Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial (WRIST) Study Group. Reflections 1 year into the 21-Center National Institutes of Health--funded WRIST study: a primer on conducting a multicenter clinical trial

Regulatory challenges in conducting human subjects research in emergency settings: the National Trauma Research Action Plan (NTRAP) scoping review

The complexity of the care environment, the emergent nature, and the severity of patient injury make conducting clinical trauma research challenging. These challenges hamper the ability to investigate potentially life-saving research that aims to deliver pharmacotherapeutics, test medical devices, and develop technologies that may improve patient survival and recovery. Regulations intended to protect research subjects impede scientific advancements needed to treat the critically ill and injured and balancing these regulatory priorities is challenging in the acute setting. This scoping review attempted to systematically identify what regulations are challenging in conducting trauma and emergency research. A systematic search of PubMed was performed to identify studies published between 2007 and 2020, from which 289 articles that address regulatory challenges in conducting research in emergency settings were included. Data were extracted and summarized using descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis of the results. The review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Most articles identified were editorial/commentary (31%) and published in the USA (49%). Regulatory factors addressed in the papers were categorized under 15 regulatory challenge areas: informed consent (78%), research ethics (65%), institutional review board (55%), human subjects protection (54%), enrollment (53%), exception from informed consent (51%), legally authorized representative (50%), patient safety (41%), community consultation (40%), waiver of informed consent (40%), recruitment challenges (39%), patient perception (30%), liability (15%), participant incentives (13%), and common rule (11%). We identified several regulatory barriers to conducting trauma and emergency research. This summary will support the development of best practices for investigators and funding agencies.

What Are the Tradeoffs in Outcomes after Casting Versus Surgery for Closed Extraarticular Distal Radius Fractures in Older Patients? A Statistical Learning Model

BACKGROUND

Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are one of the most common major fractures. Despite their frequency, the tradeoffs in different outcomes after casting or surgery for closed extraarticular DRFs in older adults are unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) For adults older than 60 years with closed extraarticular DRFs, what are the tradeoffs in outcomes for choosing casting versus surgery? (2) In what settings would surgery be preferred over casting?

METHOD

This is a secondary analysis of data from the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial (WRIST), a randomized, multicenter clinical trial that enrolled patients from April 10, 2012 to December 31, 2016. For WRIST, researchers recruited patients older than 60 years who sustained closed extraarticular distal radius fractures from 24 sites in the United States, Canada, and Singapore. We conducted a secondary analysis using data from WRIST, which had longitudinal data from a robust collection of covariates for patients who underwent surgery and casting. Among the 296 patients recruited in the WRIST study, 59% (174) of patients (mean age 71 ± 9 years) with complete sociodemographic data and 12-month follow-up for each primary outcome were included in the main analysis. More patients underwent surgery than casting (72% [126 of 174] versus 28% [48 of 174]). Most sociodemographic variables were similar between the surgery and casting groups, except for age and volar tilt. The surgical cohort was composed of patients randomized to external fixation, closed reduction percutaneous pinning, or volar locking plate internal fixation. The casting cohort consisted of patients who elected to be treated with closed reduction and casting. A tree-based reinforcement statistical learning method was used to determine the best treatment, either surgery or casting, to maximize functional and esthetic outcomes while minimizing pain. Tree-based reinforcement learning is a statistical learning method to build an unsupervised decision tree within a causal inference framework that will identify useful variables and their cutoff values to tailor treatment assignment accordingly to achieve the best health outcome desired. The primary outcome was minimization of pain (12-month Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire pain subdomain score), maximization of grip strength, total ROM (supination and wrist arc of motion), and esthetics (12-month Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire esthetics subdomain score).

RESULTS

Casting was the best treatment to reduce pain and maximize esthetics, whereas surgery maximized grip strength and ROM. When the patient favored gaining ROM over pain reduction (more than 80:20), surgery was the preferred treatment. When the patient prioritized the importance of grip strength over pain reduction (more than 70:30), surgery was also the preferred treatment.

CONCLUSION

There are tradeoffs in outcomes after treating patients older than 60 years with closed extraarticular distal radius fractures with casting or surgery. When patients are attempting to balance minimizing pain and improving functional outcomes, unless they desire maximal functional recovery, casting may be the better treatment. Surgery may be beneficial if patients want to regain as much grip strength and ROM as possible, even with the possibility of having residual pain. These findings can be referenced for more concrete preoperative counseling and patient expectation management before treatment selection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatments after Closed Extraarticular Distal Radius Fractures in Older Adults from the WRIST Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

This study performs an economic analysis of volar locking plate, external fixation, percutaneous pinning, or casting in elderly patients with closed distal radius fractures.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial, a randomized, multicenter, international clinical trial with a parallel nonoperative casted group of patients older than 60 years with surgically indicated, extraarticular closed distal radius fractures. Thirty-Six-Item Short-Form Health Survey-converted utilities and total costs from Medicare were used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

Casted patients were self-selected and older (p < 0.001) than the randomized surgical cohorts, but otherwise similar in sociodemographic characteristics. Quality-adjusted life-years for percutaneous pinning were highest at 9.17 and external fixation lowest at 8.81. Total costs expended were $16,354 for volar locking plates, $16,012 for external fixation, $11,329 for percutaneous pinning, and $6837 for casting. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for volar locking plates and external fixation were dominated by percutaneous pinning and casting. The ratio for percutaneous pinning compared to casting was $28,717. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed a 10, 5, 53, and 32 percent chance of volar locking plate, external fixation, percutaneous pinning, and casting, respectively, being cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

CONCLUSIONS

Casting is the most cost-effective treatment modality in the elderly with closed extraarticular distal radius fractures and should be considered before surgery. In unstable closed fractures, percutaneous pinning, which is the most cost-effective surgical intervention, may be considered before volar locking plates or external fixation.

What Is the Evidence in Treating Distal Radius Fractures in the Geriatric Population?

Distal radius fractures are common in the elderly population, second only to hip fractures in frequency. Historically, these injuries were treated almost exclusively without surgery, but an increase in operative management has occurred with development of volar locked plating in the early 2000s. Functional outcomes are similar between conservative and surgical treatment, but most studies assume low functional demands in older patients. Many elderly individuals today are active and independent. Decision-making in this higher-demand population is difficult. This article provides current evidence to facilitate informed, individualized decision-making when treating distal radius fractures in geriatric patients.

Modifiable Factors Associated With Chronic Pain 1 Year After Operative Management of Distal Radius Fractures: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Despite appropriate treatment, many patients who sustain distal radius fractures (DRFs) report persistent wrist pain. Chronic musculoskeletal pain is among the leading health problems in the elderly population associated with significant personal and societal burden.

OBJECTIVE

To identify modifiable preoperative factors that are significantly associated with developing chronic pain.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This is a secondary analysis of the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial (WRIST), a randomized multicenter clinical trial of 24 study sites in the United States, Canada, and Singapore that enrolled patients from April 10, 2012, to December 31, 2016. Adults older than 60 years who sustained closed extra-articular DRFs, were treated operatively, and completed 12-month Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaires (MHQs) were included in this study. Analysis was conducted from September to December 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Volar locking plate internal fixation, external fixation, or percutaneous pinning.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

12-month MHQ pain domain score. Inverse probability weighted logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with of chronic pain.

RESULTS

A total of 146 patients with DRF who were treated operatively and had 12-month MHQ scores met inclusion criteria. The mean (SD) patient age was 68.9 (7.2) years, 128 (87.6%) were women, and 93 (63.7%) were retired. Chronic pain was present in 87 patients (59.6%) and absent in 59 patients (40.4%) at 1-year follow-up. A 1-week delay in surgery was associated with more than triple the odds of developing chronic pain (odds ratio [OR], 3.65; 95% CI, 1.48-9.00), and each 10-point increase in preoperative pain was associated with a 17% increase in the odds of experiencing chronic pain (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.02-1.34). Internal fixation was associated with decreased odds of developing chronic pain compared with the other 2 procedures (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.10-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, preoperative pain, time to surgery, and procedure type were modifiable factors associated with chronic pain 1 year after DRF treated with surgery. Adequate pain control in patients with acute DRFs even before definitive surgical management and earlier fixation for patients requiring surgery may decrease the risk of developing chronic pain. Internal fixation may decrease the risk of chronic pain after DRF surgery, compared with percutaneous pinning or external fixation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01589692.

Collaboration in Hand Surgery: Experiences From Silicone Arthroplasty in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Finger Replantation and Amputation Challenges in Assessing Impairment, Satisfaction, and Effectiveness, Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial, and Surgery of the Ulnar Nerve

Outcomes research has historically been driven by single-center investigations. However, multicenter studies represent an opportunity to overcome challenges associated with single-center studies, including generalizability and adequate power. In hand surgery, most clinical trials are single-center studies, with few having randomized controls and blinding of both participants and assessors. This pervasive issue jeopardizes the integrity of evidence-based practice in the field. Because healthcare payers emphasize applying the best available evidence to justify medical services, multicenter research collaborations are increasingly recognized as an avenue for efficiently generating high-quality evidence. Although no study design is perfect, the potential advantages of multicenter trials include generalizability of the results, larger sample sizes, and a collaboration of experienced investigators poised to optimize protocol development and study conduct. As the era of single-center studies shifts toward investment in multicenter trials and clinical registries, investigators will inevitably be faced with the challenges of conducting or contributing to multicenter research collaborations. We present our experiences in conducting multicenter investigations to provide insight into this demanding and rewarding frontier of research.

Percutaneous pinning for treating distal radial fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

Fracture of the distal radius is a common clinical problem. A key method of surgical fixation is percutaneous pinning, involving the insertion of wires through the skin to stabilise the fracture. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of percutaneous pinning versus cast immobilisation alone and of different methods and techniques of percutaneous pinning, modalities or duration of immobilisation after pinning, and methods or timing of pin or wire removal for treating fractures of the distal radius in adults. Our primary focus was on dorsally displaced fractures.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, trial registers, conference proceedings and reference lists of articles up to June 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials involving adults with a fracture of the distal radius, which compared percutaneous pinning with non-surgical treatment or different aspects of percutaneous pinning. Our main outcomes were patient-reported function at the short term (up to three months), medium term (three up to 12 months) and long term (greater than 12 months); overall numbers of participants with complications requiring secondary treatment and any complication; grip strength and health-related quality of life at 12 months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently performed study screening and selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction. We pooled data where appropriate and used GRADE for assessing the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and five quasi-RCTs, involving 1946 generally older and female adults with dorsally displaced and potentially or evidently unstable distal radial fractures. Trial populations varied but the majority of studies reported mean ages in the sixth decade or older. All trials were at high risk of bias, invariably performance bias - which for most trials reflected the impracticality of blinding care providers or participants to treatment allocation - and often detection bias and selective reporting bias. Allocation concealment was secure in one trial only. All trials reported outcomes incompletely. The studies tested one of 10 comparisons. In the following, we report on those of the main outcomes for which evidence was available. No subgroup analysis, such as by pinning methods, was viable. Eleven heterogeneous trials involving 917 participants compared percutaneous pinning with plaster cast immobilisation after closed reduction of the fracture. The quality of the evidence was very low for all reported outcomes. Thus, we are uncertain if percutaneous pinning compared with plaster cast alone makes any difference to patient-reported function, measured using the DASH questionnaire, at six weeks or six months (incomplete data from one trial). Overall numbers of participants with complications were not reported. Redisplacement resulting in secondary treatment occurred on average in 12% (range 3.3% to 75%) of participants treated by cast alone (six trials) whereas pin tract infection requiring antibiotics and, often, early wire removal, occurred on average in 7.7% (range 0% to 15%) of pinning group participants (seven trials). We are uncertain whether pinning makes a difference to the incidence of complex regional pain syndrome, reported in four studies. Although two studies found finger stiffness after cast removal was less common after pinning (20% versus 36%), the treatment implications were not reported. Other reported complications were mainly surgery-related. Based on incomplete data or qualitative statements from only four studies, we are uncertain of the effects of pinning on grip strength at 12 months. We are uncertain if percutaneous pinning compared with plaster cast alone makes any difference to patient-reported quality of life at four months (one study). Five comparisons of different pinning methods were made by six trials in all. One of these trials, which reported results for 96 participants, compared Kapandji intrafocal pinning (2 or 3 wires) with early mobilisation versus trans-styloid fixation (2 wires) with six weeks cast immobilisation. We are uncertain whether Kapandji pinning slightly increases the risk of superficial radial nerve symptoms or complex regional pain syndrome, or whether it makes a difference in grip strength at 12 months (very low-quality evidence). Two small trials using two distinct pinning techniques compared biodegradable pins versus metal pins in 70 participants. Although very low-quality evidence, the extra demands at surgery of insertion of biodegradable pins and excess of serious complications (e.g. severe osteolytic reactions) associated with biodegradable material are important findings. Three poorly-reported trials involving 168 participants compared burying of wire ends versus leaving them exposed. We are uncertain whether burying of wires reduces the incidence of superficial infection (very low-quality evidence). There is low-quality evidence that burying of wires may be associated with a higher risk of requiring more invasive treatment for wire removal. Four small trials compared different types or duration of postoperative immobilisation. Very low-quality evidence of small between-group differences in individual complications and grip strength at 17 weeks, means we are uncertain of the effects of positioning the wrist in dorsiflexion versus palmar flexion during cast immobilisation following pinning of redisplaced fractures (one trial; 60 participants). Three small heterogeneous trials compared cast immobilisation for one week (early mobilisation) versus four or six weeks after percutaneous pinning in 170 people. Although we note one trial using Kapandji pinning reported more complications in the early group, the very low-quality evidence means there is uncertainty of the effects of early mobilisation on overall and individual complications, or grip strength at 12 months. No trials tested different methods for, or timing of, pin/wire removal.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there is insufficient RCT evidence to inform on the role of percutaneous pinning versus cast immobilisation alone or associated treatment decisions such as method of pinning, burying or not of wire ends, wrist position and duration of immobilisation after pinning. Although very low-quality evidence, the serious complications associated with biodegradable materials is noteworthy. We advise waiting on the results of a large ongoing study comparing pinning with plaster cast treatment as these could help inform future research.

Patient satisfaction after treatment of distal radial fractures in older adults

The Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial (WRIST) collaboration is the largest clinical trial ever conducted in hand surgery. We applied data from this study to examine the relationship between functional outcomes and patient satisfaction after treatment of distal radial fractures. Patients aged 60 years and older with isolated distal radial fractures were enrolled at 24 health systems. Grip strength and the arc of wrist motion were measured after treatment. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire was used to measure patient satisfaction. Receiver operating characteristic curves were created using patient satisfaction as the reference standard and each functional measure as a predictor. At 12 months after treatment, mean grip strength was 82% of normal and mean arc of motion was 88% of normal. The optimal cut-off points to distinguish satisfaction from dissatisfaction occurred when patients recovered 59% of hand strength and 79% of wrist motion. Continuing therapy to increase functional gains beyond this point unnecessarily utilizes healthcare resources without additional patient-reported gains. Level of evidence: IV.

The Complexity of Conducting a Multicenter Clinical Trial: Taking It to the Next Level Stipulated by the Federal Agencies

Randomized controlled trials are becoming increasingly difficult to organize and conduct efficiently. This, in turn, hinders the ability to derive the highest level of evidence. Often, investigators forget or remain unaware of essential practices that will help them fulfill their study goals. This article emphasizes the common issues that a study team experiences during the planning and conducting of randomized controlled trials. The authors sought to share remedies to overcome these issues with the experience garnered in conducting several multicenter clinical trials and observational studies. In addition, the authors list resources from sponsors such as the National Institutes of Health and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that study teams can apply to undertake studies effectively.

Assessment of Distal Radius Fracture Complications Among Adults 60 Years or Older: A Secondary Analysis of the WRIST Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Complications affect treatment outcomes and quality of life in addition to increasing treatment costs.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate complication rates after the treatment of a distal radius fracture, to determine whether the rate or complication type is associated with treatment method, and to determine predictors of complications.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The multicenter Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial (WRIST), a randomized clinical trial, enrolled participants from April 10, 2012, to December 31, 2016. The study included 304 adults 60 years or older with isolated unstable distal radius fractures; 187 were randomized and 117 opted for casting. The study was conducted at 24 health systems in the United States, Canada, and Singapore. Data for this secondary analysis were collected from April 24, 2012, to February 28, 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants opting for surgery were randomized to receive the volar locking plate system (n = 65), percutaneous pinning (n = 58), or bridging external fixation with or without supplemental pinning (n = 64). Patients who chose not to have surgery (n = 117) were not randomized and were enrolled for casting.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Complication rate.

RESULTS

The WRIST enrolled a total of 304 participants, of whom 8 casting group participants were later found to be ineligible and were excluded from the analysis, leaving 296 participants. Randomized participants' mean (SD) age was 68 (7.2) years, 163 (87%) were female, and 165 (88%) were white. Casting participants' mean (SD) age was 75.6 (9.6) years, 93 (84%) were female, and 85 (85%) were white. The most common type of complications varied by treatment. Twelve of 65 participants (18.5%) in the internal fixation group reported a median nerve compression, while 16 of 26 participants (25.8%) who received external fixation and 13 of 56 participants (23.2%) who received pinning sustained pin site infections. Compared with the internal fixation group, complication rate for any severity complication was higher in participants who initially received casting (adjusted rate ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.22-2.88), whereas the rate for moderate complications was higher in the external fixation group (adjusted rate ratio, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.25-5.09).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The distal radius fracture treatment decision-making process for older patients should incorporate a complication profile for each treatment type. For example, external fixation and pinning could be used for patients after apprising them of pin site infection risk. Internal fixation can be done in patients with high functional demands who are willing to receive surgery. Internal fixation use should be substantiated owing to the time and cost involved.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01589692.

Older Patient Preferences for Internal Fixation after a Distal Radius Fracture: A Qualitative Study from the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial

BACKGROUND

Distal radius fracture treatments provide similar functional outcomes. It has been hypothesized that the use of internal fixation is increasing because of physician preferences. The multisite randomized Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial provides a unique opportunity to examine patient preferences in the absence of surgeon influence. The authors' objective was to investigate patient preference for internal fixation even after being informed of the equipoise among treatments.

METHODS

The authors performed 30 semistructured interviews with older individuals, all older than 60 years, approached at their institution for the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial. The authors' sample included three groups: those with a preference for internal fixation (n = 11), those with preference for nonsurgical treatment (n = 6), and those without a preference who consented to surgical randomization (n = 13). We used grounded theory for data collection and analysis.

RESULTS

All participants indicated their chief concern was regaining full function. Patients based their preferences for internal fixation on multiple values, including obstacles to recovery, autonomy, aesthetics, and pain relief. Some patients who did not select internal fixation reflected on their experiences, questioning whether they would have had a potentially different outcome with internal fixation treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Without evidence for a superior treatment, patients focus on factors that pertain to recovery rather than outcomes, with most preferring the volar locking plating system. To best align with patient values, physicians should focus their discussion with patients on aspects of the recovery period rather than functional outcomes. Evidence from the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial will provide high-level information about patient-reported, functional, and radiographic outcomes.

Institutional review boards: what's old? What's new? What needs to change?

SUMMARY

Institutional review boards have come under fire for being burdened with work, causing delays in the progress of human subject research without improvements in the protection of human subjects. Over the years, there have been increases in the numbers of clinical trials, the use of multisite studies, and the amount of bureaucracy, but there have been no changes to the system to accommodate these advancements. Proposed changes include the use of a centralized institutional review board for multisite studies and harmonization of reporting requirements among agencies. The purposes of this article are to review the history, structure, and purpose of the institutional review board, to assess the criticisms of the current system, and to discuss solutions for improvement.