Background. Both-bone diaphyseal forearm fractures constitute up to 5.4% of all fractures in children under 16 years of age in the United Kingdom. Most can be managed with closed reduction and cast immobilisation. Surgical fixation options include flexible intramedullary nailing and plating. However, the optimal method is controversial. Objectives. The main purpose of this study was to systematically search for and critically appraise articles comparing functional outcomes, radiographic outcomes and complications of nailing and plating for both-bone diaphyseal forearm fractures in children. Methods. A literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane library databases using specific search terms and limits was undertaken. The
Chronic postoperative pain (CPP) can occur in elective mid/hindfoot and ankle surgery patients. Multimodal pain management has been reported to reduce postoperative pain and opioid use, which may prevent the development of CPP. However, few studies have examined the impact of multimodal pain management strategies on CPP following complex elective mid/hindfoot and ankle surgery. The purpose of this study was to 1) evaluate current pain management strategies and 2) determine current definitions, incidence, and prevalence of CPP after elective mid/hindfoot and ankle surgery. Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library) were manually and electronically searched for English language studies published between 1990 and July 2017. For the first aim, we included comparative studies of adults undergoing elective mid/hindfoot and ankle surgery that investigated pre-, peri- or postoperative pain management. For the second aim, we included observational studies examining CPP definition, incidence, and prevalence. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, followed by full texts. Conflicts were resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. Reviewers also independently assessed the quality of studies meeting inclusion criteria using the Joanna Briggs Institute
Introduction. Indications for the use of external fixation include damage control orthopaedics, definitive fracture treatment, deformity correction and leg lengthening. Despite many advances in the development of external fixation techniques, pin-tract infection and loosening are still significant complications. They are the most commonly occurring complications during limb lengthening using external fixation, with some studies reporting an incidence of up to 80%. Objectives. The main aim of this systematic review was to investigate HA-coated versus uncoated external fixator pins used in patients undergoing leg lengthening and determine benefits in terms of pin loosening, infection and loss of reduction/malunion. Methods. A systematic literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane library databases was undertaken. Comparative trials investigating HA-coated versus uncoated external fixation pins used in patients undergoing leg lengthening procedures were identified. These were critically appraised as per the CASP (Guyatt et al) and CONSORT guidelines (Schulz et al., 2010). Primary outcome measures included pin loosening and infection. Secondary outcome measures included loss of reduction/malunion. Results. All studies identified had different criteria for defining pin loosening and infection. However, they all demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in loosening with HA-coated pins. Review of the studies included demonstrated insufficient evidence to determine any significant clinical benefit with regards to infection and malunion.
As there is currently no evidenced-based and systematic way of prioritising people requiring JRS we aimed to develop a clinically relevant system to improve prioritisation of people who may require JRS. An important challenge in this area is to accurately assign a queue position and improve list management. To identify priority criteria areas eight workshops were held with surgeons and patients. Domains derived were pain, activity limitations, psychosocial wellbeing, economic impact and deterioration. Draft questions were developed and refined through structured interviews with patients and consultation with consultants. 38 items survived
Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the highest level of evidence used to inform patient care. However, it has been suggested that the quality of randomization in RCTs in orthopaedic surgery may be low. This study aims to describe the quality of randomization in trials included in systematic reviews in orthopaedic surgery. Systematic reviews of RCTs testing orthopaedic procedures published in 2022 were extracted from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A random sample of 100 systematic reviews was selected, and all included RCTs were retrieved. To be eligible for inclusion, systematic reviews must have tested an orthopaedic procedure as the primary intervention, included at least one study identified as a RCT, been published in 2022 in English, and included human clinical trials. The Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 Tool was used to assess random sequence generation as ‘adequate’, ‘inadequate’, or ‘no information’; we then calculated the proportion of trials in each category. We also collected data to test the association between these categories and characteristics of the RCTs and systematic reviews.Aims
Methods
Bone demonstrates good healing capacity, with a variety of strategies being utilized to enhance this healing. One potential strategy that has been suggested is the use of stem cells to accelerate healing. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, WHO-ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as reference checking of included studies. The inclusion criteria for the study were: population (any adults who have sustained a fracture, not including those with pre-existing bone defects); intervention (use of stem cells from any source in the fracture site by any mechanism); and control (fracture healing without the use of stem cells). Studies without a comparator were also included. The outcome was any reported outcomes. The study design was randomized controlled trials, non-randomized or observational studies, and case series.Aims
Methods
The poor reporting and use of statistical methods in orthopaedic papers has been widely discussed by both clinicians and statisticians. A detailed review of research published in general orthopaedic journals was undertaken to assess the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting. A representative sample of 100 papers was assessed for compliance to CONSORT and STROBE guidelines and the quality of the statistical reporting was assessed using a validated questionnaire. Overall compliance with CONSORT and STROBE guidelines in our study was 59% and 58% respectively, with very few papers fulfilling all criteria. In 37% of papers patient numbers were inadequately reported; 20% of papers introduced new statistical methods in the ‘results’ section not previously reported in the ‘methods’ section, and 23% of papers reported no measurement of error with the main outcome measure. Taken together, these issues indicate a general lack of statistical rigour and are consistent with similar reviews undertaken in a number of other scientific and clinical research disciplines. It is imperative that the orthopaedic research community strives to improve the quality of reporting; a failure to do so could seriously limit the development of future research.