Global hand surgery collaborations: national survey of UK surgical trainees.

This cross-sectional national survey used qualitative methodology to explore the views of surgical trainees about hand surgery in low-resource settings. Key concerns have been identified and recommendations are made for responsible organizations to promote equal access for the engagement of trainees in global surgery partnerships.

RSTN COVID Hand: Hand trauma in the United Kingdom and Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly impacted the delivery of hand surgery services throughout the UK and Europe; from triage to treatment. Our aim was to assess the impact on management of common hand trauma injuries to inform future service delivery and research. The Reconstructive Surgery Trials Network led a service evaluation during the first wave of COVID-19 in 2020. Data was collected on hand injury management during the COVID-19 pandemic and was compared to the management clinicians would have delivered prior. Across 35 hand surgery units, 2540 patients with hand trauma were included. There was an increase of between 3% and 7% in non-operative management of injuries, apart from flexor tendon injuries where management remained unchanged. Cases triaged by a consultant doubled, with a 22% increase in the see-and-treat model. There was a move to operating in low-resource settings; a 13% increase in the use of minor operating theatres and 10% in clinic rooms. Use of WALANT, absorbable sutures, and remote follow-up also increased by 16%, 24%, and between 11% and 25%, respectively. The reported 30-day complication rate was 3.2%, with a surgical site infection rate of 1.8%. The pandemic led to rapid change in many aspects of hand trauma care. It was the impetus for increased out-of-theatre operating, use of local anaesthetic, and more non-operative management of injuries, without an increase in complication rate. Further research needs to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of these changes to ensure that COVID-19 is a catalyst for a modern, evidence-based, and environmentally sustainable delivery of hand trauma services.

A Systematic Review of Treatment Interventions for Metacarpal Shaft Fractures in Adults.

Metacarpal shaft fractures are common hand injuries that predominantly affect younger patients. There is wide variability in their treatment with no consensus on best practice. We performed a systematic review to assess the breadth and quality of available evidence supporting different treatment modalities for metacarpal shaft fractures of the finger digits in adults. A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A total of 1600 records were identified; 7 studies fulfilled eligibility criteria and were included. No randomized controlled trials directly comparing surgery with nonsurgical treatment were found. One retrospective study compared nonsurgical with surgical treatment, whereas 6 compared surgical or nonsurgical treatments. Considerable heterogeneity between studies along with a high or critical risk of bias restricts direct comparison and conclusions. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to guide treatment, supporting the need for well-designed, multicenter trials to identify the most effective and cost-efficient treatment for metacarpal shaft fractures in adults.

Protocol for surgical and non-surgical treatment for metacarpal shaft fractures in adults: an observational feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Metacarpal shaft fractures (MSF) are common traumatic hand injuries that usually affect young people of working age. They place a significant burden on healthcare resources and society; however, there is a lack of evidence to guide their treatment. Identifying the most beneficial and cost-efficient treatment will ensure optimisation of care and provide economic value for the National Health Service. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial comparing surgical and non-surgical treatment for MSF in adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre prospective cohort study, with a nested qualitative study consisting of patient interviews and focus groups, and an embedded factorial randomised substudy evaluating the use of text messages to maximise data collection and participant retention. The outcomes of interest include eligibility, recruitment and retention rates, completion of follow-up, evaluation of primary outcome measures, calculation of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for selected outcome measures and establishing the feasibility of data collection methods and appropriate time-points for use in a future trial. Data will be captured using a secure online data management system. Data analyses will be descriptive and a thematic inductive analysis will be used for qualitative data. Minimum clinically important effects for each patient-reported outcome measure will be estimated using anchor-based responsiveness statistics and distribution-based methods. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee and the Health Research Authority (REC reference 20/EE/0124). Results will be made available to patients, clinicians, researchers and the funder via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Social media platforms, local media and feedback from the Patient Advisory Group will be used to maximise circulation of findings to patients and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13922779.