aspirin than those assigned to low-molecular-weight heparin (odds ratio [OR]: 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.39 to 2.80; p < 0.001). Overall, the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs for thromboprophylaxis medication were 51% higher for patients assigned to aspirin compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.37 to 1.66; p < 0.001). However, patients assigned to aspirin had substantially lower odds of out-of-pocket costs of at least $25 (OR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.18; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of aspirin substantially improved patients' satisfaction with their medication after orthopaedic trauma. While aspirin use increased the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs, it protected against costs of ≥$25, potentially improving health equity for thromboprophylaxis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Skin Antisepsis before Surgical Fixation of Extremity Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating surgical-site infection have had conflicting results with respect to the use of alcohol solutions containing iodine povacrylex or chlorhexidine gluconate as skin antisepsis before surgery to repair a fractured limb (i.e., an extremity fracture). METHODS: In a cluster-randomized, crossover trial at 25 hospitals in the United States and Canada, we randomly assigned hospitals to use a solution of 0.7% iodine povacrylex in 74% isopropyl alcohol (iodine group) or 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol (chlorhexidine group) as preoperative antisepsis for surgical procedures to repair extremity fractures. Every 2 months, the hospitals alternated interventions. Separate populations of patients with either open or closed fractures were enrolled and included in the analysis. The primary outcome was surgical-site infection, which included superficial incisional infection within 30 days or deep incisional or organ-space infection within 90 days. The secondary outcome was unplanned reoperation for fracture-healing complications. RESULTS: A total of 6785 patients with a closed fracture and 1700 patients with an open fracture were included in the trial. In the closed-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 77 patients (2.4%) in the iodine group and in 108 patients (3.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 1.00; P = 0.049). In the open-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 54 patients (6.5%) in the iodine group and in 60 patients (7.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odd ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.27; P = 0.45). The frequencies of unplanned reoperation, 1-year outcomes, and serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with closed extremity fractures, skin antisepsis with iodine povacrylex in alcohol resulted in fewer surgical-site infections than antisepsis with chlorhexidine gluconate in alcohol. In patients with open fractures, the results were similar in the two groups. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03523962.).

Risk-stratified thromboprophylaxis effects of aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin in orthopedic trauma patients: A secondary analysis of the PREVENT CLOT trial.

BACKGROUND: The PREVENT CLOT trial concluded that thromboprophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in preventing death after orthopedic trauma. However, it was unclear if these results applied to patients at highest risk of thrombosis. Therefore, we assessed if the effect of aspirin versus LMWH differed based on patients' baseline risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). METHODS: The PREVENT CLOT trial enrolled 12,211 adult patients with fractures. This secondary analysis stratified the study population into VTE risk quartiles: low (<1%) to high (>10%) using the Caprini score. We assessed stratum-specific treatment effects using the win ratio method, in which each patient assigned to aspirin was paired with each assigned to LMWH. In each pair, we compared outcomes hierarchically, starting with death, then pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and bleeding. The secondary outcome added patients' medication satisfaction as a fifth composite component. RESULTS: In the high-risk quartile (n = 3052), 80% had femur fracture, pelvic, or acetabular fractures. Thoracic (47%) and head (37%) injuries were also common. In the low risk quartile (n = 3053), most patients had a tibia fracture (67%), 5% had a thoracic injury, and less than 1% had head or spinal injuries. Among high risk patients, thromboembolic events did not differ statistically between aspirin and LMWH (win ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.08, p = 0.42). This result was consistent in the low (win ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.90-1.47, p = 0.27), low-medium (win ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85-1.29, p = 0.68), and medium-high risk quartiles (win ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.80-1.11, p = 0.48). When medication satisfaction was considered, favorable outcomes were 68% more likely with aspirin (win ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.60-1.77; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Thromboembolic outcomes were similar with aspirin or LMWH, even among patients at highest risk of VTE. Aspirin was favored if medication satisfaction was also considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II.

Does Fracture Pattern Really Predict Displacement of LC1 Sacral Fractures?

BACKGROUND: Operative management of minimally displaced lateral compression type-1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries remains controversial. We aimed to assess the proportion of LC1 pelvic fractures that displaced following nonoperative management as a function of specific ring fracture patterns, and we quantified the magnitude of this displacement. METHODS: A retrospective review of the billing registry of a level-I trauma center was performed. Two hundred and seventy-three patients with a high-energy LC1 pelvic ring fracture and <5 mm of sacral displacement were included. The fracture pattern was characterized with use of computed tomography (CT) scans and radiographs. Absolute and interval pelvic ring displacement were quantified with use of previously described methodology. RESULTS: Thirty-five pelvic ring injuries (13%) were displaced. The rate of displacement was 31% (15 of 49) for LC1 injuries involving a complete sacral fracture and bilateral ramus fractures, 12% (7 of 58) for injuries involving a complete sacral fracture and a unilateral ramus fracture, and 10% (5 of 52) for injuries involving an incomplete sacral fracture and bilateral ramus fractures. In displaced injuries, the average interval displacement was 4.2 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 6.8) and the final displacement was 9.9 mm ± 4.2 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that fracture characteristics can be used to predict the likelihood of displacement of LC1 fractures that are treated without surgery. To our knowledge, the present study is the first to describe the magnitude of displacement that may occur in association with LC1 pelvic ring injuries that are treated nonoperatively; however, further studies are needed to determine the clinical impact of this displacement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Does the OTA Open Fracture Classification Align With the Gustilo-Anderson Classification? A Study of 2215 Open Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Open Fracture Classification (OTA-OFC) and Gustilo-Anderson classification of open extremity fractures and determine if there is meaningful alignment between these grading systems. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Level I academic trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients with at least 1 operatively treated open extremity fracture and surgeon-assigned OTA-OFC and Gustilo-Anderson classification. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Frequency, distribution, and association measures of OTA-OFC category scores and Gustilo-Anderson classification types. RESULTS: Two thousand twenty-seven patients (mean age, 43.1 ± 17.5 years) with 2215 fractures were included. Gustilo-Anderson type I or II fractures (n = 961; 43%) most frequently had the least severe scores for all OTA-OFC categories. Type IIIA fractures (n = 978; 44%) were most often assigned intermediate scores for OTA-OFC Bone Loss (n = 564; 58%). Type IIIB fractures (n = 204, 9%) were most often assigned intermediate OTA-OFC Skin scores (n = 120; 59%). Type IIIC fractures (n = 72; 3%) were most often assigned the most severe OTA-OFC Arterial score (n = 60; 83%). In the multivariable model, OTA-OFC Contamination scores showed little association (ß = 0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.09) with Gustilo-Anderson classification severity. Conversely, higher OTA-OFC Arterial (ß = 0.50; 95% CI 0.44-0.56) and Skin (ß = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.40-0.51) scores were strongly associated with more severe Gustilo-Anderson classifications. CONCLUSIONS: OTA-OFC Contamination scores were weakly associated with Gustilo-Anderson classification severity for open fractures. The study findings suggest that the current Gustilo-Anderson classification does not adequately account for injury contamination, a known predictor of infection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Frequency and Characteristics of Posterior Labral Injuries in Operative Acetabular Fractures Treated Through a Posterior Approach: A Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: The association between labral injuries and acetabular fractures is unknown. This study aimed to identify the frequency and characteristics of labral injuries in operatively treated acetabular fractures that cannot be identified on preoperative imaging. METHODS: . DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort. SETTING: Level I trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients with an acetabular fracture operatively treated through a posterior approach. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: The frequency and characteristics of labral injuries. RESULTS: Fifty-three of 71 acetabular fractures (75%; 95% confidence interval, 63%-83%) demonstrated a labral injury visible via the posterior approach. Posterior labral injuries occurred in 89% of operative acetabular fracture patterns involving the posterior wall and most commonly represent a detachment of the posteroinferior labrum (n = 39, 75%). Fractures with a labral injury were more likely to have gluteus minimus damage (93% vs. 61%, P = 0.02), femoral head lesions (38% vs. 17%, P = 0.03), joint capsule detachment (60% vs. 33%, P = 0.05), and fracture patterns involving the posterior wall (89% vs. 50%, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the high rate (89%) of posterior labral injuries in posterior wall fractures, the most common injury pattern being a detachment of the posteroinferior labrum. Labral injuries in acetabular fractures may have important clinical implications and this study is the first to identify the frequency and characteristics of these injuries. Further studies should assess the relationship between labral injuries, treatment strategies, and the progression to post-traumatic osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Can an Orthopedic Hip Fracture Simulator Advance Orthopedic Residents' Hip Fracture Fixation Skills to an Expert Level?

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate hip fracture simulator training and orthopedic resident skill attainment. We hypothesized that after 6 training sessions, improvement in post-training scores in junior residents would exceed that of senior residents and that senior residents would attain expert level proficiency sooner. DESIGN: Thirty orthopedic residents from a single institution completed 6 training sessions. Sessions included a pretest, 9 training modules, and post-test. An expert score was obtained from the average scores of 8 trauma fellows and attending orthopedic traumatologists. The primary outcome measure was overall score. SETTING: A single academic institution. PARTICIPANTS: Orthopedic residents (postgraduate years [PGYs] 1-5). RESULTS: Twenty-six residents completed the study. The mean overall post-training score was 87% of the expert level. Factors associated with post-training score changes were additional training sessions (4.2% improvement [p < 0.01]), time between training sessions (0.3% decrease [p = 0.05]) and PGY5 class (12.1% improvement [p = 0.03]). Fifty-four percent of residents attained the expert overall score. Expert score attainment was not associated with an additional year of training or case log volume. Post-training scores plateaued for the PGY1s and showed linear improvement for the PGY5s. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in trends between training levels suggest this simulator is a useful adjunct to a 5-year orthopedic residency training program.

Work Productivity Loss After Minimally Displaced Complete Lateral Compression Pelvis Fractures.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify work impairment and economic losses due to lost employment, lost work time (absenteeism), and lost productivity while working (presenteeism) after a lateral compression pelvic ring fracture. Secondarily, productivity loss of patients treated with surgical fixation versus nonoperative management was compared. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a prospective, multicenter trial. SETTING: Two level I academic trauma centers. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients with a lateral compression pelvic fracture (OTA/AO 61-B1/B2) with a complete posterior pelvic ring fracture and less than 10 mm of initial displacement. Excluded were patients who were not working or non-ambulatory before their pelvis fracture or who had a concomitant spinal cord injury. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Work impairment, including hours lost to unemployment, absenteeism, and presenteeism, measured by Work Productivity and Activity Impairment assessments in the year after injury. Results after non-operative and operative treatment were compared. RESULTS: Of the 64 included patients, forty-seven percent (30/64) were treated with surgical fixation, and 53% (30/64) with nonoperative management. 63% returned to work within 1 year of injury. Workers lost an average of 67% of a 2080-hour average work year, corresponding with $56,276 in lost economic productivity. Of the 1395 total hours lost, 87% was due to unemployment, 3% to absenteeism, and 10% to presenteeism. Surgical fixation was associated with 27% fewer lost hours (1155 vs. 1583, P = 0.005) and prevented $17,266 in average lost economic productivity per patient compared with nonoperative management. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral compression pelvic fractures are associated with a substantial economic impact on patients and society. Surgical fixation reduces work impairment and the corresponding economic burden. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Technical Factors Contributing to Nonunion in Supracondylar Distal Femur Fractures Treated With Lateral Locked Plating: A Risk-Stratified Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify technical factors associated with nonunion after operative treatment with lateral locked plating. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ten Level I trauma centers. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients with supracondylar distal femur fractures (OTA/AO type 33A or C) treated with lateral locked plating from 2010 through 2019. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Surgery for nonunion stratified by risk for nonunion. RESULTS: The cohort included 615 patients with supracondylar distal femur fractures. The median patient age was 61 years old (interquartile range: 46 -72years) and 375 (61%) were female. Observed were nonunion rates of 2% in a low risk of nonunion group (n = 129), 4% in a medium-risk group (n = 333), and 14% in a high-risk group (n = 153). Varus malreduction with an anatomic lateral distal femoral angle greater than 84 degrees, was associated with double the odds of nonunion compared to those without such varus [odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-4.2; P = 0.03]. Malreduction by medial translation of the articular block increased the odds of nonunion, with 30% increased odds per 4 mm of medial translation (95% CI, 1.0-1.6; P = 0.03). Working length increased the odds of nonunion in the medium risk group, with an 18% increase in nonunion per 10-mm increase in working length (95% CI, 1.0-1.4; P = 0.01). Increased proximal screw density was protective against nonunion (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.92; P = 0.02) but yielded lower mRUST scores with each 0.1 increase in screw density associated with a 0.4-point lower mRUST (95% CI, -0.55 to -0.15; P < 0.001). Lateral plate length and type of plate material were not associated with nonunion. ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Malreduction is a surgeon-controlled variable associated with nonunion after lateral locked plating of supracondylar distal femur fractures. Longer working lengths were associated with nonunion, suggesting that bridge plating may be less likely to succeed for longer fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The VANCO Trial Findings Are Generalizable to a North American Trauma Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the generalizability of treatment effects observed in the VANCO trial to a broader population of patients with tibial plateau or pilon fractures. METHODS: Design and Setting: Clinical trial data from 36 United States trauma centers and Trauma Quality Programs registry data from more than 875 Level I-III trauma centers in the United States and Canada.Patient Selection Criteria: Patients enrolled in the VANCO trial treated with intrawound vancomycin powder from January 2015 to June 2017 and 31,924 VANCO-eligible TQP patients admitted in 2019 with tibial plateau and pilon fractures.Outcome Measure and Comparisons: Deep surgical site infection and gram-positive deep surgical site infection estimated in the TQP sample weighed by the inverse probability of trial participation. RESULTS: The 980 patients in the VANCO trial were highly representative of 31,924 TQP VANCO-eligible patients (Tipton generalizability index 0.96). It was estimated that intrawound vancomycin powder reduced the odds of deep surgical infection by odds ratio (OR) = 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.86) and gram-positive deep surgical infection by OR = 0.39 (95% CI, 0.18-0.84) within the TQP sample of VANCO-eligible patients. For reference, the trial average treatment effects for deep surgical infection and gram-positive deep surgical infection were OR = 0.60 (95% CI, 0.37-0.98) and OR = 0.44 (95% CI, 0.23-0.80), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This generalizability analysis found that the inferences of the VANCO trial generalize and might even underestimate the effects of intrawound vancomycin powder when observed in a wider population of patients with tibial plateau and pilon fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Pragmatic design and inclusion of patient-partner representatives improves participant experience in clinical research.

Objectives: Patient engagement in the design and implementation of clinical trials is necessary to ensure that the research is relevant and responsive to patients. The PREP-IT trials, which include 2 pragmatic trials that evaluate different surgical preparation solutions in orthopaedic trauma patients, followed the patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) methodology throughout the design, implementation, and conduct. We conducted a substudy within the PREP-IT trials to explore participants' experiences with trial participation. Methods: At the final follow-up visit (12 months after their fracture), patients participating in the PREP-IT trials were invited to participate in the substudy. After providing informed consent, participants completed a questionnaire that asked about their experience and satisfaction with participating in the PREP-IT trials. Descriptive statistics are used to report the findings. Results: Four hundred two participants participated in the substudy. Most participants (394 [98%]) reported a positive experience, and 376 (94%) participants felt their contributions were appreciated. The primary reasons for participation were helping future patients with fracture (279 [69%]) and to contribute to science (223 [56%]). Two hundred seventeen (46%) participants indicated that their decision to participate was influenced by the minimal time commitment. Conclusions: Most participants reported a positive experience with participating in the PREP-IT trials. Altruism was the largest motivator for participating in this research. Approximately half of the participants indicated that the pragmatic, low-participant burden design of the trial influenced their decision to participate. Meaningful patient engagement, a pragmatic, and low-burden protocol led to high levels of participant satisfaction.

Patient preferences for physical therapy programs after a lower extremity fracture: a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify patients' preferences for physical therapy programmes after a lower extremity fracture and determine patient factors associated with preference variation. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment. SETTING: Level I trauma centre. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifty-one adult (≥18 years old) patients with lower extremity fractures treated operatively. INTERVENTION: Patients were given hypothetical scenarios and asked to select their preferred therapy course when comparing cost, mobility, long-term pain, session duration, and treatment setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A multinomial logit model was used to determine the relative importance and willingness to pay for each attribute. RESULTS: Mobility was of greatest relative importance (45%, 95% CI: 40% to 49%), more than cost (23%, 95% CI: 19% to 27%), long-term pain (19%, 95% CI: 16% to 23%), therapy session duration (12%, 95% CI: 9% to 5%) or setting (1%, 95% CI: 0.2% to 2%). Patients were willing to pay US$142 more per session to return to their preinjury mobility level (95% CI: US$103 to US$182). Willingness to pay for improved mobility was higher for women, patients aged 70 years and older, those with bachelor's degrees or higher and those living in less-deprived areas. Patients were willing to pay US$72 (95% CI: US$50 to US$93) more per session to reduce pain from severe to mild. Patients were indifferent between formal and independent home therapy (willingness to pay: -US$12, 95% CI: -US$33 to US$9). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with lower extremity fractures highly value recovering mobility and are willing to pay more for postoperative physical therapy programmes that facilitate returning to their pre-injury mobility level. These patient preferences might be useful when prescribing and designing new techniques for postoperative therapy.

Simple design and analysis strategies for solving problems in observational orthopaedic clinical research.

Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard to establishing causal relationships in clinical research. However, these studies are expensive and time consuming to conduct. This article aims to provide orthopaedic surgeons and clinical researchers with methodology to optimize inference and minimize bias in observational studies that are often much more feasible to undertake. To mitigate the risk of bias arising from their nonexperimental design, researchers must first understand the ways in which measured covariates can influence treatment, outcomes, and missingness of follow-up data. With knowledge of these relationships, researchers can then build causal diagrams to best understand how to control sources of bias. Some common techniques for controlling for bias include matching, regression, stratification, and propensity score analysis. Selection bias may result from loss to follow-up and missing data. Strategies such as multiple imputation and time-to-event analysis can be useful for handling missingness. For longitudinal data, repeated measures allow observational studies to best summarize the impact of the intervention over time. Clinical researchers familiar with fundamental concepts of causal inference and techniques reviewed in this article will have the power to improve the quality of inferences made from clinical research in orthopaedic trauma surgery.

Is External Beam Radiation Therapy Really Associated With Low Rates of Heterotopic Ossification After Acetabular Surgery?

OBJECTIVES: Describe rate of postoperative heterotopic ossification (HO) after acetabular surgery in patients who received external beam radiation (XRT) as HO prophylaxis. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Level I trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive series of patients who presented to a single, level I, academic trauma center over a 10-year period (2008-2018) for surgical fixation of an acetabular fracture. Patients eligible for inclusion were those who underwent surgical fixation of an acetabular fracture through a posterior (Kocher-Langenbeck), combined anterior and posterior, or extensile exposure. Patients were excluded if an isolated anterior approach was performed or if an acute total hip arthroplasty was performed at the time of index surgery. INTERVENTION: XRT. MAIN OUTCOME: Severe HO (Brooker class III or IV). RESULTS: The severe HO (Brooker class III or IV) rate for entire cohort was 12% (44 of 361 patients). Of these 44 patients, 30 patients were classified as Brooker III and 14 patients were classified as Brooker IV. The Brooker IV rate for the entire cohort was 4% (14 of 361 patients). Severe HO rates showed a declining trend over the period examined, with a risk reduction of -1.0% per year (95% confidence interval -2.1% to 0.2%; P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the largest single consecutive series on acetabular fracture patients who received XRT as HO prophylaxis. The overall severe HO rate was 12%, which is similar to other comparably large series data on patients who did not receive XRT after surgical fixation acetabular fractures. Although these data suggest that XRT may not be beneficial when used universally for all patients, comparative studies are required to rule out the benefits of XRT for preventing HO in this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.