Pragmatic trials in comparative effectiveness research assess the effects of different treatment, therapeutic, or healthcare options in clinical practice. They are characterized by broad eligibility criteria and large sample sizes, which can lead to an unmanageable number of participants, increasing the risk of bias and affecting the integrity of the trial. We describe the development of a sampling strategy tool and its use in the PREPARE trial to circumvent the challenge of unmanageable work flow.Given the broad eligibility criteria and high fracture volume at participating clinical sites in the PREPARE trial, a pragmatic sampling strategy was needed. Using data from PREPARE, descriptive statistics were used to describe the use of the sampling strategy across clinical sites. A Chi-square test was performed to explore whether use of the sampling strategy was associated with a reduction in the number of missed eligible patients.7 of 20 clinical sites (35%) elected to adopt a sampling strategy. There were 1539 patients excluded due to the use of the sampling strategy, which represents 30% of all excluded patients and 20% of all patients screened for participation. Use of the sampling strategy was associated with lower odds of missed eligible patients (297/4545 (6.5%) versus 341/3200 (10.7%) p < 0.001).Implementing a sampling strategy in the PREPARE trial has helped to limit the number of missed eligible patients. This sampling strategy represents a simple, easy to use tool for managing work flow at clinical sites and maintaining the integrity of a large trial.
Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is a leading cause of disability with disproportionately high impacts on marginalized populations, including non-English-preferring patients. These patients face significant barriers to accessing care and adhering to self-management strategies due to language barriers, socioeconomic challenges, and cultural differences. Despite the emphasis on self-management for cLBP, limited research has focused on understanding the specific needs and preferences of Spanish- and Cantonese-preferring patients.
PurposeFemoral neck fractures in young patients are typically managed with internal fixation using either cancellous screws or a sliding hip screw (SHS). Although fixation preserves the hip joint, patients are still at risk of complications and poor clinical outcomes which lead to diminished function and health related quality of life (HRQL). The Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip Fractures (FAITH-2) pilot randomized controlled factorial trial evaluated the effect of surgical fixation (cancellous screws vs. SHS) and vitamin D supplementation vs. placebo on patient-reported function and HRQL.MethodsPatients between the ages of 18-60 years with a femoral neck fracture requiring surgical fixation were eligible. Eligible patients were randomized to receive either a sliding hip screw or cancellous screws for fracture fixation AND vitamin D3 4,000 IU or placebo daily for 6 months. Patient-reported function (Hip Outcome Score) and HRQL (Short Form-12) were assessed at standardized time points in the 12 months following their fixation surgery. Patient-reported function and HRQL were summarized using means, SD, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), or percentages and counts. Longitudinal data analysis with mixed models was used to explore the effect of treatment group and time on the patient-reported function and HRQL.Results86 of the 91 patients randomized into the FAITH-2 pilot study were deemed eligible. There were no significant differences in patient-reported function or HRQL between the treatment groups at 12 months post-fracture. At the 6- and 9-month assessments, a potential benefit in hip function was seen in the cancellous screw group. In all treatment groups, participants reported lower function and HRQL at 12 months post-fracture as compared to their pre-injury assessment.ConclusionsFew differences were found in function and HRQL among the treatment groups in the FAITH-2 pilot study. Despite modern implants and vitamin D supplementation, neither function nor HRQL returns to baseline in this population. Additional efforts to improve the outcomes of these challenging injuries are still needed.Level of EvidenceTherapeutic Level II
To identify the patient, injury, and treatment factors associated with an acute infection during the treatment of open ankle fractures in a large multicenter retrospective review. To evaluate the effect of infectious complications on the rates of nonunion, malunion, and loss of reduction.Multicenter retrospective review.Sixteen trauma centers.One thousand and 3 consecutive skeletally mature patients (514 men and 489 women) with open ankle fractures.Fracture-related infection (FRI) in open ankle fractures.The charts of 1003 consecutive patients were reviewed, and 712 patients (357 women and 355 men) had at least 12 weeks of clinical follow-up. Their average age was 50 years (range 16-96), and average BMI was 31; they sustained OTA/AO types 44A (12%), 44B (58%), and 44C (30%) open ankle fractures. The rate FRI rate was 15%. A multivariable regression analysis identified male sex, diabetes, smoking, immunosuppressant use, time to wound closure, and wound location as independent risk factors for infection. There were 77 cases of malunion, nonunion, loss of reduction, and/or implant failure; FRI was associated with higher rates of these complications (P = 0.01).Several patient, injury, and surgical factors were associated with FRI in the treatment of open ankle fractures.Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience of engaging patient advisors to identify an optimal model of consent for the PREP-IT trials. This paper also examines surrogate measures of success for the selected model of consent.The PREP-IT program consists of two multi-center cluster randomized crossover trials that engaged patient advisors to determine an optimal model of consent. Patient advisors and stakeholders met regularly and reached consensus on decisions related to the trial design including the model for consent. Patient advisors provided valuable insight on how key decisions on trial design and conduct would be received by participants and the impact these decisions will have.Patient advisors, together with stakeholders, reviewed the pros and cons and the requirements for the traditional model of consent, deferred consent, and waiver of consent. Collectively, they agreed upon a deferred consent model, in which patients may be approached for consent after their fracture surgery and prior to data collection. The consent rate in PREP-IT is 80.7%, and 0.67% of participants have withdrawn consent for participation.Involvement of patient advisors in the development of an optimal model of consent has been successful. Engagement of patient advisors is recommended for other large trials where the traditional model of consent may not be optimal.
Racial disparities in treatment benchmarks have been documented among older patients with hip fractures. However, these studies were limited to patient-level evaluations.To assess whether disparities in meeting fracture care time-to-surgery benchmarks exist at the patient level or at the hospital or institutional level using high-quality multicenter prospectively collected data; the study hypothesis was that disparities at the hospital-level reflecting structural health systems issues would be detected.This cohort study was a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data in the PREP-IT (Program of Randomized trials to Evaluate Preoperative antiseptic skin solutions in orthopaedic Trauma) program from 23 sites throughout North America. The PREP-IT trials enrolled patients from 2018 to 2021, and patients were followed for 1-year. All patients with hip and femur fractures enrolled in the PREP-IT program were included in analysis. Data were analyzed April to September 2022.Patient-level and hospital-level race, ethnicity, and insurance status.Primary outcome measure was time to surgery based on 24-hour time-to-surgery benchmarks. Multilevel multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the association of race, ethnicity, and insurance status with time to surgery. The reported odds ratios (ORs) were per 10% change in insurance coverage or racial composition at the hospital level.A total of 2565 patients with a mean (SD) age of 64.5 (20.4) years (1129 [44.0%] men; mean [SD] body mass index, 27.3 [14.9]; 83 [3.2%] Asian, 343 [13.4%] Black, 2112 [82.3%] White, 28 [1.1%] other) were included in analysis. Of these patients, 834 (32.5%) were employed and 2367 (92.2%) had insurance; 1015 (39.6%) had sustained a femur fracture, with a mean (SD) injury severity score of 10.4 (5.8). Five hundred ninety-six patients (23.2%) did not meet the 24-hour time-to-operating-room benchmark. After controlling for patient-level characteristics, there was an independent association between missing the 24-hour benchmark and hospital population insurance coverage (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98; P = .005) and the interaction term between hospital population insurance coverage and racial composition (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; P = .03). There was no association between patient race and delay beyond 24-hour benchmarks (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.72-1.29; P = .79).In this cohort study, patients who sought care from an institution with a greater proportion of patients with racial or ethnic minority status or who were uninsured were more likely to experience delays greater than the 24-hour benchmarks regardless of the individual patient race; institutions that treat a less diverse patient population appeared to be more resilient to the mix of insurance status in their patient population and were more likely to meet time-to-surgery benchmarks, regardless of patient insurance status or population-based insurance mix. While it is unsurprising that increased delays were associated with underfunded institutions, the association between institutional-level racial disparity and surgical delays implies structural health systems bias.
The rate of open tibia fractures is rapidly increasing across the globe due to a recent rise in road traffic accidents, predominantly in low- and low-middle-income countries. These injuries are orthopedic emergencies associated with infection rates as high as 40% despite the use of systemic antibiotics and surgical debridement. The use of local antibiotics has shown some promise in reducing the burden of infection in these injuries due to increasing local tissue availability; however, no trial has yet been appropriately powered to evaluate for definitive evidence and the majority of current studies have taken place in a high-resource countries where resources and the bio-burden may be different.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospital systems were forced to reduce operating room capacity and reallocate resources. The outcomes of these policies on the care of injured patients and the maintenance of emergency services have not been adequately reported.To evaluate whether the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with delays in urgent fracture surgery beyond national time-to-surgery benchmarks.This retrospective cohort study used data collected in the Program of Randomized Trials to Evaluate Preoperative Antiseptic Skin Solutions in Orthopaedic Trauma among at 20 sites throughout the US and Canada and included patients who sustained open fractures or closed femur or hip fractures.COVID-19-era operating room restrictions were compared with pre-COVID-19 data.Surgery within 24 hours after injury.A total of 3589 patients (mean [SD] age, 55 [25.4] years; 1913 [53.3%] male) were included in this study, 2175 pre-COVID-19 and 1414 during COVID-19. A total of 54 patients (3.1%) in the open fracture cohort and 407 patients (21.8%) in the closed hip/femur fracture cohort did not meet 24-hour time-to-surgery benchmarks. We were unable to detect any association between time to operating room and COVID-19 era in either open fracture (odds ratio [OR], 1.40; 95% CI, 0.77-2.55; P = .28) or closed femur/hip fracture (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.74-1.37; P = .97) cohorts. In the closed femur/hip fracture cohort, there was no association between time to operating room and regional COVID-19 prevalence (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.70-1.64; P = .76).In this cohort study, there was no association between meeting time-to-surgery benchmarks in either open fracture or closed femur/hip fracture during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with before the pandemic. This is counter to concerns that the unprecedented challenges associated with managing the COVID-19 pandemic would be associated with clinically significant delays in acute management of urgent surgical cases and suggests that many hospital systems within the US were able to effectively implement policies consistent with time-to-surgery standards for orthopedic trauma in the context of COVID-19-related resource constraints.
Background Hemodynamically unstable patients with a pelvic fracture and arterial pelvic bleeding frequently are treated with pelvic angiographic embolization (PAE). PAE is reported to be a safe and effective method of controlling hemorrhage. However, the loss of blood supply and subsequent ischemia from embolization may lead to adverse consequences. Objectives/purposes We sought to determine (1) the frequency and types of complications observed after PAE; (2) the mortality after PAE; and (3) the clinical factors associated with complications and mortality after PAE. Methods We conducted a retrospective case series descriptive study at a Level I trauma center. Using our institution's trauma registry, we isolated patients with pelvic fractures treated with PAE admitted between June 1999 and December 2007. Complications attributed to PAE occurring in the initial hospital stay were recorded. We identified 98 patients with pelvic fractures treated by PAE with an average hospital stay of 25.3 days. Results The complication rate was 11% and included six patients with gluteal muscle necrosis (6%), five with surgical wound breakdown (5%), four deep infections (4%), one superficial infection, two patients with of impotence (2%), and one with bladder necrosis. The mortality rate in the PAE group reached 20%. Bilateral embolization was performed in 100% of the patients with complications. Nonselective embolization was performed in 81% of patients with complications. All of the patients with gluteal necrosis had bilateral nonselective embolization. Conclusions Bilateral or nonselective PAE is associated with significant complications during the initial hospital stay. The value of PAE should be weighed against its possible adverse consequences. Selective unilateral arterial embolization should be considered whenever possible. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
The risk of developing a surgical site infection after extremity fracture repair is nearly 5 times greater than in most elective orthopedic surgical procedures. For all surgical procedures, it is standard practice to prepare the operative site with an antiseptic solution; however, there is limited evidence to guide the choice of solution used for orthopedic fracture repair.To compare the effectiveness of iodophor vs chlorhexidine solutions to reduce surgical site infections and unplanned fracture-related reoperations for patients who underwent fracture repair.The PREP-IT (Program of Randomized Trials to Evaluate Pre-operative Antiseptic Skin Solutions in Orthopaedic Trauma) master protocol will be followed to conduct 2 multicenter pragmatic cluster randomized crossover trials, Aqueous-PREP (Pragmatic Randomized Trial Evaluating Pre-Operative Aqueous Antiseptic Skin Solution in Open Fractures) and PREPARE (Pragmatic Randomized Trial Evaluating Pre-Operative Alcohol Skin Solutions in Fractured Extremities). The Aqueous-PREP trial will compare 4% aqueous chlorhexidine vs 10% povidone-iodine for patients with open extremity fractures. The PREPARE trial will compare 2% chlorhexidine in 70% isopropyl alcohol vs 0.7% iodine povacrylex in 74% isopropyl alcohol for patients with open extremity fractures and patients with closed lower extremity or pelvic fractures. Both trials will share key aspects of study design and trial infrastructure. The studies will follow a pragmatic cluster randomized crossover design with alternating treatment periods of approximately 2 months. The primary outcome will be surgical site infection and the secondary outcome will be unplanned fracture-related reoperations within 12 months. The Aqueous-PREP trial will enroll a minimum of 1540 patients with open extremity fractures from at least 12 hospitals; PREPARE will enroll a minimum of 1540 patients with open extremity fractures and 6280 patients with closed lower extremity and pelvic fractures from at least 18 hospitals. The primary analyses will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle and account for potential between-cluster and between-period variability. The patient-centered design, implementation, and dissemination of results are guided by a multidisciplinary team that includes 3 patients and other relevant stakeholders.The PREP-IT master protocol increases efficiency through shared trial infrastructure and study design components. Because prophylactic skin antisepsis is used prior to all surgical procedures and the application, cost, and availability of all study solutions are similar, the results of the PREP-IT trials are poised to inform clinical guidelines and bring about an immediate change in clinical practice.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03385304 and NCT03523962.
