Search

Abstract. Background:. Open tibial fractures have a high risk of infection that can lead to severe morbidity. Antibiotics administered locally at the site of the open wound are a potentially effective preventive measure, but there are limited data evaluating aminoglycoside antibiotics. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of a clinical trial to test the efficacy of local gentamicin in reducing the risk of fracture-related infection after open tibial fracture. Methods:. This study is a single-center, pilot, masked, randomized controlled trial conducted at the Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute. Participants were randomized intraoperatively after wound closure to receive gentamicin solution or normal saline solution injected at the fracture site. Follow-ups were completed at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year postoperatively. The primary feasibility outcomes were the rate of enrollment and retention. The primary clinical outcome was the occurrence of fracture-related infection. Results:. Of 199 patients screened, 100 eligible patients were successfully enrolled and randomized over 9 months (11.1 patients/month). Complete data were recorded at baseline and follow-up for >95% of cases. The rate of follow-up at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year were 70%, 68%, 69%, 61%, and 80%, respectively. There was no difference in adverse events or any of the measured primary and secondary outcomes. Conclusion:. This pilot study is among the first to evaluate locally administered gentamicin in open tibial fractures. Results indicate a rigorous clinical trial with acceptable rates of enrollment and follow-up to address this topic is possible in this setting.

Background:. Disparities exist in treatment modalities, including arthroscopic surgery, for orthopaedic injuries between high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Arthroscopy training is a self-identified goal of LMIC surgeons to meet the burden of musculoskeletal injury. The aim of this study was to determine the necessary “key ingredients” for establishing arthroscopy centers in LMICs in order to build capacity and expand training in arthroscopy in lower-resource settings. Methods:. This study utilized semi-structured interviews with orthopaedic surgeons from both HICs and LMICs who had prior experience establishing arthroscopy efforts in LMICs. Participants were recruited via referral sampling. Interviews were qualitatively analyzed in duplicate via a coding schema based on repeated themes from preliminary interview review. Subgroup analysis was conducted between HIC and LMIC respondents. Results:. We identified perspectives shared between HIC and LMIC stakeholders and perspectives unique to 1 group. Both groups were motivated by opportunities to improve patients’ lives; the LMIC respondents were also motivated by access to skills and equipment, and the HIC respondents were motivated by teaching opportunities. Key ingredients identified by both groups included an emphasis on teaching and the need for high-cost equipment, such as arthroscopy towers. The LMIC respondents reported single-use materials as a key ingredient, while the HIC respondents reported local champions as crucial. The LMIC respondents cited the scarcity of implants and shaver blades as a barrier to the continuity of arthroscopy efforts. Conclusions:. Incorporation of the identified key ingredients, along with leveraging the motivations of the host and the visiting participant, will allow future international arthroscopy partnerships to better match proposed interventions with the host-identified needs. Clinical Relevance:. Arthroscopy is an important tool for treatment of musculoskeletal injury. Increasing access to arthroscopy is an important goal to achieve greater equity in musculoskeletal care globally. Developing successful partnerships between HICs and LMICs to support arthroscopic surgery requires sustained relationships that address local needs.

Abstract Background Open tibia fractures are a major source of disability in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) due to the high incidence of complications, particularly infection and chronic osteomyelitis. One proposed adjunctive measure to reduce infection is prophylactic local antibiotic delivery, which can achieve much higher concentrations at the surgical site than can safely be achieved with systemic administration. Animal studies and retrospective clinical studies support the use of gentamicin for this purpose, but no high-quality clinical trials have been conducted to date in high- or low-income settings. Methods We describe a protocol for a pilot study conducted in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to assess the feasibility of a single-center masked randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy of locally applied gentamicin to placebo for the prevention of fracture-related infection in open tibial shaft fractures. Discussion The results of this study will inform the design and feasibility of a definitive trial to address the use of local gentamicin in open tibial fractures. If proven effective, local gentamicin would be a low-cost strategy to reduce complications and disability from open tibial fractures that could impact care in both high- and low-income countries. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, Registration # NCT03559400 ; Registered June 18, 2018.

Background: The rise of diabetes and traumatic injury has increased limb loss-related morbidity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite this, the majority of amputees in LMICs have no access to prosthetic devices, and the magnitude of prosthesis impact on quality of life (QOL ) and function has not been quantified. Objectives: Quantify the impact of prostheses on QOL and function in Tanzanian transfemoral amputees. Method: A prospective cohort study was conducted. Transfemoral amputees at Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute were assessed twice before and three times after prosthetic fitting using EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L), Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M), 2-minute walk test (2MWT) and Physiologic Cost Index (PCI). Data were analysed for change over time. Subgroup analysis was performed for amputation aetiology (vascular or non-vascular) and prosthesis use. Results: Amongst 30 patients, EQ-5D, PLUS-M and 2MWT improved after prosthesis provision (p 0.001). EuroQol-5D increased from 0.48 to 0.85 at 1 year (p 0.001). EuroQol-5D and 2MWT were higher in non-vascular subgroup (p 0.030). At 1-year, 84% of non-vascular and 44% of vascular subgroups reported using their prosthesis (p = 0.068). Conclusion: Prosthesis provision to transfemoral amputees in an LMIC improved QOL and function. This benefit was greater for non-vascular amputation aetiologies. Quality of life and function returned to pre-prosthesis levels with discontinued use of prosthesis.

Introduction:. Interest in clinical rotations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has grown among high-income country (HIC) orthopaedic residents. This study addresses the following questions: (1) What motivates HIC surgical residents to rotate in LMICs? (2) What is the impact of rotations on HIC residents? (3) What are the LMIC partner perceptions of HIC collaboration? Materials and Methods:. A search strategy of multiple databases returned 3,740 unique articles pertaining to HIC surgical resident motivations for participating in rotations in LMICs or the LMIC host perspective. Data extraction was dually performed using meta-ethnography, the qualitative equivalent of meta-analysis. Results:. Twenty-one studies were included in the final analysis. HIC residents were primarily motivated to rotate in LMICs by altruistic intent, with greatest impact on professional development. LMIC partners mostly valued HIC sustained investment and educational opportunities for LMIC partners. From LMIC's perspective, potential harm from collaboration arose from system-level and individual-level discordance between HIC and LMIC expectations and priorities. HIC priorities included the following: (1) adequate operative time, (2) exposure to varied pathology, and (3) mentorship. LMIC priorities included the following: (1) avoiding competition with HIC residents for surgical cases, (2) that HIC groups not undermine LMIC internal authority, (3) that HIC initiatives address local LMIC needs, and (4) that LMIC partners be included as authors on HIC research initiatives. Both HIC and LMIC partners raised ethical concerns regarding collaboration and perceived HIC residents to be underprepared for their LMIC rotation. Discussion:. This study synthesizes the available literature on HIC surgical resident motivations for and impact of rotating in LMICs and the LMIC host perception of collaboration. Three improvement categories emerged: that residents (1) receive site-specific preparation before departure, (2) remain in country long enough to develop site-specific skills, and (3) cultivate flexibility and cultural humility. Specific suggestions based on synthesized data are offered for each concept and can serve as a foundation for mutually beneficial international electives in LMICs for HIC orthopaedic trainees.