The Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society

Comparative Study of Postoperative Outcomes of Clavicle Midshaft Fracture Treated by Nailing vs. Plating

Background

A midshaft clavicle fracture is a prevalent form of injury of the upper extremity that affects one's quality of life. Several treatment modalities facilitate fixation of the displaced midshaft clavicle to decrease nonunion and malunion of the clavicle fracture. Still, numerous factors influence choosing an optimal surgical intervention. Thus, this study investigates the functional outcome of two standard fixation techniques, titanium elastic nails (TENs) and locking plates, as a prospective comparative study for surgical management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

Methods

We performed closed/open reduction and internal fixation in 62 patients (40 male and 22 female) with TENs and locking plates, respectively, which were followed up at regular intervals following the surgery (at two, six, 12, 24, and 48 weeks). The surgical outcome was assessed both from functional and radiological standpoints. The influence of surgical fixation on functional outcome was evaluated based on the Constant-Murley score and the fracture recuperation based on union times.

Results

When compared to plate fixation, TENs had lesser union times. Still, there was no statistical difference in union time between the two groups. The functional assessment graded by Constant-Murley score had a similar distribution of scores between the two groups.With a follow-up of twelve months, the Constant-Murley scores between the groups were not statistically different. While the average score for plate fixation was slightly higher than that of TENs, the nonunion rate was found to be similar in both groups.

Conclusion

Surgical interventions using both TENs and plate fixation are suitable for managing clavicle midshaft fractures as they have a similar functional outcome. However, considering early recovery with minimal surgical complications, TENs can be a preferred treatment choice for managing displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

The Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society

AIMS

This study reviews the past 30 years of research from the Canadian Orthopedic Trauma Society (COTS), to identify predictive factors that delay or accelerate the course of randomized controlled trials in orthopaedic trauma.

METHODS

We conducted a methodological review of all papers published through the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society or its affiliates. Data abstracted included: year of publication; journal of publication; study type; number of study sites; sample size; and achievement of sample size goals. Information about the study timelines was also collected, including: the date of study proposal to COTS; date recruitment began; date recruitment ended; and date of publication.

RESULTS

In total, 22 studies have been published through the COTS working group, 13 of which are randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In total, 1,423 individual patients have been involved in COTS studies, a mean of 110 patients per trial (22 to 424). Each study was conducted across a mean of approximately six centres (1 to 11) and took nearly ten years (mean 119.9 months (59 to 188)) from presentation of concept to publication. The mean length of enrolment was 63 months (26 to 113) and the mean time from cessation of enrolment to publication 51 months (19 to 78). Regardless of sample size, the only factor associated with a decreased length of enrolment was a higher number of clinical sites (p = 0.041). Neither study sample size nor length of enrolment were associated with total time to publication.

CONCLUSION

Over the last three decades, COTS has developed a multinational strategy to produce high-quality evidence in the field of orthopaedic trauma through 13 multicentre RCTs. Future efficiencies can be realized by recruitment of more clinical sites, improving connectivity between the sites, and the promotion of national streamlined ethics processes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):898-901.

Advances and future directions for management of trauma patients with musculoskeletal injuries

Musculoskeletal injuries are the most common reason for operative procedures in severely injured patients and are major determinants of functional outcomes. In this paper, we summarise advances and future directions for management of multiply injured patients with major musculoskeletal trauma. Improved understanding of fracture healing has created new possibilities for management of particularly challenging problems, such as delayed union and non union of fractures and large bone defects. Optimum timing of major orthopaedic interventions is guided by increased knowledge about the immune response after injury. Individual treatment should be guided by trading off the benefits of early definitive skeletal stabilisation, and the potentially life-threatening risks of systemic complications such as fat embolism, acute lung injury, and multiple organ failure. New methods for measurement of fracture healing and function and quality of life outcomes pave the way for landmark trials that will guide the future management of musculoskeletal injuries.

Research: getting started in an academic setting

Surgeons who choose a position in an academic teaching center have chosen to incorporate research and education into their clinical practice. These clinicians-scientists need passion, an inquiring mind, pertinent questions, time, money, and a research team to pursue a lifetime of intellectual challenges and patient care. The desire and passion for research is a critical requirement. An "inquiring mind" has to have a relevant question that is feasible to be tested and attain an answer. Adequate time carved into one's weekly schedule will greatly facilitate research productivity. Pursuit of money will also assist in obtaining the support personnel to help gather data, communicate with institutional review boards, and write grants and manuscripts. All these components will be critical members of the "research team." Established teams can also greatly facilitate orthopaedic research by joining groups that are doing multicenter studies with established studies. This can be a great learning experience and introduction into multicenter research.