The Edinburgh Trauma Triage Clinic (TTC) streamlines outpatient
care through consultant-led ‘virtual’ triage of referrals and the
direct discharge of minor fractures from the Emergency Department.
We compared the patient outcomes for simple fractures of the radial
head, little finger metacarpal, and fifth metatarsal before and
after the implementation of the TTC. A total of 628 patients who had sustained these injuries over
a one-year period were identified. There were 337 patients in the
pre-TTC group and 289 in the post-TTC group. The Disabilities of
the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (QuickDASH) or Foot and Ankle Disability
Index (FADI), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), visual analogue scale (VAS) pain
score, satisfaction rates, and return to work/sport were assessed
six months post-injury. The development of late complications was
excluded by an electronic record evaluation at three years post-injury.
A cost analysis was performed.Aims
Patients and Methods
Fracture clinics are often characterised by the referral of large
numbers of unselected patients with minor injuries not requiring
investigation or intervention, long waiting times and recurrent
unnecessary reviews. Our experience had been of an unsustainable
system and we implemented a ‘Trauma Triage Clinic’ (TTC) in order
to rationalise and regulate access to our fracture service. The
British Orthopaedic Association’s guidelines have required a prospective evaluation
of this change of practice, and we report our experience and results. We review the management of all 12 069 patients referred to our
service in the calendar year 2014, with a minimum of one year follow-up
during the calendar year 2015. Aims
Patients and Methods
The aims of this study were to estimate the cost of surgical
treatment of fractures of the proximal humerus using a micro-costing
methodology, contrast this cost with the national reimbursement
tariff and establish the major determinants of cost. A detailed inpatient treatment pathway was constructed using
semi-structured interviews with 32 members of hospital staff. Its
content validity was established through a Delphi panel evaluation.
Costs were calculated using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC)
and sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the determinants
of costAims
Methods
Endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal femur may be required to treat primary bone tumours or destructive metastases either with impending or established pathological fracture. Modular prostheses are available off the shelf and can be adapted to most reconstructive situations for this purpose. We have assessed the clinical and functional outcome of using the METS (Stanmore Implants Worldwide) modular tumour prosthesis to reconstruct the proximal femur in 100 consecutive patients between 2001 and 2006. We compared the results with the published series for patients managed with modular and custom-made endoprosthetic replacements for the same conditions. There were 52 males and 48 females with a mean age of 56.3 years (16 to 84) and a mean follow-up of 24.6 months (0 to 60). In 65 patients the procedure was undertaken for metastases, in 25 for a primary bone tumour, and in ten for other malignant conditions. A total of 46 patients presented with a pathological fracture, and 19 presented with failed fixation of a previous pathological fracture. The overall patient survival was 63.6% at one year and 23.1% at five years, and was significantly better for patients with a primary bone tumour than for those with metastatic tumour (82.3% vs 53.3%, respectively at one year (p = 0.003)). There were six early dislocations of which five could be treated by closed reduction. No patient needed revision surgery for dislocation. Revision surgery was required by six (6%) patients, five for pain caused by acetabular wear and one for tumour progression. Amputation was needed in four patients for local recurrence or infection. The estimated five-year implant survival with revision as the endpoint was 90.7%. The mean Toronto Extremity Salvage score was 61% (51% to 95%). The implant survival and complications resulting from the use of the modular system were comparable to the published series of both custom-made and other modular proximal femoral implants. We conclude that at intermediate follow-up the modular tumour prosthesis for proximal femur replacement provides versatility, a low incidence of implant-related complications and acceptable function for patients with metastatic tumours, pathological fractures and failed fixation of the proximal femur. It also functions as well as a custom-made endoprosthetic replacement.
