ABSTRACT
Background: Paediatric femoral shaft fractures can be managed with single- or double-leg hip spica casting between ages six-months and six-years. The aim of this review was to determine if single-leg hip spicas reduce the impact on family life without compromising fracture stability. Methods: The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023454309). MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and clinical trial registers were searched to May 2023 for level I-III evidence. Primary outcomes were impact on family life and fracture stability. Where appropriate, Meta-analysis was completed using RevMan v5.4. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 (RCTs) and ROBINS-I (non-RCTs). Certainty of evidence was measured with GRADE. Results: From 234 identified papers, four met the inclusion criteria (two RCTs; two non-RCTs). A total of 339 children were included (single-leg spica: 176; double-leg spica: 163). Three studies were 'high risk' and one study 'moderate risk' of bias. Impact on family life parameters were too heterogenous for pooled meta-analysis. Non-pooled data identified significantly more missed work days in the double-leg spica group and the 'Impact on Family' Scale significantly favoured single-leg spicas. For fracture stability, meta-analysis identified that (i) mal-union rates were significantly lower in single-leg spica: OR 0.08 (95 % CI 0.01 to 0.69; p = 0.02); (ii) MUA in theatre was not significantly different: OR 0.97 (95 % CI 0.19 to 4.86; p = 0.97); and (iii) wedge adjustment was not significantly different: OR 3.46 (95 % CI 0.48 to 24.92; p = 0.22). Certainty of evidence was assessed as 'very low'. Conclusion: Single-leg hip spicas may be associated with reduced impact on family life without compromising fracture stability compared with double-leg hip spicas. However, the evidence is weak. Therefore, a propensity score matched observational study is required to understand if subgroups of patients (age, fracture pattern, mechanism of injury) would benefit from a single- or double-leg hip spica.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Participatory learning and action (PLA) is a form of group reflection and learning with documented efficacy in low-income countries to improve social and health outcomes. PLA represents both a learning philosophy and a practical framework that could be applied to a variety of contexts. To date, PLA has not been widely implemented within high-income countries (HICs) to improve health and health-related outcomes. We aim to synthesise the literature currently available by means of a systematic review to form a foundation for future applications of PLA methodology in HICs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers will independently search predefined terms in the following electronic bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. The search terms will encompass PLA and PDSA (Plan-Do-Study-Act) projects, as well as studies using the Triple/Quadruple Aim model. We will include randomised controlled trials that incorporate online or face-to-face components using the PLA/PDSA methodology. Our data will be extracted into a standardised prepiloted form with subsequent narrative review according to the SWiM (Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis) guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required for this study. The results of this study will be submitted for publication in a leading peer-reviewed academic journal in this field. Additionally, a report will be produced for the funders of this review, which can be viewed for free on their website. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020187978.
