Randomized feasibility study of an autologous protein solution versus corticosteroids injection for treating subacromial pain in the primary care setting - the SPiRIT trial.

Aims: The primary aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of recruiting and retaining patients to a patient-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing corticosteroid injection (CSI) to autologous protein solution (APS) injection for the treatment of subacromial shoulder pain in a community care setting. The study focused on recruitment rates and retention of participants throughout, and collected data on the interventions' safety and efficacy. Methods: Participants were recruited from two community musculoskeletal treatment centres in the UK. Patients were eligible if aged 18 years or older, and had a clinical diagnosis of subacromial impingement syndrome which the treating clinician thought was suitable for treatment with a subacromial injection. Consenting patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to a patient-blinded subacromial injection of CSI (standard care) or APS. The primary outcome measures of this study relate to rates of recruitment, retention, and compliance with intervention and follow-up to determine feasibility. Secondary outcome measures relate to the safety and efficacy of the interventions. Results: A total of 53 patients were deemed eligible, and 50 patients (94%) recruited between April 2022 and October 2022. Overall, 49 patients (98%) complied with treatment. Outcome data were collected in 100% of participants at three months and 94% at six months. There were no significant adverse events. Both groups demonstrated improvement in patient-reported outcome measures over the six-month period. Conclusion: Our study shows that it is feasible to recruit to a patient-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing APS and CSI for subacromial pain in terms of clinical outcomes and health-resource use in the UK. Safety and efficacy data are presented.

Single nucleus and spatial transcriptomic profiling of healthy human hamstring tendon.

The molecular and cellular basis of health in human tendons remains poorly understood. Among human tendons, hamstring tendon has markedly low pathology and can provide a prototypic healthy tendon reference. The aim of this study was to determine the transcriptomes and location of all cell types in healthy hamstring tendon. Using single nucleus RNA sequencing, we profiled the transcriptomes of 10 533 nuclei from four healthy donors and identified 12 distinct cell types. We confirmed the presence of two fibroblast cell types, endothelial cells, mural cells, and immune cells, and identified cell types previously unreported in tendons, including different skeletal muscle cell types, satellite cells, adipocytes, and undefined nervous system cells. The location of these cell types within tendon was defined using spatial transcriptomics and imaging, and potential transcriptional networks and cell-cell interactions were analyzed. We demonstrate that fibroblasts have the highest number of potential cell-cell interactions in our dataset, are present throughout the tendon, and play an important role in the production and organization of extracellular matrix, thus confirming their role as key regulators of hamstring tendon homeostasis. Overall, our findings underscore the complexity of the cellular networks that underpin healthy human tendon function and the central role of fibroblasts as key regulators of hamstring tendon tissue homeostasis.

A protocol for the conduct of a multicentre, prospective, randomized superiority trial of surgical versus non-surgical interventions for humeral shaft fractures.

Aims: Fractures of the humeral shaft represent 3% to 5% of all fractures. The most common treatment for isolated humeral diaphysis fractures in the UK is non-operative using functional bracing, which carries a low risk of complications, but is associated with a longer healing time and a greater risk of nonunion than surgery. There is an increasing trend to surgical treatment, which may lead to quicker functional recovery and lower rates of fracture nonunion than functional bracing. However, surgery carries inherent risk, including infection, bleeding, and nerve damage. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of functional bracing compared to surgical fixation for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Methods: The HUmeral SHaft (HUSH) fracture study is a multicentre, prospective randomized superiority trial of surgical versus non-surgical interventions for humeral shaft fractures in adult patients. Participants will be randomized to receive either functional bracing or surgery. With 334 participants, the trial will have 90% power to detect a clinically important difference for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire score, assuming 20% loss to follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include function, pain, quality of life, complications, cost-effectiveness, time off work, and ability to drive. Discussion: The results of this trial will provide evidence regarding clinical and cost-effectiveness between surgical and non-surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Ethical approval has been obtained from East of England - Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee. Publication is anticipated to occur in 2024.

Artificial neural networks outperform linear regression in estimating 9-month patient-reported outcomes after upper extremity fractures with increasing number of variables.

Objective: To compare performance between linear regression (LR) and artificial neural network (ANN) models in estimating 9-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after upper extremity fractures using various subsets of early mental, social, and physical health variables. Methods: We studied 734 patients with isolated shoulder, elbow, or wrist fracture who completed demographics, mental and social health measures, and PROs at baseline, 2-4 weeks, and 6-9 months postinjury. PROs included 3 measures of capability (QuickDASH, PROMIS-UE-PF, PROMIS-PI) and one of pain intensity. We developed ANN and LR models with various selections of variables (20, 23, 29, 34, and 54) to estimate 9-month PROs using a training subset (70%) and internally validated them using another subset (15%). We assessed the accuracy of the estimated value being within one MCID of the actual 9-month PRO value in a test subset (15%). Results: ANNs outperformed LR in estimating 9-month outcomes in all models except the 20-variable model for capability measures and 20-variable and 23-variable models for pain intensity. The accuracy of ANN versus LR in the primary model (29-variable) was 83% versus 73% (Quick-DASH), 68% versus 65% (PROMIS-UE-PF), 66% versus 62% (PROMIS-PI), and 78% versus 65% (pain intensity). Mental and social health factors contributed most to the estimations. Conclusion: ANNs outperform LR in estimating 9-month PROs, particularly with a larger number of variables. Given the otherwise relatively comparable performance, aspects such as practicality of collecting greater sets of variables, nonparametric distribution, and presence of nonlinear correlations should be considered when deciding between these statistical methods.

Understanding patient experience of distal tibia or ankle fracture: a qualitative systematic review.

To systematically review qualitative studies of patients with distal tibia or ankle fracture, and explore their experience of injury and recovery. We undertook a systematic review of qualitative studies. Five databases were searched from inception to 1 February 2022. All titles and abstracts were screened, and a subset were independently assessed. Methodological quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. The GRADE-CERQual checklist was used to assign confidence ratings. Thematic synthesis was used to analyze data with the identification of codes which were drawn together to form subthemes and then themes. From 2,682 records, 15 studies were reviewed in full and four included in the review. A total of 72 patients were included across the four studies (47 female; mean age 50 years (17 to 80)). Methodological quality was high for all studies, and the GRADE-CERQual checklist provided confidence that the findings were an adequate representation of patient experience of distal tibia or ankle fracture. A central concept of 'being the same but different' conveyed the substantial disruption to patients' self-identity caused by their injury. Patient experience of 'being the same but different' was expressed through three interrelated themes, with seven subthemes: i) being proactive where persistence, doing things differently and keeping busy prevailed; ii) living with change including symptoms, and living differently due to challenges at work and leisure; and iii) striving for normality, adapting while lacking in confidence, and feeling fearful and concerned about the future. Ankle injuries were disruptive, draining, and impacted on patients' wellbeing. Substantial short- and longer-term challenges were experienced during recovery. Rehabilitation and psychosocial treatment strategies may help to ameliorate these challenges. Patients may benefit from clinicians being cognisant of patient experience when assessing, treating, and discussing expectations and outcomes with patients.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty versus non-surgical treatment for older adults with acute 3- or 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (PROFHER-2: PROximal Fracture of Humerus Evaluation by Randomisation - Trial Number 2).

BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures (PHF) are common and painful injuries, with the majority resulting from falls from a standing height. As with other fragility fractures, its age-specific incidence is increasing. Surgical treatment with hemiarthroplasty (HA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have been increasingly used for displaced 3- and 4-part fractures despite a lack of good quality evidence as to whether one type of arthroplasty is superior to the other, and whether surgery is better than non-surgical management. The PROFHER-2 trial has been designed as a pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of RSA vs HA vs Non-Surgical (NS) treatment in patients with 3- and 4-part PHF. METHODS: Adults over 65 years of age presenting with acute radiographically confirmed 3- or 4-part fractures, with or without associated glenohumeral joint dislocation, who consent for trial participation will be recruited from around 40 National Health Service (NHS) Hospitals in the UK. Patients with polytrauma, open fractures, presence of axillary nerve palsy, pathological (other than osteoporotic) fractures, and those who are unable to adhere to trial procedures will be excluded. We will aim to recruit 380 participants (152 RSA, 152 HA, 76 NS) using 2:2:1 (HA:RSA:NS) randomisation for 3- or 4-part fractures without joint dislocation, and 1:1 (HA:RSA) randomisation for 3- or 4-part fracture dislocations. The primary outcome is the Oxford Shoulder Score at 24 months. Secondary outcomes include quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), pain, range of shoulder motion, fracture healing and implant position on X-rays, further procedures, and complications. Independent Trial Steering Committee and Data Monitoring Committee will oversee the trial conduct, including the reporting of adverse events and harms. DISCUSSION: The PROFHER-2 trial is designed to provide a robust answer to guide the treatment of patients aged 65 years or over who sustain 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures. The pragmatic design and recruitment from around 40 UK NHS hospitals will ensure immediate applicability and generalisability of the trial findings. The full trial results will be made available in a relevant open-access peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN76296703. Prospectively registered on 5th April 2018.

Unhelpful thoughts and distress regarding symptoms are associated with recovery from upper extremity fracture.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that thoughts and emotions regarding symptoms are strongly associated with levels of comfort and capability for a given injury or disease. Longitudinal data from a large cohort of people recovering from an upper extremity fracture provided an opportunity to study how these mindset factors evolve during recovery. METHODS: Seven hundred and four adults (66% women, mean age 59 ± 21 years) recovering from upper extremity fracture completed two measures of reaction to symptoms (the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia), a visual analog scale of pain intensity, and two measures of magnitude of incapability 1 week, 3 to 4 weeks, and 6 to 9 months after fracture. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis identified distinct groupings of questions addressing unhelpful thoughts and feelings of distress regarding symptoms. The number of distinct question groupings of mindset factors diminished over time. Variations in those groupings of mindset factors were associated with a notable amount of the variation in comfort and capability at all time points. Questions pertaining to unhelpful thoughts about symptoms had stronger associations with comfort and capability than questions measuring distress about symptoms, more so as recovery progressed. CONCLUSIONS: The need to integrate mental health into musculoskeletal is bolstered by the observation that mindsets-interpretation of symptoms in particular-are key contributors to comfort and capability.

A systematic review of outcome reporting in clinical trials of distal tibia and ankle fractures : the need for a core outcome set.

AIMS: To describe outcome reporting variation and trends in non-pharmacological randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of distal tibia and/or ankle fractures. METHODS: Five electronic databases and three clinical trial registries were searched (January 2000 to February 2022). Trials including patients with distal tibia and/or ankle fractures without concomitant injuries were included. One reviewer conducted all searches, screened titles and abstracts, assessed eligibility, and completed data extraction; a random 10% subset were independently assessed and extracted by a second reviewer at each stage. All extracted outcomes were mapped to a modified version of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework. The quality of outcome reporting (reproducibility) was assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 105 trials (n = 16 to 669 participants) from 27 countries were included. Trials compared surgical interventions (n = 62), post-surgical management options (n = 17), rehabilitative interventions (n = 14), surgical versus non-surgical interventions (n = 6), and pre-surgical management strategies (n = 5). In total, 888 outcome assessments were reported across seven domains: 263 assessed body structure or function (85.7% of trials), 136 activities (68.6% of trials), 34 participation (23.8% of trials), 159 health-related quality of life (61.9% of trials), 247 processes of care (80% of trials), 21 patient experiences (15.2% of trials), and 28 economic impact (8.6% of trials). From these, 337 discrete outcomes were described. Outcome reporting was inconsistent across trials. The quality of reporting varied widely (reproducibility ranged 4.8% patient experience to 100% complications). CONCLUSION: Substantial heterogeneity in outcome selection, assessment methods, and reporting quality were described. Despite the large number of outcomes, few are reported across multiple trials. Most outcomes are clinically focused, with little attention to the long-term consequences important to patients. Poor reporting quality reduces confidence in data quality, inhibiting data synthesis by which to inform care decisions. Outcome reporting guidance and standardization, which captures the outcomes that matter to multiple stakeholders, are urgently required.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):832-840.

Symptoms of depression and catastrophic thinking attenuate the relationship of pain intensity and magnitude of incapability with fracture severity.

OBJECTIVE: The relative association of pain intensity and magnitude of incapability with pathophysiology, accounting for psychological factors, is incompletely understood. Using moderation analysis, we assessed the association of pain intensity and magnitude of incapability (dependent variables) with fracture severity (independent variable) and the influence of symptoms of depression and catastrophic thinking (moderators) at early and later stages of recovery. METHODS: A cohort of 731 patients recovering from a shoulder, elbow, or wrist fracture, completed self-reported measures of pain intensity, upper extremity capability, symptoms of depression, and catastrophic thinking between 2 and 4 weeks after injury and again between 6 and 9 months after injury. Fracture severity was rated by clinicians, and we used multivariable regression analysis to examine interaction effects of fracture severity, depression, catastrophic thinking, pain intensity, and magnitude of incapability at early and later stages of recovery. RESULTS: Symptoms of depression and catastrophic thinking attenuate the relationship between pain intensity and fracture severity at earlier and later stages of recovery. Symptoms of depression and catastrophic thinking also attenuate the relationship between the magnitude of incapability and fracture severity, but only at early stages of recovery. CONCLUSION: The relative divergence of pain intensity and magnitude of incapability from the level of fracture severity due to the moderating effects of unhelpful thinking and distress, signals a benefit to anticipating mental health opportunities during recovery after fracture. Fracture management can incorporate measures of unhelpful thinking and symptoms of distress to better address these opportunities and ensure comprehensive optimization of recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IIc, prognostic.

Co-producing a multi-stakeholder Core Outcome Set for distal Tibia and Ankle fractures (COSTA): a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Ankle fracture is a common injury with a strong evidence base focused on effectiveness of treatments. However, there are no reporting guidelines on distal tibia and ankle fractures. This has led to heterogeneity in outcome reporting and consequently, restricted the contribution of evidence syntheses. Over the past decade, core outcome sets have been developed to address this issue and are available for several common fractures, including those of the hip, distal radius, and open tibial fractures. This protocol describes the process to co-produce-with patient partners and other key stakeholders-a multi-stakeholder derived Core Outcome Set for distal Tibia and Ankle fractures (COSTA). The scope of COSTA will be for clinical trials. METHODS: The study will have five-stages which will include the following: (i) systematic reviews of existing qualitative studies and outcome reporting in randomised controlled trial studies to inform a developing list of potential outcome domains; (ii) qualitative interviews (including secondary data) and focus groups with patients and healthcare professionals to explore the impact of ankle fracture and the outcomes that really matter; (iii) generation of meaningful outcome statements with the study team, international advisory group and patient partners; (iv) a multi-round, international e-Delphi study to achieve consensus on the core domain set; and (v) an evidence-based consensus on a core measurement set will be achieved through a structured group consensus meeting, recommending best assessment approaches for each of the domains in the core domain set. DISCUSSION: Development of COSTA will provide internationally endorsed outcome assessment guidance for clinical trials for distal tibia and ankle fractures. This will enhance comparative reviews of interventions, potentially reducing reporting bias and research waste.

Factors associated with persistent opioid use after an upper extremity fracture.

AIMS: The increase in prescription opioid misuse and dependence is now a public health crisis in the UK. It is recognized as a whole-person problem that involves both the medical and the psychosocial needs of patients. Analyzing aspects of pathophysiology, emotional health, and social wellbeing associated with persistent opioid use after injury may inform safe and effective alleviation of pain while minimizing risk of misuse or dependence. Our objectives were to investigate patient factors associated with opioid use two to four weeks and six to nine months after an upper limb fracture. METHODS: A total of 734 patients recovering from an isolated upper limb fracture were recruited in this study. Opioid prescription was documented retrospectively for the period preceding the injury, and prospectively at the two- to four-week post-injury visit and six- to nine-month post-injury visit. Bivariate and multivariate analysis sought factors associated with opioid prescription from demographics, injury-specific data, Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Instrumentation System (PROMIS), Depression computer adaptive test (CAT), PROMIS Anxiety CAT, PROMIS Instrumental Support CAT, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), the Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ-2), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11), and measures that investigate levels of social support. RESULTS: A new prescription of opioids two to four weeks after injury was independently associated with less social support (odds ratio (OR) 0.26, p < 0.001), less instrumental support (OR 0.91, p < 0.001), and greater symptoms of anxiety (OR 1.1, p < 0.001). A new prescription of opioids six to nine months after injury was independently associated with less instrumental support (OR 0.9, p < 0.001) and greater symptoms of anxiety (OR 1.1, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that potentially modifiable psychosocial factors are associated with increased acute and chronic opioid prescriptions following upper limb fracture. Surgeons prescribing opioids for upper limb fractures should be made aware of the screening and management of emotional and social health. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):119-124.

Bankart Repair Versus Latarjet Procedure for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 3275 Shoulders.

BACKGROUND: Little consensus is available regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, treatment selection has been based on training and tradition rather than the available evidence. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between arthroscopic Bankart procedure and the Latarjet procedure in the treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability with emphasis on follow-up time. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Ovid, and Web of Science up to January 2018 and included studies that compared arthroscopic Bankart versus Latarjet for treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Continuous data, such as operative time and patient-reported outcomes, were pooled as mean differences (MDs), whereas dichotomous data, such as recurrence, revision, redislocation, arthropathy, infection, and hematoma, were pooled as risk ratios (RRs), with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Pooling data from 7 cohort studies (3275 patients) showed that arthroscopic Bankart was associated with a higher risk of redislocation (RR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.48-5.06; P = .03), a higher risk of recurrence (RR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.91-4.30; P < .0001), and a lower risk of infection (RR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.43; P = .0002) compared with Latarjet, while the effect size did not favor arthroscopic Bankart or Latarjet in terms of Rowe score (MD, 0.22; 95% CI, -5.64 to 6.08; P = .94), revision (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.08-1.39; P = .13), and hematoma (RR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03-1.19; P = .07). The effect estimate showed a pronounced advantage for Latarjet from 6 to 10 years postoperatively in terms of recurrence and redislocation (RR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.98-4.56 and RR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.51-5.38, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results showed that Latarjet had less risk of recurrence and redislocation with longer follow-up time. Both procedures were comparable in terms of Rowe score, the need for revision, and postoperative hematoma formation, whereas Bankart repair was associated with a lower risk of infection.

Public priorities for osteoporosis and fracture research: results from a focus group study.

Four focus groups were conducted with members of the public to identify important areas for future osteoporosis research. Participants identified priorities to increase public awareness of osteoporosis, reduce delays in diagnosis, improve communication between healthcare providers and to improve follow-up and information provision about causes of osteoporosis, medication harms and prognosis. PURPOSE: Patients and the public must be involved in setting research agendas to ensure relevant and impactful questions are prioritised. This study aimed to understand what people living with osteoporosis and fragility fractures felt was important to research, to inform the content of a national survey on research priorities in this area. METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with members of the public with experience of osteoporosis or fragility fractures. The topic guide was co-developed with a patient and public involvement research user group, and explored participants' experiences of osteoporosis including diagnosis, management and effect upon their lives, what aspects of their ongoing care was most important to them and what about their care or condition could be improved. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: A total of twenty-three participants were recruited to four focus groups. Analysis identified two main themes: challenges in living with osteoporosis and healthcare services for osteoporosis. Information needs was a further cross-cutting theme. Participants called for increased public awareness of osteoporosis and wanted healthcare services to address conflicting messages about diet, exercise and medication. Participants described long delays in diagnosis, poor communication between primary and secondary care and the need for structured follow-up as important areas for future research to address. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study provide an understanding of research priorities from the perspective of patients and the public, have informed the content of a national survey and have implications for patient education, health services research and policy.

Early Psychological and Social Factors Explain the Recovery Trajectory After Distal Radial Fracture.

BACKGROUND: This prospective study identified the association of demographic, injury, psychological, and social variables, measured early during recovery, with limitations in function (measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Physical Function Computer Adaptive Test [PROMIS UE]) at 6 to 9 months after a distal radial fracture. Additionally, we assessed variables associated with the PROMIS UE; the abbreviated version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH); the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE); and the 3-Level EuroQol 5 Dimensions Index (EQ-5D-3L) over time. METHODS: A total of 364 adult patients (73% female), with a median age of 65 years (interquartile range, 45.5 to 77 years), who sustained an isolated distal radial fracture completed questionnaires at 3 time periods after the fracture: within 1 week, between 2 and 4 weeks, and between 6 and 9 months. We created a multivariable regression model and a generalized least squares random effects model, accounting for multicollinearity using correlation matrices, the variable inflation factor, and the partial R. RESULTS: Multiple variables within a week of the injury correlated with 6 to 9-month limitations in bivariate analysis. Being retired (partial R = 0.19; p < 0.001), using opioids after the fracture (partial R = 0.04; p < 0.001), using antidepressants (partial R = 0.11; p < 0.001), greater pain interference (partial R = 0.03; p = 0.001), and greater pain catastrophization (partial R = 0.04; p = 0.002) within 1 week of the injury were strong predictors of greater limitations (PROMIS UE) at 6 to 9 months in multivariable analysis. Longitudinal analysis of variables over time demonstrated greater pain interference, greater fear of movement, lower self-efficacy, older age, and female sex as strong predictors of limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery from a distal radial fracture is influenced by a series of demographic, psychological, and social variables. Of these factors, being retired, using opioids, using antidepressants, greater pain interference, and greater pain catastrophization within a week of the injury explain the largest amounts of unique variance in self-perceived upper-extremity physical function. Evaluating the impact of change in variables over time underlined the influence of pain interference as well as the influence of fear of movement and self-efficacy (or resiliency) on limitations in physical function and general health. These findings have important implications for identifying individuals who can benefit from behavioral interventions for these psychological factors to optimize recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The impact of a patient's engagement in their health on the magnitude of limitations and experience following upper limb fractures.

AIMS: Patient engagement in adaptive health behaviours and interactions with their healthcare ecosystem can be measured using self-reported instruments, such as the Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13) and the Effective Consumer Scale (ECS-17). Few studies have investigated the influence of patient engagement on limitations (patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). First, we assessed whether patient engagement (PAM-13, ECS-17) within two to four weeks of an upper limb fracture was associated with limitations (the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Physical Function computer adaptive test (PROMIS UE PF) scores) measured six to nine months after fracture, accounting for demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors. Secondly, we assessed the association between patient engagement and experience (numerical rating scale for satisfaction with care (NRS-C) and satisfaction with services (NRS-S) six to nine months after fracture. METHODS: A total of 744 adults with an isolated fracture of the proximal humerus, elbow, or distal radius completed PROMs. Due to multicollinearity of patient engagement and psychosocial variables, we generated a single variable combining measures of engagement and psychosocial factors using factor analysis. We then performed multivariable analysis with p < 0.10 on bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Patient engagement and psychosocial factors combined to form a single factor (factor 1) accounting for 20% (QuickDASH, semi-partial R2 = 0.20) and 14% (PROMIS UE PF, semi-partial R2 = 0.14) of the variation in limitations six to nine months after fracture. Factor 1 also accounted for 17% (NRS-C, semi-partial R2 = 0.17) of variation in satisfaction with care, and 21% (NRS-S, semi-partial R2 = 0.21) of variation in satisfaction with services. Demographic factors (age, sex, work status) and measures of greater pathophysiology (type of fracture, high-energy injury, post-surgical complications), accounted for much less variation. CONCLUSION: Patients who actively manage their health and demonstrate effective emotional and social functioning share a common underlying trait. They have fewer limitations and greater satisfaction with care during recovery from upper limb fractures. Future efforts should focus on evaluating initiatives that optimize patient engagement, such as patient education, coaching, and a communication strategy for healthcare professionals. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(1):42-47.

Woodcast versus standard casting material for the immobilization of nonoperatively treated distal radial fractures.

AIMS: Distal radial fractures are the most common fracture sustained by the adult population. Most can be treated using cast immobilization without the need for surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a definitive trial comparing the commonly used fibreglass cast immobilization with an alternative product called Woodcast. Woodcast is a biodegradable casting material with theoretical benefits in terms of patient comfort as well as benefits to the environment. METHODS: This was a multicentre, two-arm, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled feasibility trial. Patients with a fracture of the distal radius aged 16 years and over were recruited from four centres in the UK and randomized (1:1) to receive a Woodcast or fibreglass cast. Data were collected on participant recruitment and retention, clinical efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability. RESULTS: Over an eight-month period, 883 patients were screened, 271 were found to be eligible, and 120 were randomized. Patient-reported outcome measures were available for 116 (97%) of participants at five weeks and 99 (83%) at three months. Clinical outcomes and patient acceptability were similar between the two interventions and no serious adverse events were reported in either intervention arm. CONCLUSION: Both interventions were deemed efficacious and safe in the cohort studied. This study showed that a definitive study comparing Woodcast and fibreglass was feasible in terms of patient recruitment and retention. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(1):48-54.

Research priorities for the management of broken bones of the upper limb in people over 50: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: To determine research priorities for the management of broken bones of the upper limb in people over 50, which represent the shared priorities of patients, their families, carers and healthcare professionals. DESIGN/SETTING: A national (UK) research priority setting partnership. PARTICIPANTS: People aged 50 and over who have experienced a fracture of the upper limb, carers involved in their care, family and friends of patients, healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of these patients. METHODS: Using a multiphase methodology in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 15 months (September 2017 to December 2018), a national scoping survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties. These were amalgamated into a smaller number of research questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not already been answered. A second national survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 25 questions was taken to a multi-stakeholder workshop where a consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities. RESULTS: There were 1898 original uncertainties submitted by 328 respondents to the first survey. These original uncertainties were refined into 51 research questions of which 50 were judged to be true uncertainties following a review of the research evidence. There were 209 respondents to the second (interim prioritisation) survey. The top 10 priorities encompass a broad range of uncertainties in management and rehabilitation of upper limb fractures. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 UK research priorities highlight uncertainties in how we assess outcomes, provide information, achieve pain control, rationalise surgical intervention, optimise rehabilitation and provide psychological support. The breadth of these research areas highlights the value of this methodology. This work should help to steer research in this area for the next 5-10 years and the challenge for researchers now is to refine and deliver answers to these research priorities.

Relationship Between Magnitude of Limitations and Patient Experience During Recovery from Upper-Extremity Fracture.

The relationship between the magnitude of limitations (measured by patient-reported outcome measures, or PROMs) and satisfaction with care providers and hospital services (measured by patient-reported experience measures, or PREMs) over the course of recovery after injury is unclear. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between a range of PROMs and 2 PREMs at 3 time points (initial office visit within a week, 2 to 4 weeks, and 6 to 9 months) after shoulder, elbow, and wrist fractures. METHODS: We enrolled 744 adult patients with an isolated shoulder, elbow, or wrist fracture and invited them to complete PROMs (the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Physical Function computer adaptive test [PROMIS UE], PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS PF) scale, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [QuickDASH] questionnaire, EuroQol 5-Dimensions 3-Level Index [EQ-5D-3L], and Oxford Shoulder Score [OSS], Oxford Elbow Score [OES], or Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation [PRWE]) and PREMs (Numerical Rating Scale [NRS] for satisfaction with care providers [NRS-C] and for satisfaction with hospital services [NRS-S]) at their initial visit at the outpatient surgical practice (maximum, 1 week after the fracture), between 2 and 4 weeks after the injury, and between 6 and 9 months after the injury. Correlational analysis was performed at each time point. RESULTS: There was moderate correlation between the PROMIS UE and the NRS-C (r = 0.56) and NRS-S (r = 0.59) at 6 to 9 months after injury, which was stronger than the correlation at the 2 to 4-week mark (NRS-C, r = 0.34; NRS-S, r = 0.36) and at the evaluation that took place within a week after the injury (NRS-C, r = 0.18; NRS-S, r = 0.16). These correlational trends were observed with all forms of PROMs. Patients reporting greater limitations after injury were also less satisfied with their care and services. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing alignment of PROMs and PREMs over the course of recovery after an upper-extremity fracture suggests that restored physical function may improve perceptions of satisfaction with care providers and hospital services over time. Future studies should assess factors that could be addressed to improve patient satisfaction and their limitations during recovery after fracture in order to maximize patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Construct Validity and Precision of Different Patient-reported Outcome Measures During Recovery After Upper Extremity Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Patient perceptions of their limitations after illness and injury can be quantified using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Few studies have assessed construct validity (using correlations and factor analysis) and precision (floor and ceiling effects) of a range of frequently used PROMs longitudinally in a population of patients recovering from common upper extremity fractures according to area (general health, region-specific, or joint-specific measures) and mode of administration (fixed-scale or computer adaptive test). QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the strength of the correlation between different PROMs within 1 week, 2 to 4 weeks and 6 to 9 months after shoulder, elbow, and wrist fractures? (2) Using a factor analysis, what underlying constructs are being measured by these PROMs? (3) Are there strong floor and ceiling effects with these instruments? METHODS: Between January 2016 and August 2016, 734 patients recovering from an isolated shoulder, elbow, or wrist fracture completed physical-limitation PROMs at baseline (the initial office visit after diagnosis in the emergency department), 2 to 4 weeks after injury, and at the final assessment 6 to 9 months after injury. In all, 775 patients were originally approached; 31 patients (4%) declined to participate due to time constraints, four patients died of unrelated illness, and six patients were lost to follow-up. The PROMs included the PROMIS Physical Function (PF, a computer adaptive, general measure of physical function), the PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE, a computer adaptive measure of upper extremity physical function), the QuickDASH (a fixed-scale, region-specific measure), the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) (a fixed-scale, joint-specific measure), and the EQ-5D-3L (a fixed-scale measure of general health). PROMs were evaluated during recovery for construct validity (using correlations and factor analysis) and precision (using floor and ceiling effects). RESULTS: Physical-limitation PROMs were intercorrelated at all time points, and the correlation strengthened over time (for example, PROMIS UE and QuickDASH at 1 week, r = -0.4665; at 2 to 4 weeks, r = -0.7763; at 6 to 9 months, r = -0.8326; p < 0.001). Factor analysis generated two factors or groupings of PROMs that could be described as capability (perceived ability to perform or engage in activities), and quality of life (an overall sense of health and wellbeing) that varied by time point and fracture type, Joint-specific and general-health PROMs demonstrated high ceiling effects 6 to 9 months after injury and PROMIS PF, PROMIS UE and QuickDASH had no floor or ceiling effects at any time points. CONCLUSIONS: There is a substantial correlation between PROMs that assess physical limitations (based on anatomic region) and general health after upper extremity fractures, and these relationships strengthen during recovery. Regardless of the delivery mode or area of focus, PROMs largely appear to represent two underlying constructs: capability and quality of life. Computer adaptive tests may be favored over fixed-scale measures for their efficiency and limited censoring. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.