Search

Aims To identify the prevalence of neuropathic pain after lower limb fracture surgery, assess associations with pain severity, quality of life and disability, and determine baseline predictors of chronic neuropathic pain at three and at six months post-injury. Methods Secondary analysis of a UK multicentre randomized controlled trial (Wound Healing in Surgery for Trauma; WHiST) dataset including adults aged 16 years or over following surgery for lower limb major trauma. The trial recruited 1,547 participants from 24 trauma centres. Neuropathic pain was measured at three and six months using the Doleur Neuropathique Questionnaire (DN4); 701 participants provided a DN4 score at three months and 781 at six months. Overall, 933 participants provided DN4 for at least one time point. Physical disability (Disability Rating Index (DRI) 0 to 100) and health-related quality-of-life (EuroQol five-dimension five-level; EQ-5D-5L) were measured. Candidate predictors of neuropathic pain included sex, age, BMI, injury mechanism, concurrent injury, diabetes, smoking, alcohol, analgaesia use pre-injury, index surgery location, fixation type, Injury Severity Score, open injury, and wound care. Results The median age of the participants was 51 years (interquartile range 35 to 64). At three and six months post-injury respectively, 32% (222/702) and 30% (234/787) had neuropathic pain, 56% (396/702) and 53% (413/787) had chronic pain without neuropathic characteristics, and the remainder were pain-free. Pain severity was higher among those with neuropathic pain. Linear regression analyses found that those with neuropathic pain at six months post-injury had more physical disability (DRI adjusted mean difference 11.49 (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.84 to 15.14; p < 0.001) and poorer quality of life (EQ-5D utility -0.15 (95% CI -0.19 to -0.11); p < 0.001) compared to those without neuropathic characteristics. Logistic regression identified that prognostic factors of younger age, current smoker, below knee fracture, concurrent injuries, and regular analgaesia pre-injury were associated with higher odds of post-injury neuropathic pain. Conclusion Pain with neuropathic characteristics is common after lower limb fracture surgery and persists to six months post-injury. Persistent neuropathic pain is associated with substantially poorer recovery. Further attention to identify neuropathic pain post-lower limb injury, predicting patients at risk, and targeting interventions, is indicated. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1047–1054.

The use of tourniquets in lower limb trauma surgery to control bleeding and improve the surgical field is a long established practice. In this article, we review the evidence relating to harms and benefits of tourniquet use in lower limb fracture fixation surgery and report the results of a survey on current tourniquet practice among trauma surgeons in the UK.

Aims Surgical treatment of hip fracture is challenging; the bone is porotic and fixation failure can be catastrophic. Novel implants are available which may yield superior clinical outcomes. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of the novel X-Bolt Hip System (XHS) with the sliding hip screw (SHS) for the treatment of fragility hip fractures. Methods We conducted a multicentre, superiority, randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 60 years and older with a trochanteric hip fracture were recruited in ten acute UK NHS hospitals. Participants were randomly allocated to fixation of their fracture with XHS or SHS. A total of 1,128 participants were randomized with 564 participants allocated to each group. Participants and outcome assessors were blind to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the EuroQol five-dimension five-level health status (EQ-5D-5L) utility at four months. The minimum clinically important difference in utility was pre-specified at 0.075. Secondary outcomes were EQ-5D-5L utility at 12 months, mortality, residential status, mobility, revision surgery, and radiological measures. Results Overall, 437 and 443 participants were analyzed in the primary intention-to-treat analysis in XHS and SHS treatment groups respectively. There was a mean difference of 0.029 in adjusted utility index in favour of XHS with no evidence of a difference between treatment groups (95% confidence interval -0.013 to 0.070; p = 0.175). There was no evidence of any differences between treatment groups in any of the secondary outcomes. The pattern and overall risk of adverse events associated with both treatments was similar. Conclusion Any difference in four-month health-related quality of life between the XHS and SHS is small and not clinically important. There was no evidence of a difference in the safety profile of the two treatments; both were associated with lower risks of revision surgery than previously reported. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):256–263.

AimsA pragmatic, single-centre, double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted in a NHS teaching hospital to evaluate whether there is a difference in functional knee scores, quality-of-life outcome assessments, and complications at one-year after intervention between total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) in patients with severe isolated patellofemoral arthritis.MethodsThis parallel, two-arm, superiority trial was powered at 80%, and involved 64 patients with severe isolated patellofemoral arthritis. The primary outcome measure was the functional section of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the full 24-item WOMAC, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), American Knee Society Score (AKSS), EuroQol five dimension (EQ-5D) quality-of-life score, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Physical Activity Rating Scale, and complication rates collected at three, six, and 12 months. For longer-term follow-up, OKS, EQ-5D, and self-reported satisfaction score were collected at 24 and 60 months.ResultsAmong 64 patients who were randomized, five patients did not receive the allocated intervention, three withdrew, and one declined the intervention. There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ WOMAC function score at 12 months (adjusted mean difference, -1.2 (95% confidence interval -9.19 to 6.80); p = 0.765). There were no clinically significant differences in the secondary outcomes. Complication rates were comparable (superficial surgical site infections, four in the PFA group versus five in the TKA group). There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ OKS score at 24 and 60 months or self-reported satisfaction score or pain-free years.ConclusionAmong patients with severe isolated patellofemoral arthritis, this study found similar functional outcome at 12 months and mid-term in the use of PFA compared with TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(3):310–318

Aims Distal radial fractures are the most common fracture sustained by the adult population. Most can be treated using cast immobilization without the need for surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a definitive trial comparing the commonly used fibreglass cast immobilization with an alternative product called Woodcast. Woodcast is a biodegradable casting material with theoretical benefits in terms of patient comfort as well as benefits to the environment. Methods This was a multicentre, two-arm, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled feasibility trial. Patients with a fracture of the distal radius aged 16 years and over were recruited from four centres in the UK and randomized (1:1) to receive a Woodcast or fibreglass cast. Data were collected on participant recruitment and retention, clinical efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability. Results Over an eight-month period, 883 patients were screened, 271 were found to be eligible, and 120 were randomized. Patient-reported outcome measures were available for 116 (97%) of participants at five weeks and 99 (83%) at three months. Clinical outcomes and patient acceptability were similar between the two interventions and no serious adverse events were reported in either intervention arm. Conclusion Both interventions were deemed efficacious and safe in the cohort studied. This study showed that a definitive study comparing Woodcast and fibreglass was feasible in terms of patient recruitment and retention. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(1):48–54

Aims Hip fractures are associated with high morbidity, mortality, and costs. One strategy for improving outcomes is to incentivize hospitals to provide better quality of care. We aimed to determine whether a pay-for-performance initiative affected hip fracture outcomes in England by using Scotland, which did not participate in the scheme, as a control. Materials and Methods We undertook an interrupted time series study with data from all patients aged more than 60 years with a hip fracture in England (2000 to 2018) using the Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care (HES APC) data set linked to national death registrations. Difference-in-differences (DID) analysis incorporating equivalent data from the Scottish Morbidity Record was used to control for secular trends. The outcomes were 30-day and 365-day mortality, 30-day re-admission, time to operation, and acute length of stay. Results There were 1 037 860 patients with a hip fracture in England and 116 594 in Scotland. Both 30-day (DID -1.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.0 to -1.2) and 365-day (-1.9%; 95% CI -2.5 to -1.3) mortality fell in England post-intervention when compared with outcomes in Scotland. There were 7600 fewer deaths between 2010 and 2016 that could be attributed to interventions driven by pay-for-performance. A pre-existing annual trend towards increased 30-day re-admissions in England was halted post-intervention. Significant reductions were observed in the time to operation and length of stay. Conclusion This study provides evidence that a pay-for-performance programme improved the outcomes after a hip fracture in England. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1015–1023.

Aims The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a femoral nerve block and a periarticular infiltration in the management of early post-operative pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients and Methods A pragmatic, single centre, two arm parallel group, patient blinded, randomised controlled trial was undertaken. All patients due for TKA were eligible. Exclusion criteria included contraindications to the medications involved in the study and patients with a neurological abnormality of the lower limb. Patients received either a femoral nerve block with 75 mg of 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride around the nerve, or periarticular infiltration with 150 mg of 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride, 10 mg morphine sulphate, 30 mg ketorolac trometamol and 0.25 mg of adrenaline all diluted with 0.9% saline to make a volume of 150 ml. Results A total of 264 patients were recruited and data from 230 (88%) were available for the primary analysis. Intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome measure of a visual analogue score for pain on the first post-operative day, prior to physiotherapy, was similar in both groups. The mean difference was -0.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) -5.9 to 4.5; p = 0.834). The periarticular group used less morphine in the first post-operative day compared with the femoral nerve block group (74%, 95% CI 55 to 99). The femoral nerve block group reported 39 adverse events, of which 27 were serious, in 31 patients and the periarticular group reported 51 adverse events, of which 38 were serious, in 42 patients up to six weeks post-operatively. None of the adverse events were directly attributed to either of the interventions under investigation. Conclusion Periarticular infiltration is a viable and safe alternative to femoral nerve block for the early post-operative relief of pain following TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:904–11.

Aims We conducted a study to determine whether radiological parameters correlate with patient reported functional outcome, health-related quality of life and physical measures of function in patients with a fracture of the distal radius. Patients and Methods The post-operative palmar tilt and ulnar variance at six weeks and 12 months were correlated with the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, and EuroQol scores, grip strength, pinch strength and range of movement at three, six and 12 months for 50 patients (mean age 57 years; 26 to 85) having surgical fixation, with either percutaneous pinning or reconstruction with a volar plate, for a fracture of the distal radius. Results Radiological parameters were found to correlate poorly with the patient reported outcomes (r = 0.00 to 0.47) and physical measures of function (r = 0.01 to 0.51) at all intervals. Conclusion This study raises concerns about the use of radiological parameters to determine management, and to act as a surrogates for successful treatment, in patients with a fracture of the distal radius. Restoration of ‘normal’ radiographic parameters may not be necessary to achieve a satisfactory functional outcome for the patient. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:376–82.

Aims Our aim, using English Hospital Episode Statistics data before during and after the Distal Radius Acute Fracture Fixation Trial (DRAFFT), was to assess whether the results of the trial affected clinical practice. Patients and Methods Data were grouped into six month intervals from July 2005 to December 2014. All patient episodes in the National Health Service involving emergency surgery for an isolated distal radial fracture were included. Results Clinical practice in England had not changed in the five years before DRAFFT: 75% of patients were treated with plate fixation versus 12% with Kirschner (K)-wires. After the publication of the trial, the proportion of patients having K-wire fixation rose to 42% with a concurrent fall in the proportion having fixation with a plate to 48%. The proportion of ‘other’ procedures stayed the same. Take home message. It appears that surgeons in the United Kingdom do change their practice in response to large, pragmatic, multicentre clinical trials in musculoskeletal trauma. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:410–13.

A clear understanding of variability is at the heart of many of the articles published by the Bone and Joint Journal. The terms variability, dispersion, spread, distribution and variance amongst many others are used to simply refer to the range of values within the dataset. Statistics was essentially founded as the study of variability, with variability often regarded as a nuisance. Measures of variability can be difficult concepts to comprehend when reading papers. They range from the relatively simple to the more complex.

Hip fracture is a common injury associated with high mortality, long-term disability and huge socio-economic burden. Yet there has been relatively little research into best treatment, and evidence that has been generated has often been criticised for its poor quality. Here, we discuss the advances made towards overcoming these criticisms and the future directions for hip fracture research: how co-ordinating existing national infrastructures and use of now established clinical research networks will likely go some way towards overcoming the practical and financial challenges of conducting large trials. We highlight the importance of large collaborative pragmatic trials to inform decision/policy makers and the progress made towards reaching a consensus on a core outcome set to facilitate data pooling for evidence synthesis and meta-analysis. These advances and future directions are a priority in order to establish the high-quality evidence base required for this important group of patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:875–9.

We conducted an observational radiographic study to determine the inter- and intra-observer reliability of the AO classification of fractures of the distal radius. Plain posteroanterior and lateral radiographs of 456 patients with an acute fracture of the distal radius were classified by a consultant orthopaedic hand specialist and two specialist trainees, and the k coefficient for the inter- and intra-observer reliability of the type, group and subgroup classification was calculated. Only the type of fracture (A, B or C) was found to provide substantial intra-observer reliability (k type 0.65). The inclusion of ‘group’ and ‘subgroup’ into the classification reduced the inter-observer reliability to fair (kgroup 0.29, ksubgroup = 0.28) and the intra-observer reliability to moderate (kgroup 0.53, ksubgroup 0.49). Disagreement was found to arise between specific subgroups, which may be amenable to clarification. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:818–23.

The anatomy and microstructure of the menisci allow the effective distribution of load across the knee. Meniscectomy alters the biomechanical environment and is a potent risk factor for osteoarthritis. Despite a trend towards meniscus-preserving surgery, many tears are irreparable, and many repairs fail.Meniscal allograft transplantation has principally been carried out for pain in patients who have had a meniscectomy. Numerous case series have reported a significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes after surgery, but randomised controlled trials have not been undertaken.It is scientifically plausible that meniscal allograft transplantation is protective of cartilage, but this has not been established clinically to date.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:590–4.

Hip fracture is a global public health problem. The National Hip Fracture Database provides a framework for service evaluation in this group of patients in the United Kingdom, but does not collect patient-reported outcome data and is unable to provide meaningful data about the recovery of quality of life. We report one-year patient-reported outcomes of a prospective cohort of patients treated at a single major trauma centre in the United Kingdom who sustained a hip fracture between January 2012 and March 2014. There was an initial marked decline in quality of life from baseline measured using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions score (EQ-5D). It was followed by a significant improvement to 120 days for all patients. Although their quality of life improved during the year after the fracture, it was still significantly lower than before injury irrespective of age group or cognitive impairment (mean reduction EQ-5D 0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.26). There was strong evidence that quality of life was lower for patients with cognitive impairment. There was a mean reduction in EQ-5D of 0.28 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.35) in patients < 80 years of age. This difference was consistent (and fixed) throughout follow-up. Quality of life does not improve significantly during recovery from hip fracture in patients over 80 years of age (p = 0.928). Secondary measures of function showed similar trends. Hip fracture marks a step down in the quality of life of a patient: it accounts for approximately 0.22 disability adjusted life years in the first year after fracture. This is equivalent to serious neurological conditions for which extensive funding for research and treatment is made available. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:372–82.

Trauma and orthopaedics is the largest of the surgical specialties and yet attracts a disproportionately small fraction of available national and international funding for health research. With the burden of musculoskeletal disease increasing, high-quality research is required to improve the evidence base for orthopaedic practice. Using the current research landscape in the United Kingdom as an example, but also addressing the international perspective, we highlight the issues surrounding poor levels of research funding in trauma and orthopaedics and indicate avenues for improving the impact and success of surgical musculoskeletal research. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1578–85.

The lack of a consensus for core health outcomes that should be reported in clinical research has hampered study design and evidence synthesis. We report a United Kingdom consensus for a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials of patients with a hip fracture. We adopted a modified nominal group technique to derive consensus on 1) which outcome domains should be measured, and 2) methods of assessment. Participants reflected a diversity of perspectives and experience. They received an evidence synthesis and postal questionnaire in advance of the consensus meeting, and ranked the importance of candidate domains and the relevance and suitability of short-listed measures. During the meeting, pre-meeting source data and questionnaire responses were summarised, followed by facilitated discussion and a final plenary session. A COS was determined using a closed voting system: a 70% consensus was required. Consensus supported a five-domain COS: mortality, pain, activities of daily living, mobility, and health-related quality of life (HRQL). Single-item measures of mortality and mobility (indoor/outdoor walking status) and a generic multi-item measure of HRQL - the EuroQoL EQ-5D - were recommended. These measures should be included as a minimum in all hip fracture trials. Other outcome measures should be added depending on the particular interventions being studied. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1016–23.

The Bone & Joint Journal provides the latest evidence to guide the clinical practice of orthopaedic surgeons. The benefits of one intervention compared with another are presented using outcome measures; some may be specific to a limb or joint and some are more general health-related quality of life measures. Readers will be familiar with many of these outcome measures and will be able to judge the relative benefits of different interventions when measured using the same outcome tool; for example, different treatments for pain in the knee measured using a particular knee score. But, how should readers compare outcomes between different clinical areas using different outcome measures? This article explores the use of standardised effect sizes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:853–4.

The quality and public perception of research has never been under greater scrutiny, whether by formal mechanisms such as the Research Excellence Framework[1][1] or via the media. The scale and intent of a recent high-profile case of research fraud,[2][2] amongst a host of others too numerous to