Fewer native and periprosthetic femoral fracture patients receive an orthogeriatric review and expedited surgery compared to hip fracture patients.

INTRODUCTION: Disproportionate emphasis has been attributed to hip fracture over other femoral fractures through implementation of Best Practice Tariff (BPT).This retrospective comparative observational cohort study aimed to evaluate the epidemiology of native and periprosthetic femoral fractures and establish any disparities in their management relative to hip fractures. METHODS: All patients ⩾60 years admitted with a native or periprosthetic femoral fracture during July 2016-June 2018 were identified using our hospital database. Results were compared to National Hip Fracture Database data over the same period. RESULTS: 58 native femoral, 87 periprosthetic and 1032 hip fractures were identified. (46/58) 79% and 76/87 (89%) of native and periprosthetic femoral fractures were managed operatively. Surgery was performed <36 hours for 34/46 (74%) of native femoral and 33/76 (43%) of periprosthetic fractures compared to 826/1032 (80%) for hips. Median time to surgery was longer in periprosthetic femoral than hip fracture patients (44.7 vs. 21.6 hours; p < 0.0001). Orthogeriatrician review occurred in 24/58 (41%) and 48/87 (55%) of native and periprosthetic fractures compared to 1017/1032 (99%) for hips (p < 0.0001). One year mortality was 35%, 20% and 26% for native femoral, periprosthetic and hip fracture patients. Cox proportional hazard ratio was higher for native femoral than hip fracture patients (1.75; 95% CI, 1.12-2.73). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates large disparities in management of other femoral and periprosthetic fractures compared to hip fractures, specifically time to surgery and orthogeriatrician review. This may have resulted in the comparatively higher mortality rate of native femoral fracture patients. Expansion of the BPT to include the whole femur is likely to improve outcomes.

Mid-term results of the treatment of complex acetabular fractures with combined acute fixation and total hip replacement in the older patient.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of acetabular fractures in older patients is increasing. The management of these patients is evolving due to the recognition of risks associated with prolonged immobility with conservative treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing fixation and total hip replacement (THR) for displaced acetabular fractures undergoing single operation with acetabular fixation and THR were identified. Outcomes were assessed using radiographs, clinical notes, Oxford Hip Score and EuroQol-5L. RESULTS: 77 patients were identified with 51 completing outcome scores. Mean age 68 years at time of injury. Mean follow-up 5 (2-12) years, OHS 40, EQ-5D 0.78. Revision surgery performed in 7 patients (9%). DISCUSSION: Acute fixation combined with THR for acetabular fractures in the elderly patient, offers good functional outcomes and a low complication rate in the mid-term.

The fate of acetabular fracture fixation at 10 years: rates of conversion to arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Post-traumatic arthritis, implant failure, non-union or avascular necrosis may result in a total hip arthroplasty (THA) after acetabular fracture fixation (AFF). The aim of this study was to report the occurrence of THA after AFF and analyse factors that predict its occurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with AFF between 2010 and 2014, in a major trauma centre, were included. Patients treated conservatively or with acute THA were excluded. Data regarding classification of fracture, details of surgery and follow-up using EQ-5D and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) were recorded prospectively. Postoperative radiographs and CT scans were analysed for accuracy of reduction. The number of patients who underwent secondary THA and indications were recorded. RESULTS: 122 patients with a mean age of 42 years were included. At a mean follow-up of 10 years, the mean OHS was 39 (range 22-48) and EQ-5D was 22 (range 10-25). THA was performed in 10 patients (8%), 50% of which were performed between 2-5 years after AFF. Age >40 years, posterior dislocation and presence of posterior wall fracture, were the only factors associated with progression to THA. The survivorship of fixation at 5 years was 95% (95% CI, 91-98%) and at 10 years was 91% (95% CI, 86-96%). CONCLUSIONS: Conversion to THA after AFF was 8%, with even anatomically reduced posterior wall fractures having a poor prognosis. A period of follow-up of at least 5 years is suggested in patients with risk factors.

Development of trauma systems in Europe-reports from England, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain.

Major trauma systems have evolved in many European countries and have resulted in improved care in terms of mortality and morbidity. Many of the systems have similar history, with reports of either poor services, or a single disaster, driving change of policy and set up. We report on 4 European systems, looking at the background, set up and some of the results. Similar issues are identified including the importance of triage, the concentration of specialist skills which require patients to bypass hospitals, and the standardization of treatment protocols. The issues of rehabilitation and the increasing importance of measuring outcome with patient reported metrics are discussed.

The Ankle Injury Management (AIM) trial: a pragmatic, multicentre, equivalence randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation comparing close contact casting with open surgical reduction and internal fixation in the treatment of unstable ankle fractures in patients aged over 60 years.

BACKGROUND: Close contact casting (CCC) may offer an alternative to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) surgery for unstable ankle fractures in older adults. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to (1) determine if CCC for unstable ankle fractures in adults aged over 60 years resulted in equivalent clinical outcome compared with ORIF, (2) estimate cost-effectiveness to the NHS and society and (3) explore participant experiences. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre, equivalence randomised controlled trial incorporating health economic evaluation and qualitative study. SETTING: Trauma and orthopaedic departments of 24 NHS hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged over 60 years with unstable ankle fracture. Those with serious limb or concomitant disease or substantial cognitive impairment were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: CCC was conducted under anaesthetic in theatre by surgeons who attended training. ORIF was as per local practice. Participants were randomised in 1 : 1 allocation via remote telephone randomisation. Sequence generation was by random block size, with stratification by centre and fracture pattern. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Follow-up was conducted at 6 weeks and, by blinded outcome assessors, at 6 months after randomisation. The primary outcome was the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), a patient-reported assessment of ankle function, at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were quality of life (as measured by the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions, Short Form questionnaire-12 items), pain, ankle range of motion and mobility (as measured by the timed up and go test), patient satisfaction and radiological measures. In accordance with equivalence trial US Food and Drug Administration guidance, primary analysis was per protocol. RESULTS: We recruited 620 participants, 95 from the pilot and 525 from the multicentre phase, between June 2010 and November 2013. The majority of participants, 579 out of 620 (93%), received the allocated treatment; 52 out of 275 (19%) who received CCC later converted to ORIF because of loss of fracture reduction. CCC resulted in equivalent ankle function compared with ORIF at 6 months {OMAS 64.5 points [standard deviation (SD) 22.4 points] vs. OMAS 66.0 points (SD 21.1 points); mean difference -0.65 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.98 to 2.68 points; standardised effect size -0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.15}. There were no differences in quality of life, ankle motion, pain, mobility and patient satisfaction. Infection and/or wound problems were more common with ORIF [29/298 (10%) vs. 4/275 (1%)], as were additional operating theatre procedures [17/298 (6%) vs. 3/275 (1%)]. Malunion was more common with CCC [38/249 (15%) vs. 8/274 (3%); p < 0.001]. Malleolar non-union was lower in the ORIF group [lateral: 0/274 (0%) vs. 8/248 (3%); p = 0.002; medial: 3/274 (1%) vs. 18/248 (7%); p < 0.001]. During the trial, CCC showed modest mean cost savings [NHS mean difference -£644 (95% CI -£1390 to £76); society mean difference -£683 (95% CI -£1851 to £536)]. Estimates showed some imprecision. Incremental quality-adjusted life-years following CCC were no different from ORIF. Over common willingness-to-pay thresholds, the probability that CCC was cost-effective was very high (> 95% from NHS perspective and 85% from societal perspective). Experiences of treatments were similar; both groups endured the impact of fracture, uncertainty regarding future function and the need for further interventions. LIMITATIONS: Assessors at 6 weeks were necessarily not blinded. The learning-effect analysis was inconclusive because of limited CCC applications per surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: CCC provides a clinically equivalent outcome to ORIF at reduced cost to the NHS and to society at 6 months. FUTURE WORK: Longer-term follow-up of trial participants is under way to address concerns over potential later complications or additional procedures and their potential to impact on ankle function. Further study of the patient factors, radiological fracture patterns and outcomes, treatment responses and prognosis would also contribute to understanding the treatment pathway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN04180738. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 75. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This report was developed in association with the National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Unit funding scheme. The pilot phase was funded by the AO Research Foundation.