The Effect of Knee Flexion Contracture on Patient Reported Outcome Measures after Distal Femur Fractures (OTA/AO Type 33):A Multi-Center Prospective Evaluation
Abstract OBJECTIVES: · To determine if patients with knee flexion contracture after distal femur fracture have poorer outcomes than patients who regain full knee extension. · To determine if factors such as patient age, gender, open fracture or implant used favors knee flexion contracture. METHODS: Design: Prospective, multicenter trial Setting: Twenty academic level I trauma centers Patient Selection Criteria: Patients with a distal femur fracture. Patients were evaluated for knee flexion contracture at 3, 6 and 12 months post-operatively. Outcome Measures and Comparisons: SMFA, Bother Index and EQ Health Index scores were recorded. Walking and stair climbing ability were assessed. RESULTS: · 126 patients had radiographic follow up for 12 months. There was clinical follow-up for 99 patients at 3 months, 90 patients at 6 months and 74 pts at 12 months. · Patients with full knee extension had better SMFA scores at 12 months than patients with knee flexion contracture (p = 0.308). · Bother Index (p = 0.29) and EQ Health State (p = 0.12) scores did not demonstrate a difference between patients with or without knee flexion contracture at any time point. · Patients with full knee extension had improved walking ability compared to patients with flexion contracture (p = 0.008). Patients with full knee extension had better stair climbing ability than patients with flexion contracture (p = 0.02). · Only older patient age showed a difference in likelihood of flexion contracture (p = 0.01) The rates of flexion contracture in women versus men (p = 0.51), RIMN versus LLP (p = 0.74) and open versus closed fracture (p = 0.24) were not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: · Patients with knee flexion contractures after distal femur fracture do worse than patients who regain full extension. · Older patients with distal femur fractures are at greater risk for knee flexion contracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I
Locked Lateral Plating Versus Retrograde Nailing for Distal Femur Fractures: A Multicenter Randomized Trial
Objectives: The 2 main forms of treatment for distal femur fractures are locked lateral plating and retrograde nailing. The goal of this trial was to determine whether there are significant differences in outcomes between these forms of treatment. Design: Multicenter randomized controlled trial. Setting: Twenty academic trauma centers. Patients/Participants: One hundred sixty patients with distal femur fractures were enrolled. One hundred twenty-six patients were followed 12 months. Patients were randomized to plating in 62 cases and intramedullary nailing in 64 cases. Intervention: Lateral locked plating or retrograde intramedullary nailing. Main Outcome Measurements: Functional scoring including Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment, bother index, EQ Health, and EQ Index. Secondary measures included alignment, operative time, range of motion, union rate, walking ability, ability to manage stairs, and number and type of adverse events. Results: Functional testing showed no difference between the groups. Both groups were still significantly affected by their fracture 12 months after injury. There was more coronal plane valgus in the plating group, which approached statistical significance. Range of motion, walking ability, and ability to manage stairs were similar between the groups. Rate and type of adverse events were not statistically different between the groups. Conclusions: Both lateral locked plating and retrograde intramedullary nailing are reasonable surgical options for these fractures. Patients continue to improve over the course of the year after injury but remain impaired 1 year postoperatively. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
International Orthopaedic Volunteer Opportunities in Low and Middle-Income Countries
Abstract: Globally, the burden of musculoskeletal conditions continues to rise, disproportionately affecting low and middle-income countries (LMICs). The ability to meet these orthopaedic surgical care demands remains a challenge. To help address these issues, many orthopaedic surgeons seek opportunities to provide humanitarian assistance to the populations in need. While many global orthopaedic initiatives are well-intentioned and can offer short-term benefits to the local communities, it is essential to emphasize training and the integration of local surgeon-leaders. The commitment to developing educational and investigative capacity, as well as fostering sustainable, mutually beneficial partnerships in low-resource settings, is critical. To this end, global health organizations, such as the Consortium of Orthopaedic Academic Traumatologists (COACT), work to promote and ensure the lasting sustainability of musculoskeletal trauma care worldwide. This article describes global orthopaedic efforts that can effectively address musculoskeletal care through an examination of 5 domains: clinical care, clinical research, surgical education, disaster response, and advocacy.