Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) is a promising tool to estimate bone structure characteristics and predict fragile fracture. The aim of this pilot cross-sectional study was to evaluate the performance of a multi-channel residual network (MResNet) based on ultrasonic radiofrequency (RF) signal to discriminate fragile fractures retrospectively in postmenopausal women. Methods. RF signal and speed of sound (SOS) were obtained using an axial transmission QUS at one‐third distal radius for 246 postmenopausal women. Based on the involved RF signal, we conducted a MResNet, which combines multi-channel training with original ResNet, to classify the high risk of fragility fractures patients from all subjects. The bone mineral density (BMD) at lumber, hip and femoral neck acquired with DXA was recorded on the same day. The fracture history of all subjects in adulthood were collected. To assess the ability of the different methods in the discrimination of fragile fracture, the odds ratios (OR) calculated using binomial logistic regression analysis and the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) were analyzed. Results. Among the 246 postmenopausal women, 170 belonged to the non-fracture group, 50 to the vertebral group, and 26 to the non-vertebral fracture group. MResNet was discriminant for all fragile fractures (OR = 2.64; AUC = 0.74), for Vertebral fracture (OR = 3.02; AUC = 0.77), for non-vertebral fracture (OR = 2.01; AUC = 0.69). MResNet showed comparable performance to that of BMD of hip and lumbar with all types of fractures, and significantly better performance than SOS all types of fractures. Conclusions. the MResNet model based on the ultrasonic RF signal can significantly improve the ability of QUS device to recognize previous fragile fractures. Moreover, the performance of the proposed model modified by age, weight, and height is further optimized. These results open perspectives to evaluate the risk of fragile fracture applying a deep learning model to analyze ultrasonic RF signal

Aims. This study aims to define the epidemiology of trauma presenting to a single centre providing all orthopaedic trauma care for a population of ∼ 900,000 over the first 40 days of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to that presenting over the same period one year earlier. The secondary aim was to compare this with population mobility data obtained from Google. Methods. A cross-sectional study of consecutive adult (> 13 years) patients with musculoskeletal trauma referred as either in-patients or out-patients over a 40-day period beginning on 5 March 2020, the date of the first reported UK COVID-19 death, was performed. This time period encompassed social distancing measures. This group was compared to a group of patients referred over the same calendar period in 2019 and to publicly available mobility data from Google. Results. Orthopaedic trauma referrals reduced by 42% (1,056 compared to 1,820) during the study period, and by 58% (405 compared to 967) following national lockdown. Outpatient referrals reduced by 44%, and inpatient referrals by 36%, and the number of surgeries performed by 36%. The regional incidence of traumatic injury fell from 5.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.79 to 5.35) to 2.94 (95% CI 2.52 to 3.32) per 100,000 population per day. Significant reductions were seen in injuries related to sports and alcohol consumption. No admissions occurred relating to major trauma (Injury Severity Score > 16) or violence against the person. Changes in population mobility and trauma volume from baseline correlated significantly (Pearson’s correlation 0.749, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.85, p < 0.001). However, admissions related to fragility fractures remained unchanged compared to the 2019 baseline. Conclusion. The profound changes in social behaviour and mobility during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic have directly correlated with a significant decrease in orthopaedic trauma referrals, but fragility fractures remained unaffected and provision for these patients should be maintained. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:182–189

Aims. Ankle fractures are common injuries and the third most common fragility fracture. In all, 40% of ankle fractures in the frail are open and represent a complex clinical scenario, with morbidity and mortality rates similar to hip fracture patients. They have a higher risk of complications, such as wound infections, malunion, hospital-acquired infections, pressure sores, veno-thromboembolic events, and significant sarcopaenia from prolonged bed rest. Methods. A modified Delphi method was used and a group of experts with a vested interest in best practice were invited from the British Foot and Ankle Society (BOFAS), British Orthopaedic Association (BOA), Orthopaedic Trauma Society (OTS), British Association of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgeons (BAPRAS), British Geriatric Society (BGS), and the British Limb Reconstruction Society (BLRS). Results. In the first stage, there were 36 respondents to the survey, with over 70% stating their unit treats more than 20 such cases per year. There was a 50:50 split regarding if the timing of surgery should be within 36 hours, as per the hip fracture guidelines, or 72 hours, as per the open fracture guidelines. Overall, 75% would attempt primary wound closure and 25% would utilize a local flap. There was no orthopaedic agreement on fixation, and 75% would permit weightbearing immediately. In the second stage, performed at the BLRS meeting, experts discussed the survey results and agreed upon a consensus for the management of open elderly ankle fractures. Conclusion. A mutually agreed consensus from the expert panel was reached to enable the best practice for the management of patients with frailty with an open ankle fracture: 1) all units managing lower limb fragility fractures should do so through a cohorted multidisciplinary pathway. This pathway should follow the standards laid down in the "care of the older or frail orthopaedic trauma patient" British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guideline. These patients have low bone density, and we should recommend full falls and bone health assessment; 2) all open lower limb fragility fractures should be treated in a single stage within 24 hours of injury if possible; 3) all patients with fragility fractures of the lower limb should be considered for mobilisation on the day following surgery; 4) all patients with lower limb open fragility fractures should be considered for tissue sparing, with judicious debridement as a default; 5) all patients with open lower limb fragility fractures should be managed by a consultant plastic surgeon with primary closure wherever possible; and 6) the method of fixation must allow for immediate unrestricted weightbearing. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(3):236–242

In the UK, multidisciplinary teamwork for patients with hip fracture has been shown to reduce mortality and improves health-related quality of life for patients, while also reducing hospital bed days and associated healthcare costs. However, despite rapidly increasing numbers of fragility fractures, multidisciplinary shared care is rare in low- and middle-income countries around the world. The HIPCARE trial will test the introduction of multidisciplinary care pathways in five low- and middle-income countries in South and Southeast Asia, with the aim to improve patients’ quality of life and reduce healthcare costs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1369–1371

Aims. Hip fracture is a common condition of the older, frailer person. This population is also at risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is important to understand the impact of coexistent hip fracture and SARS-CoV-2 for informed decision-making at patient and service levels. Methods. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies of older (> 60 years) people with fragility hip fractures and outcomes with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was early (30-day or in-hospital) mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay and key clinical characteristics known to be associated with outcomes after hip fracture. Results. A total of 14 cohort and five case series studies were included (692 SARS-CoV-2 positive, 2,585 SARS-CoV-2 negative). SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an overall risk ratio (RR) for early mortality of 4.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.42 to 5.82). Early mortality was 34% (95% CI 30% to 38%) and 9% (95% CI 8% to 10%) in the infected and noninfected groups respectively. Length of stay was increased in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (mean difference (MD) 5.2 days (3.2 to 7.2)). Age (MD 1.6 years (0.3 to 2.9)); female sex (RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.05)); admission from home (RR 0.51 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.00)); presence of dementia (RR 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.43)); and intracapsular fracture (RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.11)) were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There were statistically, but not clinically, significantly greater Nottingham Hip Fracture Scores in infected compared with non-infected patients (MD 0.7 (0.4 to 0.9)). Conclusion. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with worse outcomes after hip fracture. This is not explained by differences in patient characteristics. These data can be used to support informed decision-making and may help track the impact of widespread adoption of system-level and therapeutic changes in management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):314–322

Aims. We assessed the value of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the prediction of adverse outcome after hip fracture. Methods. Of 1,577 consecutive patients aged > 65 years with a fragility hip fracture admitted to one institution, for whom there were complete data, 1,255 (72%) were studied. Clinicians assigned CFS scores on admission. Audit personnel routinely prospectively completed the Standardised Audit of Hip Fracture in Europe form, including the following outcomes: 30-day survival; in-hospital complications; length of acute hospital stay; and new institutionalization. The relationship between the CFS scores and outcomes was examined graphically and the visual interpretations were tested statistically. The predictive values of the CFS and Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) to predict 30-day mortality were compared using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Results. Significant non-linear associations between CFS and outcomes were observed. Risk of death within 30 days rose linearly for CFS 1 to 5, but plateaued for CFS > 5. The incidence of complications and length of stay rose linearly for CFS 1 to 4, but plateaued for CFS > 4. In contrast, the risk of new institutionalization rose linearly for CFS 1 to 8. The AUCs for 30-day mortality for the CFS and NHFS were very similar: CFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69) and NHFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69). Conclusion. Use of the CFS may provide useful information on outcomes for fitter patients presenting with hip fracture, but completion of the CFS by the admitting orthopaedic team does not appear successful in distinguishing between higher CFS categories, which define patients with frailty. This makes a strong case for the role of the orthogeriatrician in the early assessment of these patients. Further work is needed to understand why patients assessed as being of mild, moderate, and severe frailty do not result in different outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):980–986

Aims

Frailty greatly increases the risk of adverse outcome of trauma in older people. Frailty detection tools appear to be unsuitable for use in traumatically injured older patients. We therefore aimed to develop a method for detecting frailty in older people sustaining trauma using routinely collected clinical data.

Aims

National hip fracture registries audit similar aspects of care but there is variation in the actual data collected; these differences restrict international comparison, benchmarking, and research. The Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) published a revised minimum common dataset (MCD) in 2022 to improve consistency and interoperability. Our aim was to assess compatibility of existing registries with the MCD.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether there have been changes in the complexity of femoral fragility fractures presenting to our Dunedin Orthopaedic Department, New Zealand, over a period of ten years. Patients over the age of 60 presenting with femoral fragility fractures to Dunedin Hospital in 2009 −10 (335 fractures) were compared with respect to demographic data, incidence rates, fracture classification and treatment details to the period 2018-19 (311 fractures). Pathological and high velocity fractures were excluded. The gender proportion and average age (83.1 vs 83.0 years) was unchanged. The overall incidence of femoral fractures in people over 60 years in our region fell by 27% (p<0.001). Intracapsular fractures (31 B1 and B2) fell by 29% (p=0.03) and stable trochanteric fractures by 56% (p<0.001). The incidence of unstable trochanteric fractures (31A2 and 31A3) increased by 84.5% from 3.5 to 6.4/10,000 over 60 years (p = 0.04). The proportion of trochanteric fractures treated with an intramedullary (IM) nail increased from 8% to 37% (p <0.001). Fewer intracapsular fractures were treated by internal fixation (p<0.001) and the rate of acute total hip joint replacements increased from 13 to 21% (p=0.07). The incidence of femoral shaft fractures did not change significantly with periprosthetic fractures comprising 70% in both cohorts. While there has been little difference in the numbers there has been a decrease in the incidence of femoral fragility fractures likely due to the increasing use of bisphosphonates. However, the incidence of unstable trochanteric fractures is increasing. This has led to the increased use of IM nails which are increasingly used for stable fractures as well. The increasing complexity of femoral fragility fractures is likely to have an impact on implant use, theatre time and cost

Introduction. Ankle fractures in the elderly have been increasing with an ageing but active population and bring with them specific challenges. Medical co-morbidities, a poor soft tissue envelope and a requirement for early mobilisation to prevent morbidity and mortality, all create potential pitfalls to successful treatment. As a result, different techniques have been employed to try and improve outcomes. Total contact casting, both standard and enhanced open reduction internal fixation, external fixation and most recently tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing have all been proposed as suitable treatment modalities. Over the past five years popular literature has begun to herald TTC nailing as an appropriate and contemporary solution to the complex problem of high-risk ankle fragility fractures. We sought to assess whether, within our patient cohort, the outcomes seen supported the statement that TTC has equal outcomes to more traditional open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) when used to treat the high-risk ankle fragility fracture. Materials & Methods. Results of ORIF versus TTC nailing without joint preparation for treatment of fragility ankle fractures were evaluated via retrospective cohort study of 64 patients with high-risk fragility ankle fractures without our trauma centre. We aimed to assess whether results within our unit were equal to those seen within other published studies. Patients were matched 1:1 based on gender, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and ASA score. Patient demographics, AO/OTA fracture classification, intra-operative and post-operative complications, discharge destination, union rates, FADI scores and patient mobility were recorded. Results. There were 32 patients within each arm. Mean age was 78.4 (TTC) and 78.3 (ORIF). The CCI was 5.9 in each group respectively with mean ASA 2.9 (TTC) and 2.8 (ORIF). There were two open fractures within each group. Median follow up duration was 26 months. Time to theatre from injury was 8.0 days (TTC) versus 3.3 days (ORIF). There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day, one year or overall mortality at final follow up. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis did however demonstrate that of those patients who died post-operatively the mean time to mortality was significantly shorter in those treated with TTC nailing versus ORIF (20.3 months versus 38.2 months, p=0.013). There was no statistical difference in the overall complication rate between the two groups (46.9% versus 25%, p=0.12). The re-operation rate was twice as high in patients treated with TTC nailing however this was not statistically significant. There was no statistical difference in the FADI scores at final follow up, 72.1±12.9 (TTC) versus 67.9±13.9 (ORIF) nor post-operative mobility status. Conclusions. Within our study TTC nailing with an unprepared joint demonstrated broadly equivalent results to ORIF in the management of high-risk ankle fragility fractures; this replicates findings of previous studies. We did however observe that mean survival was significantly shorter in the TTC group than those treated with ORIF. We believe this may have been contributed to by a delay to theatre due to TTC stabilisation being treated as a sub-specialist operation in our unit at the time. We propose that both TTC and ORIF are satisfactory techniques to stabilise the frail ankle fracture however, similarly to the other fragility fractures, the priority should be on an emergent operation in a timely fashion in order to minimise the associated morbidity and mortality. Further randomised control studies are needed within the area to establish definitive results and a working consensus

Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is an essential part of orthopaedic surgeries in preventing life-threatening thromboembolic events such as Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and Pulmonary Embolism (PE). Orthopaedic surgery has the highest incidence rate of thromboembolic events as compared to any other surgical specialities, making it an essential component in managing any orthopaedic case. At Queen's Medical Centre (QMC), a major trauma centre in the United Kingdom (UK), sees up to 750 NOF fracture cases annually, making it one of the busiest trauma and orthopaedic centres in the UK. Our study aims to evaluate how VTE Prophylaxis is conducted in a UK Major Trauma Centre for NOF and pelvic fragility fractures and how human factors can improve its efficacy. The Nottingham University Hospitals (NUH) Trust has implemented new guidelines from August 2019 that patients with fragility fractures such as NOF and pelvic fractures are prescribed with 28 days VTE prophylaxis with Enoxaparin, or their own anti-coagulants if risk of thrombosis exceed the risk of bleeding. This is an adaptation from the trust to align their guidelines closer to the NICE 2018 guidelines. We will be evaluating the initial compliance of VTE Prophylaxis, identify and utilise human factors, then re-analyse the department after implementing interventions on the same batch of junior doctors working in the department. Data of 100 patients with fragility fractures were collected, 50 consecutive patients in the pre-intervention window during August 2019 and 50 in the post-intervention window during November 2019. The pre-intervention data had 43 NOF and 7 Pelvic fractures. Our study showed that 93% of NOF fracture and 100% of pelvic fracture received the correct course of VTE prophylaxis. The data was presented at the local department junior doctor academic session. Three simple human factor interventions were implemented over the course of September and October: Education to the trauma and orthopaedic department on the new guideline, extended VTE labels on drug charts for patients with fragility fractures, VTE reminder labels at doctors' stations. Another 50 consecutive patients' data were collected during November 2019. Data shows that 97.8% of NOF (p>0.05) and 60% of pelvic fracture (p>0.05) received the correct course of VTE prophylaxis. Our data has shown an increase in correct VTE prescription for NOF fracture patients, which is the main bulk of our fragility fracture patients whilst we see a drop in pelvic fracture patients. Due to the limited time frame of four months where junior doctors in the UK rotate between specialities, we are only able to collect data during the first month, implement interventions between datasets and collect data on the final month of the four-month rotation. A future bigger study might provide a more significant result on the department. We believe that the key to achieving 100% VTE prophylaxis in the T&O department is optimising human factors, educating junior doctors, who are not orthopaedic trained, with sufficient information of the guidelines, and evidence of the risk and benefits of providing prolonged VTE prophylaxis for orthopaedic patients. In conclusion, we found that QMC, a major trauma centre with high patient volume and turnover, has a high level of compliance with VTE prophylaxis for fragility fractures and it is imperative that utilising human factors will inch the department closer to its goal of 100% VTE compliance

Fragility fractures associated with osteoporosis (OP) reduce quality of life, increase risk for subsequent fractures, and are a major economic burden. In 2010, Osteoporosis Canada produced clinical practice guidelines on the management of OP patients at risk for fractures (Papaioannou et al. CMAJ 2010). We describe the real-world incidence of primary and subsequent fragility fractures in elderly Canadians in Ontario, Canada in a timespan (2011–2017) following guideline introduction. This retrospective observational study used de-identified health services administrative data generated from the publicly funded healthcare system in Ontario, Canada from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. The study population included individuals ≥66 years of age who were hospitalized with a primary (i.e. index) fragility fracture (identified using ICD-10 codes from hospital admissions, emergency and ambulatory care) occurring between January 1, 2011 and March 31, 2015. All relevant anatomical sites for fragility fractures were examined, including (but not limited to): hip, vertebral, humerus, wrist, radius and ulna, pelvis, and femur. OP treatment in the year prior to fracture and subsequent fracture information were collected until March 31, 2017. Patients with previous fragility fractures over five years prior to the index fracture, and those fractures associated with trauma codes, were excluded. 115,776 patients with an index fracture were included in the analysis. Mean (standard deviation) age at index fracture was 80.4 (8.3) years. In the year prior to index fracture, 32,772 (28.3%) patients received OP treatment. The incidence of index fractures per 1,000 persons (95% confidence interval) from 2011–2015 ranged from 15.16 (14.98–15.35) to 16.32 (16.14–16.51). Of all examined index fracture types, hip fractures occurred in the greatest proportion (27.3%) of patients (Table). The proportion of patients incurring a second fracture of any type ranged from 13.4% (tibia, fibula, knee, or foot index fracture) to 23% (vertebral index fracture). Hip fractures were the most common subsequent fracture type and the proportion of subsequent hip fractures was highest in patients with an index hip fracture (Table). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) time to second fracture ranged from 436 (69–939) days (radius and ulna index fracture) to 640 (297–1,023) days (tibia, fibula, knee, or foot index fracture). The median (IQR) time from second to third fracture ranged from 237 (75–535) days (pelvis index fracture) to 384 (113–608) days (femur index fracture). This real-world study found that elderly patients in Ontario, Canada incurring a primary fragility fracture from 2011–2015 were at risk for future fractures occurring over shorter periods of time with each subsequent fracture. These observations are consistent with previous reports of imminent fracture risk and the fragility fracture cascade in OP patients (Balasubramanian et al. ASBMR 2016, Toth et al. WCO-IOF-ESCEO 2018). Overall, these data suggest that in elderly patients with an index fragility fracture at any site (with the exception of the radius or ulna), the most likely subsequent fracture will occur at the hip in less than 2 years

To evaluate the effects of 6 and 18 months of abaloparatide (ABL) compared with placebo (PBO) on bone mineral density (BMD) in the acetabular regions of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (OP). Acetabular bone loss, as may occur in OP, increases risk of acetabular fragility fractures. a. In total hip arthroplasty (THA), low acetabular BMD adversely affects primary stability, osseointegration, and migration of acetabular cups. c. ABL is an osteoanabolic agent for the treatment of men and postmenopausal women with OP at high risk for fracture. Effects of ABL on acetabular BMD are unknown. Hip DXA scans were obtained at baseline, 6, and 18 months from a random subgroup of postmenopausal women (aged 49–86 y) from the phase 3 ACTIVE trial randomized to either ABL 80 µg/d or PBO (n=250/group). Anatomical landmarks were identified in each DXA scan to virtually place a hemispherical shell model of an acetabular cup and define regions of interest corresponding to DeLee & Charnley zones 1 (R1), 2 (R2), and 3 (R3). BMD changes compared to baseline were calculated for each zone. Statistical P values were based on a repeated mixed measures model. BMD in all zones were similar at baseline in the ABL and PBO groups. BMD significantly increased in the ABL group at 6 and 18 months compared with PBO (all P<0.0001 vs PBO). BMD in the PBO group was relatively stable over time. ABL treatment resulted in rapid and progressive increases in BMD of all 3 acetabular zones. Increasing acetabular BMD has the potential to improve acetabular strength, which may reduce risk of acetabular fragility fractures. In bone health optimization prior to THA, increased acetabular BMD via ABL may provide better primary stability and longevity of acetabular cups in postmenopausal women with OP

Fragility ankles fractures in the geriatric population are challenging to manage, due to fracture instability, soft tissue compromise, patient co-morbidities. Traditional management options include open reduction internal fixation, or conservative treatment, both of which are fraught with high complication rates. We aimed to present functional outcomes of elderly patients with fragility ankle fractures treated with tibiotalocalcaneal nails. 171 patients received a tibiotalocalcaneal nail over a six-year period, but only twenty met the inclusion criteria of being over sixty and having poor bone stock, verified by radiological evidence of osteopenia or history of fragility fractures. Primary outcome was mortality risk from co-morbidities, according to the Charlson co-morbidity index (CCI), and patients’ post-operative mobility status compared to pre-operative mobility. Secondary outcomes include intra-operative and post-operative complications, six-month mortality rate, time to mobilisation and union. The mean age was 77.82 years old, five of whom are type 2 diabetics. The average CCI was 5.05. Thirteen patients returned to their pre-operative mobility state. Patients with low CCI are more likely to return to pre-operative mobility status (p=0.16; OR=4.00). Average time to bone union and mobilisation were 92.5 days and 7.63 days, respectively. Mean post-operative AOFAS ankle-hindfoot and Olerud-Molander scores were 53.0 (range 17-88) and 50.9 (range 20-85), respectively. There were four cases of broken distal locking screws, and four cases of superficial infection. Patients with high CCI were more likely to acquire superficial infections (p=0.264, OR=3.857). There were no deep infections, periprosthetic fractures, nail breakages, non-unions. TTC nailing is an effective treatment methodology for low-demand geriatric patients with fragility ankle fractures. This technique leads to low complication rates and early mobilisation. It is not a life-changing procedure, with many able to return to their pre-operative mobility status, which is important for preventing the loss of socioeconomic independence

Aims. COVID-19 represents one of the greatest global healthcare challenges in a generation. Orthopaedic departments within the UK have shifted care to manage trauma in ways that minimize exposure to COVID-19. As the incidence of COVID-19 decreases, we explore the impact and risk factors of COVID-19 on patient outcomes within our department. Methods. We retrospectively included all patients who underwent a trauma or urgent orthopaedic procedure from 23 March to 23 April 2020. Electronic records were reviewed for COVID-19 swab results and mortality, and patients were screened by telephone a minimum 14 days postoperatively for symptoms of COVID-19. Results. A total of 214 patients had orthopaedic surgical procedures, with 166 included for analysis. Patients undergoing procedures under general or spinal anaesthesia had a higher risk of contracting perioperative COVID-19 compared to regional/local anaesthesia (p = 0.0058 and p = 0.0007, respectively). In all, 15 patients (9%) had a perioperative diagnosis of COVID-19, 14 of whom had fragility fractures; six died within 30 days of their procedure (40%, 30-day mortality). For proximal femoral fractures, our 30-day mortality was 18.2%, compared to 7% in 2019. Conclusion. Based on our findings, patients undergoing procedures under regional or local anaesthesia have minimal risk of developing COVID-19 perioperatively. Those with multiple comorbidities and fragility fractures have a higher morbidity and mortality if they contract COVID-19 perioperatively; therefore, protective care pathways could go some way to mitigate the risk. Our 30-day mortality of proximal femoral fractures was 18.2% during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison to the annual national average of 6.1% in 2018 and the University Hospital Coventry average of 7% for the same period in 2019, as reported in the National Hip Fracture Database. Patients undergoing procedures under general or spinal anaesthesia at the peak of the pandemic had a higher risk of contracting perioperative COVID-19 compared to regional block or local anaesthesia. We question whether young patients undergoing day-case procedures under regional block or local anaesthesia with minimal comorbidities require fourteen days self-isolation; instead, we advocate that compliance with personal protective equipment, a negative COVID-19 swab three days prior to surgery, and screening questionnaire may be sufficient. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:520–529

The widely used Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) estimates a 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) using age, sex, body mass index, and seven clinical risk factors, including prior history of fracture. Prior fracture is a binary variable in FRAX, although it is now clear that prior fractures affect future MOF risk differently depending on their recency and site. Risk of MOF is highest in the first two years following a fracture and then progressively decreases with time – this is defined as imminent risk. Therefore, the FRAX tool may underestimate true fracture risk and result in missed opportunities for earlier osteoporosis management in individuals with recent MOF. To address this, multipliers based on age, sex, and fracture type may be applied to baseline FRAX scores for patients with recent fractures, producing a more accurate prediction of both short- and long-term fracture risk. Adjusted FRAX estimates may enable earlier pharmacologic treatment and other risk reduction strategies. This study aimed to report the effect of multipliers on conventional FRAX scores in a clinical cohort of patients with recent non-hip fragility fractures. After obtaining Research Ethics Board approval, FRAX scores were calculated both before and after multiplier adjustment, for patients included in our outpatient Fracture Liaison Service who had experienced a non-hip fragility fracture between June 2020 and November 2021. Patients age 50 years or older, with recent (within 3 months) forearm (radius and/or ulna) or humerus fractures were included. Exclusion criteria consisted of patients under the age of 50 years or those with a hip fracture. Age- and sex-based FRAX multipliers for recent forearm and humerus fractures described by McCloskey et al. (2021) were used to adjust the conventional FRAX score. Low, intermediate and high-risk of MOF was defined as less than 10%, 10-20%, and greater than 20%, respectively. Data are reported as mean and standard deviation of the mean for continuous variables and as proportions for categorical variables. A total of 91 patients with an average age of 64 years (range = 50-97) were included. The majority of patients were female (91.0%), with 73.6% sustaining forearm fractures and 26.4% sustaining humerus fractures. In the forearm group, the average MOF risk pre- and post-multiplier was 16.0 and 18.8, respectively. Sixteen percent of patients (n = 11) in the forearm group moved from intermediate to high 10-year fracture risk after multiplier adjustment. Average FRAX scores before and after adjustment in the humerus group were 15.7 and 22.7, respectively, with 25% (n = 6) of patients moving from an intermediate risk to a high-risk score. This study demonstrates the clinically significant impact of multipliers on conventional FRAX scores in patients with recent non-hip fractures. Twenty-five percent of patients with humerus fractures and 16% of patients with forearm fractures moved from intermediate to high-risk of MOF after application of the multiplier. Consequently, patients who were previously ineligible for pharmacologic management, now met criteria. Multiplier-adjusted FRAX scores after a recent fracture may more accurately identify patients with imminent fracture risk, facilitating earlier risk reduction interventions

Aims. The current global pandemic due to COVID-19 is generating significant burden on the health service in the UK. On 23 March 2020, the UK government issued requirements for a national lockdown. The aim of this multicentre study is to gain a greater understanding of the impact lockdown has had on the rates, mechanisms and types of injuries together with their management across a regional trauma service. Methods. Data was collected from an adult major trauma centre, paediatric major trauma centre, district general hospital, and a regional hand trauma unit. Data collection included patient demographics, injury mechanism, injury type and treatment required. Time periods studied corresponded with the two weeks leading up to lockdown in the UK, two weeks during lockdown, and the same two-week period in 2019. Results. There was a 55.7% (12,935 vs 5,733) reduction in total accident and emergency (A&E) attendances with a 53.7% (354 vs 164) reduction in trauma admissions during lockdown compared to 2019. The number of patients with fragility fractures requiring admission remained constant (32 patients in 2019 vs 31 patients during lockdown; p > 0.05). Road traffic collisions (57.1%, n = 8) were the commonest cause of major trauma admissions during lockdown. There was a significant increase in DIY related-hand injuries (26% (n = 13)) lockdown vs 8% (n = 11 in 2019, p = 0.006) during lockdown, which resulted in an increase in nerve injuries (12% (n = 6 in lockdown) vs 2.5% (n = 3 in 2019, p = 0.015) and hand infections (24% (n = 12) in lockdown vs 6.2% (n = 8) in 2019, p = 0.002). Conclusion. The national lockdown has dramatically reduced orthopaedic trauma admissions. The incidence of fragility fractures requiring surgery has not changed. Appropriate provision in theatres should remain in place to ensure these patients can be managed as a surgical priority. DIY-related hand injuries have increased which has led to an increased in nerve injuries requiring intervention

The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) is validated to predict mortality after fragility neck of femur fractures (NOF). Risk stratification supports informed consent, peri-operative optimisation and case prioritisation. With the inclusion of fragility distal femur fractures (DFF) in the BPT, increasing attention is being placed on the outcome of these injuries. Developing on the lessons learnt over the past decades in NOF management is key. This study assesses the validity of the NHFS in predicting mortality after fragility DFFs. A multi-centre study of 3 high volume fragility fracture units was performed via a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected databases. Patients aged 60 years-of-age who presented with AO 33.A/B/C native DFF, or V.3.A/B periprosthetic DFF over an 86-month period between September 2014 and December 2021 and underwent surgical treatment were eligible for inclusion. Open and/or polytrauma (ISS >15) were excluded. All operations were performed or supervised by Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeons and were reviewed peri-operatively by a 7-day MDT. Patients with a NHFS of gt;=5 were stratified into a high-risk of 30-day mortality cohort, with all others being œlow-risk. 285 patients were eligible for inclusion with 92 considered to be low-risk of 30-day mortality, these tended to be younger female patients admitted from their own homes. 30-day mortality was 0% in the low-risk cohort and 6.2% (12/193) in the high-risk group. 1-year mortality was 8.7% (8/92) and 35.7% (69/193) in the low and high-risk groups respectively. Area Under the Curve (AUC) analyses of Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves demonstrated the greatest ability to predict mortality at 30-days for the high-risk cohort (0.714). The NHFS demonstrates a good ability to predict 30-day mortality in those patients with a NHFS =5 after a surgically managed fragility DFF. With comparable mortality outcomes to those documented from fragility NOF

Fragility ankle fractures are traditionally managed conservatively or with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF). Tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) fusion is an alternative option for the geriatric patient. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a detailed analysis of the functional and clinical outcomes of hindfoot nailing for fragility ankle fractures presented so far in the literature. A systematic search was performed on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, identifying fourteen studies for inclusion. Studies including patients over 60 with a fragility ankle fracture, treated with TTC nail were included. Patients with a previous fracture of the ipsilateral limb, fibular nails, and pathological fractures were excluded. Subgroup analyses were performed according to (1) open vs closed fractures, (2) immediate post-operative FWB vs post-operative NWB, (3) majority of cohort are diabetics vs minority of cohort are diabetics. Meta-regression analyses were done to explore sources of heterogeneity, and publication bias was assessed using Egger's test. The pooled proportion of superficial infection, deep infection, implant failure, malunion, and all-cause mortality was 0.10 (95%CI:0.06-0.16; I2=44%), 0.08 (95%CI:0.06-0.11, I2=0%), 0.11 (95%CI:0.07-0.15, I2=0%), 0.11 (95%CI:0.06-0.18; I2=51%), and 0.27 (95%CI:0.20-0.34; I2=11%), respectively. The pooled mean post-operative OMAS score was 54.07 (95%CI:48.98-59.16; I2=85%). The best-fitting meta-regression model included age and percentage of male patients as covariates (p=0.0263), and were inversely correlated with higher OMAS scores. Subgroup analyses showed that studies with a majority of diabetics had a higher proportion of implant failure (p=0.0340) and surgical infection (p=0.0096), and a lower chance of returning to pre-injury mobility than studies with a minority of diabetics (p=0.0385). Egger's test (p=0.56) showed no significant publication bias. TTC nailing is an adequate alternative option for fragility ankle fractures. However, current evidence includes mainly case series with inconsistent outcome measures reported and post-operative rehabilitation protocols. Prospective RCTs with long follow-up times and large cohort sizes are needed to clearly guide the use of TTC nailing for ankle fractures