Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 77
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 92-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 7 - 7
1 Mar 2010
Bhandari M Karanicolas PJ Walter SD Heels-Ansdell D Guyatt GH
Full Access

Purpose: Although blinding of outcome assessors is crucial to minimize bias in clinical trials, the majority of surgical trials do not blind these individuals in part due to practical difficulties inherent in surgical interventions. We devised and tested techniques to blind outcome assessors in trials of femoral neck fracture fixation. Method: We developed three techniques to mask radiographs of femoral neck fractures fixated with cancellous screws or dynamic hip screws: Blackout, Subtraction, and Overlay. 50 orthopaedic trauma surgeons assessed 32 radiographs blinded with each of these techniques. We considered:. The ability to mask the surgeons (the proportion of radiographs in which the surgeons were able to correctly identify the implant and the Bang Blinding Index);. Surgeons’ ability to accurately rate the quality of reduction in blinded images;. Surgeons’ perceptions of difficulties rating the blinded images. Results: All three techniques achieved low proportions of correct identification of cancellous or dynamic screws (14.9% for Blackout, 26.9% for Subtraction, 22.1% for Overlay) and high proportions of “don’t know” responses (72.3%, 48.4%, 52.8% respectively). The Bang Blinding Indices were close to 0 (perfect blinding) for all three techniques (−0.024 to 0.008). The interrater reliability of quality of reduction in the blinded images (ICC = 0.55 – 0.57) was similar to the reliability of the unblinded radiographs (ICC = 0.60). Surgeons perceived the Overlay images as much more difficult to rate in 6.9% of radiographs, compared with 9.7% of Subtraction images (p=0.25) and 28.0% of Blackout images (p< 0.001). Conclusion: Three techniques of blinding radiographs of femoral neck fractures successfully mask surgeons to the type of implant fixated, do not compromise reliability of reduction ratings, and do not make the rating process substantially more difficult. Trialists should explore creative approaches such as these to blind as many individuals as possible when designing trials, and should incorporate rigorous approaches to testing the success of blinding


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 91-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 18 - 18
1 Mar 2009
Poolman R Struijs P Krips R Sierevelt I Marti R Farrokhyar F Zlowodzki M Bhandari M
Full Access

Background: While surgical trials can rarely blind surgeons or patients, they can often blind outcome assessors. The aim of this systematic review was threefold:

1) to examine the reporting of outcome measures in orthopaedic trials,

2) to determine the feasibility of blinding in published orthopaedic trials and

3) to examine the association between the magnitude of treatment differences and methodological safeguards such as blinding.

Specifically, we focused on an association between blinding of outcome assessment and the size of the reported treatment effect; in other words: does blinding of outcome assessors matter?

Methods: We reviewed 32 identified RCTs published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume), in 2003 and 2004 for the appropriate use of outcome measures. These RCTs represented 3.4% (32/938) of all studies published during that time period. All RCTs were reviewed by two of us for:

1) the outcome measures used and

2) the use of a methodological safeguard: blinding.

We calculated the magnitude of treatment effect of blinded compared to un-blinded outcome assessors.

Results: The methodological validation and clinical usefulness of the clinician-based, patient-based, and generic outcome instruments varied. Ten of the 32 RCTs (31%) used a modified outcome instrument. Of these 10 trials, 4 (40%) failed to describe how the outcome instrument was modified. Nine (90%) of the 10 articles did not describe how their modified instrument was validated and retested. Sixteen (50%) of the 32 RCTs did not report blinding of outcome assessors where blinding would have been possible. Among those studies with continuous outcome measure, unblinded outcomes assessment was associated with significantly larger treatment effects (standardized mean difference 0.76 versus 0.25, p=0.01). Similarly, in those studies with dichotomous outcomes, unblinded outcomes assessments were associated with significantly greater treatment effects (Odds ratio 0.13 versus 0.42, unblinded versus blinded, p< 0.001). The ratio of odds ratios (unblinded to blinded) was 0.31 suggesting that unblinded outcomes assessment was associated with an exaggeration of the benefit of a treatment’s effectiveness in our cohort of studies.

Conclusion: Reported outcomes in RCTs are often modified and rarely validated. Half of the RCTs did not blind outcome assessors even though blinding of outcome assessors would have been feasible in each case. Treatment effects may be exaggerated if outcome assessors are unblinded. Emphasis should be placed on detailed reporting of outcome measures to facilitate generalization. Outcome assessors should be blinded where possible to prevent bias.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 2, Issue 11 | Pages 245 - 247
1 Nov 2013
Sprowson AP Rankin KS McNamara I Costa ML Rangan A

The peer review process for the evaluation of manuscripts for publication needs to be better understood by the orthopaedic community. Improving the degree of transparency surrounding the review process and educating orthopaedic surgeons on how to improve their manuscripts for submission will help improve both the review procedure and resultant feedback, with an increase in the quality of the subsequent publications. This article seeks to clarify the peer review process and suggest simple ways in which the quality of submissions can be improved to maximise publication success.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:245–7.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 106-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 61 - 61
2 May 2024
Shah JZ Bubak S Sami WA Quraishi S
Full Access

Alcohol hand rubs, endorsed by WHO and NICE guidelines, are integral to modern surgical practices. Our objective was to assess how different scrubbing methods impact overall water usage by the surgical team, shedding light on variations among team members and their environmental implications. Over three consecutive arthroplasty lists spanning a week, water usage during scrubbing was observed for the operating team. Blinding all team members, including the anesthetist, consultant surgeon, orthopaedic registrar, orthopaedic SHO, and scrub nurse, during water usage calculations was implemented. Automated taps, using motion sensors, posed a challenge due to variable water quantity, necessitating water flow calculations per sensor movement. The senior surgeon, with over 20 years of experience, follows a traditional approach, starting with a morning prescrub and using an alcohol tub for each case, except when hands are soiled. We observed a total of 14 cases of lower limb primary arthroplasty. The cumulative water usage for scrubbing by the entire team was 193 liters, yielding a mean of 13.8 liters (±1.85) per case. The anaesthetist demonstrated the most conservative water usage, utilizing a total of 11.85 liters with a mean of 0.84 liters per case. Notably, alcohol rub was employed for half of the observed time, contributing to this efficient use. The senior operating surgeon used a total of 15.6 liters, averaging 1.1 liters per case. In contrast, the SHO and the registrar exhibited the highest water consumption, totaling 121.6 liters and yielding a mean of 5.7 liters per case. The nurses’ collective water usage for scrubbing amounted to 44.8 liters. Adopting alcohol rub, as endorsed by WHO, results in a remarkable 10-fold reduction in water usage, aligning with global health guidelines. This highlights significant potential for resource conservation in surgical procedures, presenting a practical and environmentally conscious approach to surgical scrubbing practices


Total knee arthroplasty is associated with early postoperative pain. Appropriate pain management is important to facilitate postoperative rehabilitation and positive functional outcomes. This study compares outcomes in TKA with three techniques; local infiltration analgesia, single shot femoral nerve block and intrathecal morphine. Methods. Forty-five patients undergoing elective primary Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with were randomized into one of three groups in a double blind proof of concept study. Study arm 1 received local infiltration analgesia ropivacaine intra-operatively, an elastomeric device of ropivacaine for 24 hours post-op. Study arm 2 received a femoral nerve block of ropivacaine with placebo local infiltration analgesia and placebo intrathecal morphine. Study arm 3 received intrathecal morphine, placebo femoral nerve block and placebo local infiltration analgesia. All patients received standardized pre-operative, intraoperative and Post-operative analgesic medication. Participants were mobilized at 4 hrs, 24hrs and 48 hrs post operation. Range of Motion, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain intensity scores and two minute walk test and Timed Up and Go test were performed. Postoperative use of analgesic drugs was recorded. Knee Society Score (KSS), Oxford Knee Score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) were completed at preoperative and 6 weeks post op. Results. Preliminary results of 32 participants convey the positive outcomes after total knee replacement demonstrated by the improvement in Oxford Knee Score and Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome score. There are marked improvements in the 2-minute walk tests at the six week time-point. At day one post-operative only 5 participants were unable to walk. Patient-controlled analgesia was used on 5 occasions on day one, 2 of which continued on day two. Sedation scores were recorded in six participants on day one and 2 on day two. Nausea was reported in 5 cases on day one and 9 on day two. Urinary catheter was needed in 5 cases on day one. Importantly the study remains blinded, therefore an analysis of the three study arms is not available and is therefore currently difficult to report on the statistical significance. There will be further assessment of the efficacy of analgesia using VAS pain scores, analgesia consumption and side effects collected preoperatively, 0–24hrs and 24–48 hours postoperatively between the three randomized groups. The assessment of functional outcomes will be measured between the three groups by comparing the ability to mobilize the first 4 hrs after surgery, maximal flexion and extension, two minute walk test and timed up-and-go preoperatively, on postoperative day 1 and 2 and 6 weeks. Conclusion. Results from the study will provide important information for the management of TKA in the hospital setting. We anticipate completion of all 45 surgeries in the next 2 months. The Blinding codes with be broken thereafter and full data analysis performed. The comparison of the three commonly used analgesic techniques and mobilization outcomes will allow enhanced management of patient's post-operative pain with earlier discharge from hospital an lower complication rates


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 93-B, Issue SUPP_IV | Pages 581 - 581
1 Nov 2011
Simunovic N Sprague S Guyatt GH Devereaux P Walter SD Schemitsch EH Bhandari M
Full Access

Purpose: Unbiased outcome assessment in orthopedic clinical trials has the potential to improve trial validity. The approaches used to limit bias in outcome assessment in orthopaedic trials remain unclear. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the reporting and process of outcomes assessment practices in the current orthopaedic trauma literature. Method: We searched eight high-impact-factor medical and orthopaedic journals manually and using the MED-LINE electronic database for reports of randomized controlled trials published from 2005 to 2008 pertaining to the surgical treatment of trauma-related injuries. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility and extracted relevant data from included trials. Results: Of the 7910 citations identified during our search, 47 randomized controlled trials, which included a total of 4706 patients, met our inclusion criteria. Of 47 studies, 39 (83%) provided a statement to describe some process of outcome assessment and 29 (74%) reported using an unblinded individual as the outcome adjudicator. Four studies (10%) reported using a second assessor to verify outcome measurements, and three studies (8%) reported the use of an adjudication committee to reach endpoint decisions via consensus. No included study provided a rationale for the use of their chosen approach to adjudication. The most commonly adjudicated outcomes included fracture healing (15 studies), reoperation rate (6 studies), and general clinical assessment of post-operative complications and limb function (30 studies), mainly by orthopaedic surgeons. Blinding of outcome assessors was not performed or unclear in 38 studies (81%). Conclusion: Despite the importance of the outcome assessment process in orthopedic trauma trials, key aspects of outcome assessment are insufficiently reported. This limits the ability of readers to assess the validity of published trials


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 84-B, Issue SUPP_II | Pages 157 - 158
1 Jul 2002
Davies A Bayer J Owen-Johnstone S Darrah C Shepstone L Glasgow M Donell S
Full Access

A prospective clinical investigation to determine the optimum knee flexion angle for the ‘skyline’ patellofemoral joint radiograph. Plain radiography of the patello-femoral joint includes the axial or ‘skyline’ radiograph. The optimum knee flexion angle for making this image remains unclear. We therefore performed a prospective clinical study in which patients underwent three skyline radiographs with knee flexion angles of 30(or minimal flexion), 50 and 90 degrees. The patients were new patients, aged between 12 and 30, presenting to a knee clinic with anterior knee pain. Two observers evaluated the radiographs, making a standardised series of measurements. Blinding was organised so that the observers were unable to use any information other than the radiographic image alone. One observer evaluated all the films on two separate occasions to allow calculation of intra- and interassessor agreement. There were 67 knees from 46 patients. There was a high level of intra- and inter-observer agreement. There were a number of patients in which the radiographic appearance of the patello-femoral varied markedly between the different views; in all cases the abnormality was best demonstrated by the 30-degree view. There were however a number of minimal flexion views in which the film contained incomplete information because part of the patello-femoral joint was missing from the image. We conclude that whilst a minimal flexion skyline view is the most sensitive method for the detection of patellar tilt and subluxation, not all knees can be successfully imaged at the required position. A flexible approach is therefore needed, to obtain satisfactory images at minimal flexion


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 9 | Pages 713 - 719
19 Sep 2023
Gregersen MG Justad-Berg RT Gill NEQ Saatvedt O Aas LK Molund M

Aims

Treatment of Weber B ankle fractures that are stable on weightbearing radiographs but unstable on concomitant stress tests (classified SER4a) is controversial. Recent studies indicate that these fractures should be treated nonoperatively, but no studies have compared alternative nonoperative options. This study aims to evaluate patient-reported outcomes and the safety of fracture treatment using functional orthosis versus cast immobilization.

Methods

A total of 110 patients with Weber B/SER4a ankle fractures will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive six weeks of functional orthosis treatment or cast immobilization with a two-year follow-up. The primary outcome is patient-reported ankle function and symptoms measured by the Manchester-Oxford Foot and Ankle Questionnaire (MOxFQ); secondary outcomes include Olerud-Molander Ankle Score, radiological evaluation of ankle congruence in weightbearing and gravity stress tests, and rates of treatment-related adverse events. The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research (approval number 277693) has granted ethical approval, and the study is funded by South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority (grant number 2023014).


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 6 | Pages 464 - 478
3 Jun 2024
Boon A Barnett E Culliford L Evans R Frost J Hansen-Kaku Z Hollingworth W Johnson E Judge A Marques EMR Metcalfe A Navvuga P Petrie MJ Pike K Wylde V Whitehouse MR Blom AW Matharu GS

Aims

During total knee replacement (TKR), surgeons can choose whether or not to resurface the patella, with advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Recently, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended always resurfacing the patella, rather than never doing so. NICE found insufficient evidence on selective resurfacing (surgeon’s decision based on intraoperative findings and symptoms) to make recommendations. If effective, selective resurfacing could result in optimal individualized patient care. This protocol describes a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of primary TKR with always patellar resurfacing compared to selective patellar resurfacing.

Methods

The PAtellar Resurfacing Trial (PART) is a patient- and assessor-blinded multicentre, pragmatic parallel two-arm randomized superiority trial of adults undergoing elective primary TKR for primary osteoarthritis at NHS hospitals in England, with an embedded internal pilot phase (ISRCTN 33276681). Participants will be randomly allocated intraoperatively on a 1:1 basis (stratified by centre and implant type (cruciate-retaining vs cruciate-sacrificing)) to always resurface or selectively resurface the patella, once the surgeon has confirmed sufficient patellar thickness for resurfacing and that constrained implants are not required. The primary analysis will compare the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) one year after surgery. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported outcome measures at three months, six months, and one year (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, OKS, EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, patient satisfaction, postoperative complications, need for further surgery, resource use, and costs). Cost-effectiveness will be measured for the lifetime of the patient. Overall, 530 patients will be recruited to obtain 90% power to detect a four-point difference in OKS between the groups one year after surgery, assuming up to 40% resurfacing in the selective group.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 8 | Pages 871 - 878
1 Aug 2024
Pigeolet M Ghufran Syed J Ahmed S Chinoy MA Khan MA

Aims

The gold standard for percutaneous Achilles tendon tenotomy during the Ponseti treatment for idiopathic clubfoot is a tenotomy with a No. 15 blade. This trial aims to establish the technique where the tenotomy is performed with a large-bore needle as noninferior to the gold standard.

Methods

We randomized feet from children aged below 36 months with idiopathic clubfoot on a 1:1 basis in either the blade or needle group. Follow-up was conducted at three weeks and three months postoperatively, where dorsiflexion range, Pirani scores, and complications were recorded. The noninferiority margin was set at 4° difference in dorsiflexion range at three months postoperatively.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1149 - 1158
1 Nov 2023
Chen B Zhang JH Duckworth AD Clement ND

Aims

Hip fractures are a major cause of morbidity and mortality, and malnutrition is a crucial determinant of these outcomes. This meta-analysis aims to determine whether oral nutritional supplementation (ONS) improves postoperative outcomes in older patients with a hip fracture.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in August 2022. ONS was defined as high protein-based diet strategies containing (or not containing) carbohydrates, fat, vitamins, and minerals. Randomized trials documenting ONS in older patients with hip fracture (aged ≥ 50 years) were included. Two reviewers evaluated study eligibility, conducted data extraction, and assessed study quality.


Aims

The efficacy of saline irrigation for treatment of implant-associated infections is limited in the presence of porous metallic implants. This study evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of antibiotic doped bioceramic (vancomycin/tobramycin-doped polyvinyl alcohol composite (PVA-VAN/TOB-P)) after saline wash in a mouse infection model implanted with titanium cylinders.

Methods

Air pouches created in female BalBc mice by subcutaneous injection of air. In the first of two independent studies, pouches were implanted with titanium cylinders (400, 700, and 100 µm pore sizes) and inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus (1 × 103 or 1 × 106 colony-forming units (CFU)/pouch) to establish infection and biofilm formation. Mice were killed after one week for microbiological analysis. In the second study, pouches were implanted with 400 µm titanium cylinders and inoculated with S. aureus (1 × 103 or 1 × 106 CFU/pouch). Four groups were tested: 1) no bacteria; 2) bacteria without saline wash; 3) saline wash only; and 4) saline wash plus PVA-VAN/TOB-P. After seven days, the pouches were opened and washed with saline alone, or had an additional injection of PVA-VAN/TOB-P. Mice were killed 14 days after pouch wash.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 2 | Pages 114 - 120
1 Feb 2024
Khatri C Metcalfe A Wall P Underwood M Haddad FS Davis ET

Total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA) are largely successful procedures; however, both have variable outcomes, resulting in some patients being dissatisfied with the outcome. Surgeons are turning to technologies such as robotic-assisted surgery in an attempt to improve outcomes. Robust studies are needed to find out if these innovations are really benefitting patients. The Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and Cost Effectiveness Randomised Controlled Trials (RACER) trials are multicentre, patient-blinded randomized controlled trials. The patients have primary osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. The operation is Mako-assisted THA or TKA and the control groups have operations using conventional instruments. The primary clinical outcome is the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months, and there is a built-in analysis of cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes include early pain, the alignment of the components, and medium- to long-term outcomes. This annotation outlines the need to assess these technologies and discusses the design and challenges when conducting such trials, including surgical workflows, isolating the effect of the operation, blinding, and assessing the learning curve. Finally, the future of robotic surgery is discussed, including the need to contemporaneously introduce and evaluate such technologies.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):114–120.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 10 | Pages 920 - 928
21 Oct 2024
Bell KR Oliver WM White TO Molyneux SG Graham C Clement ND Duckworth AD

Aims

The primary aim of this study is to quantify and compare outcomes following a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius in elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) who are managed conservatively versus with surgical fixation (open reduction and internal fixation). Secondary aims are to assess and compare upper limb-specific function, health-related quality of life, wrist pain, complications, grip strength, range of motion, radiological parameters, healthcare resource use, and cost-effectiveness between the groups.

Methods

A prospectively registered (ISRCTN95922938) randomized parallel group trial will be conducted. Elderly patients meeting the inclusion criteria with a dorsally displaced distal radius facture will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to either conservative management (cast without further manipulation) or surgery. Patients will be assessed at six, 12, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks post intervention. The primary outcome measure and endpoint will be the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) at 52 weeks. In addition, the abbreviated version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire, pain score (visual analogue scale 1 to 10), complications, grip strength (dynamometer), range of motion (goniometer), and radiological assessments will be undertaken. A cost-utility analysis will be performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgery. We aim to recruit 89 subjects per arm (total sample size 178).


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 4 | Pages 343 - 349
22 Apr 2024
Franssen M Achten J Appelbe D Costa ML Dutton S Mason J Gould J Gray A Rangan A Sheehan W Singh H Gwilym SE

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.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1176 - 1181
1 Oct 2024
Helenius L Gerdhem P Ahonen M Syvänen J Jalkanen J Nietosvaara Y Helenius I

Aims

Closed suction subfascial drainage is widely used after instrumented posterior spinal fusion in patients with a spinal deformity. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of this wound drainage on the outcomes in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This was a further analysis of a randomized, multicentre clinical trial reporting on patients after posterior spinal fusion using segmental pedicle screw instrumentation. In this study the incidence of deep surgical site infection (SSI) and chronic postoperative pain at two years’ follow-up are reported.

Methods

We conducted a randomized, multicentre clinical trial on adolescents undergoing posterior spinal fusion for AIS using segmental pedicle screw instrumentation. A total of 90 consecutive patients were randomized into a ‘drain’ or ‘no drain’ group at the time of wound closure, using the sealed envelope technique (1:1). The primary outcomes in the initial study were the change in the level of haemoglobin in the blood postoperatively and total blood loss. A secondary outcome was the opioid consumption immediately after surgery. The aim of this further study was to report the rate of deep SSI and persistent postoperative pain, at two years' follow-up.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 9 | Pages 729 - 735
3 Sep 2024
Charalambous CP Hirst JT Kwaees T Lane S Taylor C Solanki N Maley A Taylor R Howell L Nyangoma S Martin FL Khan M Choudhry MN Shetty V Malik RA

Aims

Steroid injections are used for subacromial pain syndrome and can be administered via the anterolateral or posterior approach to the subacromial space. It is not currently known which approach is superior in terms of improving clinical symptoms and function. This is the protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare the clinical effectiveness of a steroid injection given via the anterolateral or the posterior approach to the subacromial space.

Methods

The Subacromial Approach Injection Trial (SAInT) study is a single-centre, parallel, two-arm RCT. Participants will be allocated on a 1:1 basis to a subacromial steroid injection via either the anterolateral or the posterior approach to the subacromial space. Participants in both trial arms will then receive physiotherapy as standard of care for subacromial pain syndrome. The primary analysis will compare the change in Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) at three months after injection. Secondary outcomes include the change in OSS at six and 12 months, as well as the Pain Numeric Rating Scale (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain), Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH), and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (RAND) at three months, six months, and one year after injection. Assessment of pain experienced during the injection will also be determined. A minimum of 86 patients will be recruited to obtain an 80% power to detect a minimally important difference of six points on the OSS change between the groups at three months after injection.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 7 | Pages 534 - 542
1 Jul 2024
Woods A Howard A Peckham N Rombach I Saleh A Achten J Appelbe D Thamattore P Gwilym SE

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.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 5 | Pages 411 - 418
20 May 2024
Schneider P Bajammal S Leighton R Witges K Rondeau K Duffy P

Aims

Isolated fractures of the ulnar diaphysis are uncommon, occurring at a rate of 0.02 to 0.04 per 1,000 cases. Despite their infrequency, these fractures commonly give rise to complications, such as nonunion, limited forearm pronation and supination, restricted elbow range of motion, radioulnar synostosis, and prolonged pain. Treatment options for this injury remain a topic of debate, with limited research available and no consensus on the optimal approach. Therefore, this trial aims to compare clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes of two treatment methods: open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus nonoperative treatment in patients with isolated ulnar diaphyseal fractures.

Methods

This will be a multicentre, open-label, parallel randomized clinical trial (under National Clinical Trial number NCT01123447), accompanied by a parallel prospective cohort group for patients who meet the inclusion criteria, but decline randomization. Eligible patients will be randomized to one of the two treatment groups: 1) nonoperative treatment with closed reduction and below-elbow casting; or 2) surgical treatment with ORIF utilizing a limited contact dynamic compression plate and screw construct. The primary outcome measured will be the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire score at 12 months post-injury. Additionally, functional outcomes will be assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and pain visual analogue scale, allowing for a comparison of outcomes between groups. Secondary outcome measures will encompass clinical outcomes such as range of motion and grip strength, radiological parameters including time to union, as well as economic outcomes assessed from enrolment to 12 months post-injury.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 13, Issue 7 | Pages 332 - 341
5 Jul 2024
Wang T Yang C Li G Wang Y Ji B Chen Y Zhou H Cao L

Aims

Although low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) combined with disinfectants has been shown to effectively eliminate portions of biofilm in vitro, its efficacy in vivo remains uncertain. Our objective was to assess the antibiofilm potential and safety of LIPUS combined with 0.35% povidone-iodine (PI) in a rat debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) model of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

Methods

A total of 56 male Sprague-Dawley rats were established in acute PJI models by intra-articular injection of bacteria. The rats were divided into four groups: a Control group, a 0.35% PI group, a LIPUS and saline group, and a LIPUS and 0.35% PI group. All rats underwent DAIR, except for Control, which underwent a sham procedure. General status, serum biochemical markers, weightbearing analysis, radiographs, micro-CT analysis, scanning electron microscopy of the prostheses, microbiological analysis, macroscope, and histopathology evaluation were performed 14 days after DAIR.