High Nonunion and Amputations Rates With Either Early Intramedullary Nail Removal or Retention for Tibial Shaft Fracture-Related Infections.

OBJECTIVES: To compare debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and intramedullary nail (IMN) removal with subsequent strategy for fracture stabilization in the treatment of tibia fracture-related infections (FRIs) occurring within 90 days of initial IMN placement. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control. SETTING: Four academic, Level 1 trauma centers. PATIENTS: Sixty-six patients who subsequently received unplanned operative treatment for FRI diagnosed within 90 days of initial tibia IMN. INTERVENTION: DAIR versus IMN removal pathways. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Fracture union. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients (42.4%) were treated with DAIR and 38 (57.6%) via IMN removal with subsequent strategy for fracture stabilization. Mean follow-up was 16.3 months. At final follow-up, ultimate bone healing was achieved in 75.8% (47/62), whereas 24.2% (15/62) had persistent nonunion or amputation. No significant difference was observed in ultimate bone healing ( P = 0.216) comparing DAIR and IMN removal. Factors associated with persistent nonunion or amputation were time from injury to initial IMN ( P < 0.001), McPherson systemic host grade B ( P = 0.046), and increasing open-fracture grade, with Gustilo-Anderson IIIB/IIIC fractures being the worst ( P = 0.009). Fewer surgeries after initial FRI treatment were positively associated with ultimate bone healing ( P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of FRI within 90 days of tibial IMN with DAIR or IMN removal with subsequent strategy for fracture stabilization results in a high rate, nearly 1 in 4, of persistent nonunion or amputation, with neither appearing superior for improving bone healing outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The coding of telephone consultations in UK primary care databases: are we picking up all the calls?

OBJECTIVES: To examine the use of two coding systems used in the THIN UK primary care research database for the coding of telephone encounters between patient and healthcare professional in primary care. This is relevant to other research databases built on GP clinical systems. Consideration of telephone consultations was particularly important during the COVID-19 pandemic as remote interactions between patient and GP are more numerous than before and are likely to remain at a higher frequency. RESULTS: Telephone encounters could either be indicated by a consultation-type code or by a Read code. All three possible combinations (coded by one method, the other method and both) were in use. In 2014, 30% were coded by the consultation-type, 55% by Read codes and 15% by both. In contrast, in 2000, 77% were coded by the consultation-type, 21% by Read codes and 2% by both. This has important implications because national and regional consultation rates by GPs are often estimated from these research databases by looking only at the consultation-type codes and consequently many encounters will not be detected.

Rapid Analgesia for Prehospital hip Disruption (RAPID): findings from a randomised feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: In managing hip fracture, effective pain relief before admission to hospital is difficult without risking side effects. Although emergency departments routinely use fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB), there has been little evaluation of its use by paramedics before hospital admission. We aimed to assess whether a multi-centre randomised trial to evaluate FICB was feasible. METHODS: Volunteer paramedics used scratchcards to allocate patients with hip fracture at random between FICB and pain relief as usual. Primary outcomes were mortality and quality of life. We also measured adverse events, costs, final diagnosis, length of stay in hospital, pain scores and quality of care and collected qualitative data about acceptability to patients in interviews, and paramedics in focus groups. We pre-specified criteria for deciding whether to progress to a fully powered trial based on the recruitment of paramedics and patients, delivery of FICB, retrieval of outcome data, safety, acceptability, and diagnostic accuracy of hip fracture. RESULTS: We effectively met all progression criteria: we recruited 19 paramedics who randomly allocated 71 patients between trial arms between 28 June 2016 and 31 July 2017; 57 (31 experimental arm, 26 usual care arm, 80% overall) retrospectively consented to follow-up. Just over half (17/31) of experimental participants received FICB; all others had contraindications, including nine taking anticoagulants. Four of the 31 participants assigned FICB and six of the 26 assigned usual care died within 6 months of hospital admission. Serious adverse events were also similar: 3/35 experimental versus 4/36 in usual care. Paramedics' recognition of hip fracture had sensitivity of 49/64 (77%) with a positive predictive value of 46/57 (81%). We received quality of life questionnaires for 30 of 49 patients (61%) at 1 month and 12 of 17 (71%) at 6 months. Patient satisfaction was similar: experimental mean 3.4 (n = 20) versus 3.5 (n = 13) for usual care. CONCLUSIONS: RAPID met all progression criteria within reasonable limits. As equipoise remains, we plan to undertake a fully powered multi-centre trial to test clinical and cost effectiveness of paramedic-administered FICB at the scene of hip fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 60065373 sought 5 November 2015.