23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Study to prospectively evaluate reamed intramedually nails in patients with tibial fractures (S.P.R.I.N.T.): Study rationale and design

      research-article
      The SPRINT Investigators 1 ,
      BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Surgeons agree on the benefits of operative treatment of tibial fractures – the most common of long bone fractures – with an intramedullary rod or nail. Rates of re-operation remain high – between 23% and 60% in prior trials – and the two alternative nailing approaches, reamed or non-reamed, each have a compelling biological rationale and strong proponents, resulting in ongoing controversy regarding which is better.

          Methods/Design

          The objective of this trial was to assess the impact of reamed versus non-reamed intramedullary nailing on rates of re-operation in patients with open and closed fractures of the tibial shaft. The study to prospectively evaluate reamed intramedullary nails in tibial fractures (S.P.R.I.N.T) was a multi-center, randomized trial including 29 clinical sites in Canada, the United States and the Netherlands which enrolled 1200 skeletally mature patients with open (Gustilo Types I-IIIB) or closed (Tscherne Types 0–3) fractures of the tibial shaft amenable to surgical treatment with an intramedullary nail. Patients received a statically locked intramedullary nail with either reamed or non-reamed insertion. The first strategy involved fixation of the fracture with an intramedullary nail following reaming to enlarge the intramedullary canal (Reamed Group). The second treatment strategy involved fixation of the fracture with an intramedullary nail without prior reaming of the intramedullary canal (Non-Reamed Group). Patients, outcome assessors, and data analysts were blinded to treatment allocation. Peri-operative care was standardized, and re-operations before 6 months were proscribed. Patients were followed at discharge, 2 weeks post-discharge, and at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post surgery. A committee, blinded to allocation, adjudicated all outcomes.

          Discussion

          The primary outcome was re-operation to promote healing, treat infection, or preserve the limb (fasciotomy for compartment syndrome after nailing). The primary outcome was a composite comprising the following re-operations: bone grafts, implant exchanges, and dynamizations, in patients with fracture gaps less than 1 cm post intramedullary nail insertion. Infections and fasciotomies were considered events irrespective of the fracture gap. We planned a priori to conduct a subgroup analysis of outcomes in patients with open and closed fractures. S.P.R.I.N.T is the largest collaborative trial evaluating alternative orthopaedic surgical interventions in patients with tibial shaft fractures. The methodological rigor will set new benchmarks for future trials in the field and its results will have important impact on patient care. The S.P.R.I.N.T trial was registered [ID NCT00038129] and received research ethics approval (REB#99-077).

          Related collections

          Most cited references74

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups.

          The widespread use of standardized health surveys is predicated on the largely untested assumption that scales constructed from those surveys will satisfy minimum psychometric requirements across diverse population groups. Data from the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) were used to evaluate data completeness and quality, test scaling assumptions, and estimate internal-consistency reliability for the eight scales constructed from the MOS SF-36 Health Survey. Analyses were conducted among 3,445 patients and were replicated across 24 subgroups differing in sociodemographic characteristics, diagnosis, and disease severity. For each scale, item-completion rates were high across all groups (88% to 95%), but tended to be somewhat lower among the elderly, those with less than a high school education, and those in poverty. On average, surveys were complete enough to compute scales scores for more than 96% of the sample. Across patient groups, all scales passed tests for item-internal consistency (97% passed) and item-discriminant validity (92% passed). Reliability coefficients ranged from a low of 0.65 to a high of 0.94 across scales (median = 0.85) and varied somewhat across patient subgroups. Floor effects were negligible except for the two role disability scales. Noteworthy ceiling effects were observed for both role disability scales and the social functioning scale. These findings support the use of the SF-36 survey across the diverse populations studied and identify population groups in which use of standardized health status measures may or may not be problematic.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A prospective study of venous thromboembolism after major trauma.

            Although deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism are considered common complications after major trauma, their frequency and the associated risk factors have not been carefully quantified. We performed serial impedance plethysmography and lower-extremity contrast venography to detect deep-vein thrombosis in a cohort of 716 patients admitted to a regional trauma unit. Prophylaxis against thromboembolism was not used. Deep-vein thrombosis in the lower extremities was found in 201 of the 349 patients (58 percent) with adequate venographic studies, and proximal-vein thrombosis was found in 63 (18 percent). Three patients died of massive pulmonary embolism before venography could be performed. Before venography, only three of the patients with deep-vein thrombosis had clinical features suggestive of the condition. Deep-vein thrombosis was found in 65 of the 129 patients with major injuries involving the face, chest, or abdomen (50 percent); in 49 of the 91 patients with major head injuries (53.8 percent); in 41 of the 66 with spinal injuries (62 percent); and in 126 of the 182 with lower-extremity orthopedic injuries (69 percent). Thrombi were detected in 61 of the 100 patients with pelvic fractures (61 percent), in 59 of the 74 with femoral fractures (80 percent), and in 66 of the 86 with tibial fractures (77 percent). A multivariate analysis identified five independent risk factors for deep-vein thrombosis: older age (odds ratio, 1.05 per year of age; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.06), blood transfusion (odds ratio, 1.74; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.03 to 2.93), surgery (odds ratio, 2.30; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.08 to 4.89), fracture of the femur or tibia (odds ratio, 4.82; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.79 to 8.33), and spinal cord injury (odds ratio, 8.59; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.92 to 25.28). Venous thromboembolism is a common complication in patients with major trauma, and effective, safe prophylactic regimens are needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system. Health Utilities Index Mark 2.

              The Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI:2) is a generic multiattribute, preference-based system for assessing health-related quality of life. Health Utilities Index Mark 2 consists of two components: a seven-attribute health status classification system and a scoring formula. The seven attributes are sensation, mobility, emotion, cognition, self-care, pain, and fertility. A random sample of general population parents were interviewed to determine cardinal preferences for the health states in the system. The health states were defined as lasting for a 60-year lifetime, starting at age 10. Values were measured using visual analogue scaling. Utilities were measured using a standard gamble technique. A scoring formula is provided, based on a multiplicative multiattribute utility function from the responses of 194 subjects. The utility scores are death-anchored (death = 0.0) and form an interval scale. Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and its utility scores can be useful to other researchers in a wide variety of settings who wish to document health status and assign preference scores.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
                BioMed Central
                1471-2474
                2008
                23 June 2008
                : 9
                : 91
                Affiliations
                [1 ]SPRINT Methods Center, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 1200 Main Street West, Room 2C9 Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                Article
                1471-2474-9-91
                10.1186/1471-2474-9-91
                2446397
                18573205
                5855f01d-acb1-4cd7-b8c5-adcd322fa5f0
                Copyright © 2008 Bhandari and The SPRINT Investigators; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 16 January 2008
                : 23 June 2008
                Categories
                Study Protocol

                Orthopedics
                Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article