Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
JAMA ; 318(24): 2438-2445, 2017 12 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29279933

ABSTRACT

Importance: Following clean (class I, not contaminated) surgical procedures, the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) should be less than approximately 2%. However, an infection rate of 12.2% has been reported following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single dose of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on the incidence of SSIs following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial including 500 patients aged 18 to 75 years with previous surgical treatment for fractures below the knee who were undergoing removal of orthopedic implants from 19 hospitals (17 teaching and 2 academic) in the Netherlands (November 2014-September 2016), with a follow-up of 6 months (final follow-up, March 28, 2017). Exclusion criteria were an active infection or fistula, antibiotic treatment, reimplantation of osteosynthesis material in the same session, allergy for cephalosporins, known kidney disease, immunosuppressant use, or pregnancy. Interventions: A single preoperative intravenous dose of 1000 mg of cefazolin (cefazolin group, n = 228) or sodium chloride (0.9%; saline group, n = 242). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was SSI within 30 days as measured by the criteria from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondary outcome measures were functional outcome, health-related quality of life, and patient satisfaction. Results: Among 477 randomized patients (mean age, 44 years [SD, 15]; women, 274 [57%]; median time from orthopedic implant placement, 11 months [interquartile range, 7-16]), 470 patients completed the study. Sixty-six patients developed an SSI (14.0%): 30 patients (13.2%) in the cefazolin group vs 36 in the saline group (14.9%) (absolute risk difference, -1.7 [95% CI, -8.0 to 4.6], P = .60). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing surgery for removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee, a single preoperative dose of intravenous cefazolin compared with saline did not reduce the risk of surgical site infection within 30 days following implant removal. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02225821.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Cefazolin/administration & dosage , Device Removal/adverse effects , Fractures, Bone/surgery , Lower Extremity/injuries , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Incidence , Infusions, Intravenous , Intention to Treat Analysis , Internal Fixators , Male , Middle Aged , Prostheses and Implants/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Young Adult
2.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 17: 235, 2016 05 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27233355

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 17 % of all fractures involve the distal radius. Two-thirds require reduction due to displacement. High redislocation rates and functional disability remain a significant problem after non-operative treatment, with up to 30 % of patients suffering long-term functional restrictions. Whether operative correction is superior to non-operative treatment with respect to functional outcome has not unequivocally been confirmed. The IlluminOss® System was introduced in 2009 as a novel, patient-specific, and minimally invasive intramedullary fracture fixation. This minimally invasive technique has a much lower risk of iatrogenic soft tissue complications. Because IlluminOss® allows for early mobilization, it may theoretically lead to earlier functional recovery and ADL independence than non-operative immobilization. The main aim of this study is to examine outcome in elderly patients who sustained a unilateral, displaced, extra-articular distal radius fracture that was treated with IlluminOss®. METHODS/DESIGN: The design of the study will be a multicenter, prospective, observational study (case series). The study population comprises elderly (60 years or older; independent in activities of daily living) with a unilateral, displaced, extra-articular distal radius fracture (AO/OTA type 23-A2 and A3) that after successful closed reduction was fixed within 2 weeks after the injury with IlluminOss®. Critical elements of treatment will be registered, and outcome will be monitored until 1 year after surgery. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score will serve as primary outcome measure. The Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score, level of pain, health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 and EuroQoL-5D), time to ADL independence, time to activities/work resumption, range of motion of the wrist, radiological outcome, and complications are secondary outcome measures. Health care consumption and lost productivity will be used for a cost analysis. The cost analysis will be performed from a societal perspective. Descriptive data will be reported. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will provide evidence on the effectiveness of operative treatment of patients who sustained an extra-articular distal radius fracture with the IlluminOss® System, using clinical, patient-reported, and societal outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR5457 ; 29-sep-2015).


Subject(s)
Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary/instrumentation , Radius Fractures/surgery , Wrist Injuries/surgery , Humans , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/instrumentation , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prospective Studies , Recovery of Function , Research Design
3.
BMC Surg ; 15: 12, 2015 Feb 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25972101

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands about 18,000 procedures with implant removal are performed annually following open or closed reduction and fixation of fractures, of which 30-80% concern the foot, ankle and lower leg region. For clean surgical procedures, the rate of postoperative wound infections (POWI) should be less than ~2%. However, rates of 10-12% following implant removal have been reported, specifically after foot, ankle and lower leg fractures. Currently, surgeons individually decide if antibiotics prophylaxis is given, since no guideline exists. This leads to undesirable practice variation. The aim of the study is to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of a single intravenous gift of Cefazolin prior to implant removal following surgical fixation of foot, ankle and/or lower leg fractures. METHODS: This is a double-blind randomized controlled trial in patients scheduled for implant removal following a foot, ankle or lower leg fracture. Primary outcome is a POWI within 30 days after implant removal. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, functional outcome and costs at 30 days and 6 months after implant removal. With 2 x 250 patients a decrease in POWI rate from 10% to 3.3% (expected rate in clean-contaminated elective orthopaedic trauma procedures) can be detected (Power = 80%, 2-sided alpha = 5%, including 15% lost to follow up). DISCUSSION: If administration of prophylactic antibiotics prior to implant removal reduces the infectious complication rate, this will offer a strong argument to adopt this as standard practice of care. This will consequently lead to less physical and social disabilities and health care use. A preliminary, conservative estimation suggests yearly cost savings in the Netherlands of € 3.5 million per year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02225821 ) and the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR4393 ) and was granted permission by the Medical Ethical Review Committee of the Academic Medical Centre on October 7 2014.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Cefazolin/therapeutic use , Device Removal , Fracture Fixation, Internal/instrumentation , Preoperative Care/methods , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical Protocols , Double-Blind Method , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Foot/surgery , Humans , Injections, Intravenous , Leg/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
4.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 15: 39, 2014 Feb 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24517194

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the humeral shaft are associated with a profound temporary (and in the elderly sometimes even permanent) impairment of independence and quality of life. These fractures can be treated operatively or non-operatively, but the optimal tailored treatment is an unresolved problem. As no high-quality comparative randomized or observational studies are available, a recent Cochrane review concluded there is no evidence of sufficient scientific quality available to inform the decision to operate or not. Since randomized controlled trials for this injury have shown feasibility issues, this study is designed to provide the best achievable evidence to answer this unresolved problem. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate functional recovery after operative versus non-operative treatment in adult patients who sustained a humeral shaft fracture. Secondary aims include the effect of treatment on pain, complications, generic health-related quality of life, time to resumption of activities of daily living and work, and cost-effectiveness. The main hypothesis is that operative treatment will result in faster recovery. METHODS/DESIGN: The design of the study will be a multicenter prospective observational study of 400 patients who have sustained a humeral shaft fracture, AO type 12A or 12B. Treatment decision (i.e., operative or non-operative) will be left to the discretion of the treating surgeon. Critical elements of treatment will be registered and outcome will be monitored at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. Secondary outcome measures are the Constant score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow and shoulder joint at both sides, radiographic healing, rate of complications and (secondary) interventions, health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36 and EuroQol-5D), time to resumption of ADL/work, and cost-effectiveness. Data will be analyzed using univariate and multivariable analyses (including mixed effects regression analysis). The cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed from a societal perspective. DISCUSSION: Successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of operative versus non-operative treatment of patients with a humeral shaft fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR3617).


Subject(s)
Fracture Fixation/methods , Fracture Healing , Humeral Fractures/therapy , Research Design , Activities of Daily Living , Clinical Protocols , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Disability Evaluation , Fracture Fixation/economics , Health Care Costs , Humans , Humeral Fractures/diagnosis , Humeral Fractures/economics , Humeral Fractures/physiopathology , Humeral Fractures/surgery , Netherlands , Pain Measurement , Prospective Studies , Recovery of Function , Return to Work , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
5.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 11: 263, 2010 Nov 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21073734

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Elbow dislocations can be classified as simple or complex. Simple dislocations are characterized by the absence of fractures, while complex dislocations are associated with fractures. After reduction of a simple dislocation, treatment options include immobilization in a static plaster for different periods of time or so-called functional treatment. Functional treatment is characterized by early active motion within the limits of pain with or without the use of a sling or hinged brace. Theoretically, functional treatment should prevent stiffness without introducing increased joint instability. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to compare early functional treatment versus plaster immobilization following simple dislocations of the elbow. METHODS/DESIGN: The design of the study will be a multicenter randomized controlled trial of 100 patients who have sustained a simple elbow dislocation. After reduction of the dislocation, patients are randomized between a pressure bandage for 5-7 days and early functional treatment or a plaster in 90 degrees flexion, neutral position for pro-supination for a period of three weeks. In the functional group, treatment is started with early active motion within the limits of pain. Function, pain, and radiographic recovery will be evaluated at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. The secondary outcome measures are the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, Oxford elbow score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow joint at both sides, rate of secondary interventions and complication rates in both groups (secondary dislocation, instability, relaxation), health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36 and EuroQol-5D), radiographic appearance of the elbow joint (degenerative changes and heterotopic ossifications), costs, and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of a functional treatment for the management of simple elbow dislocations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR2025).


Subject(s)
Casts, Surgical , Disability Evaluation , Elbow Injuries , Joint Dislocations/therapy , Physical Therapy Modalities , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Braces , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Elbow Joint/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
6.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 11: 97, 2010 May 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20500849

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the proximal humerus are associated with a profound temporary and sometimes permanent, impairment of function and quality of life. The treatment of comminuted fractures of the proximal humerus like selected three-or four-part fractures and split fractures of the humeral head is a demanding and unresolved problem, especially in the elderly. Locking plates appear to offer improved fixation; however, screw cut-out rates ranges due to fracture collapse are high. As this may lead to higher rates of revision surgery, it may be preferable to treat comminuted fractures in the elderly primarily with a prosthesis or non-operatively. Results from case series and a small-sample randomized controlled trial (RCT) suggest improved function and less pain after primary hemiarthroplasty (HA); however these studies had some limitations and a RCT is needed. The primary aim of this study is to compare the Constant scores (reflecting functional outcome and pain) at one year after primary HA versus non-operative treatment in elderly patients who sustained a comminuted proximal humeral fracture. Secondary aims include effects on functional outcome, pain, complications, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: A prospective, multi-center RCT will be conducted in nine centers in the Netherlands and Belgium. Eighty patients over 65 years of age, who have sustained a three-or four part, or split head proximal humeral fracture will be randomized between primary hemiarthroplasty and conservative treatment. The primary outcome is the Constant score, which indicates pain and function. Secondary outcomes include the Disability of the Arm and Shoulder (DASH) score, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, radiographic healing, health-related quality of life (Short-form-36, EuroQol-5D) and healthcare consumption. Cost-effectiveness ratios will be determined for both trial arms. Outcome will be monitored at regular intervals over the subsequent 24 months (1, 3 and 6 weeks, and 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months). Data will be analyzed on an intention to treat basis, using univariate and multivariable analyses. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide level-1 evidence on the effectiveness of the two mostly applied treatment options for three-or four part and split head proximal humeral fractures in the elderly. These data may support the development of a clinical guideline for treatment of these traumatic injuries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR2040).


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty/methods , Fractures, Comminuted/surgery , Humerus/injuries , Humerus/surgery , Shoulder Fractures/surgery , Shoulder Joint/surgery , Activities of Daily Living , Age Factors , Aged , Arthroplasty/trends , Belgium , Clinical Protocols , Female , Fractures, Comminuted/pathology , Fractures, Comminuted/physiopathology , Humans , Humerus/pathology , Male , Netherlands , Osteoporosis/complications , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Patient Selection , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Prosthesis Design , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Prosthesis Implantation/trends , Shoulder Fractures/pathology , Shoulder Fractures/physiopathology , Shoulder Joint/pathology , Shoulder Joint/physiopathology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...