Maximal intended movement velocity, low training load, simple training methods, low-volume training and low-frequency training were revealed as components offering potential for the development of a pragmatic intervention. Additionally, the research area is dominated by short-term interventions producing short-term gains with little consideration of the long-term maintenance of functional performance. We believe the area would benefit from larger and higher-quality studies and consideration of optimal long-term strategies to develop and maintain muscle power and physical function over years rather than weeks.

BackgroundClose contact casting (CCC) may offer an alternative to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) surgery for unstable ankle fractures in older adults.ObjectivesWe aimed to (1) determine if CCC for unstable ankle fractures in adults aged over 60 years resulted in equivalent clinical outcome compared with ORIF, (2) estimate cost-effectiveness to the NHS and society and (3) explore participant experiences.DesignA pragmatic, multicentre, equivalence randomised controlled trial incorporating health economic evaluation and qualitative study.SettingTrauma and orthopaedic departments of 24 NHS hospitals.ParticipantsAdults aged over 60 years with unstable ankle fracture. Those with serious limb or concomitant disease or substantial cognitive impairment were excluded.InterventionsCCC was conducted under anaesthetic in theatre by surgeons who attended training. ORIF was as per local practice. Participants were randomised in 1 : 1 allocation via remote telephone randomisation. Sequence generation was by random block size, with stratification by centre and fracture pattern.Main outcome measuresFollow-up was conducted at 6 weeks and, by blinded outcome assessors, at 6 months after randomisation. The primary outcome was the Olerud–Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), a patient-reported assessment of ankle function, at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were quality of life (as measured by the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions, Short Form questionnaire-12 items), pain, ankle range of motion and mobility (as measured by the timed up and go test), patient satisfaction and radiological measures. In accordance with equivalence trial US Food and Drug Administration guidance, primary analysis was per protocol.ResultsWe recruited 620 participants, 95 from the pilot and 525 from the multicentre phase, between June 2010 and November 2013. The majority of participants, 579 out of 620 (93%), received the allocated treatment; 52 out of 275 (19%) who received CCC later converted to ORIF because of loss of fracture reduction. CCC resulted in equivalent ankle function compared with ORIF at 6 months {OMAS 64.5 points [standard deviation (SD) 22.4 points] vs. OMAS 66.0 points (SD 21.1 points); mean difference –0.65 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) –3.98 to 2.68 points; standardised effect size –0.04, 95% CI –0.23 to 0.15}. There were no differences in quality of life, ankle motion, pain, mobility and patient satisfaction. Infection and/or wound problems were more common with ORIF [29/298 (10%) vs. 4/275 (1%)], as were additional operating theatre procedures [17/298 (6%) vs. 3/275 (1%)]. Malunion was more common with CCC [38/249 (15%) vs. 8/274 (3%);p < 0.001]. Malleolar non-union was lower in the ORIF group [lateral: 0/274 (0%) vs. 8/248 (3%);p = 0.002; medial: 3/274 (1%) vs. 18/248 (7%);p < 0.001]. During the trial, CCC showed modest mean cost savings [NHS mean difference –£644 (95% CI –£1390 to £76); society mean difference –£683 (95% CI –£1851 to £536)]. Estimates showed some imprecision. Incremental quality-adjusted life-years following CCC were no different from ORIF. Over common willingness-to-pay thresholds, the probability that CCC was cost-effective was very high (> 95% from NHS perspective and 85% from societal perspective). Experiences of treatments were similar; both groups endured the impact of fracture, uncertainty regarding future function and the need for further interventions.LimitationsAssessors at 6 weeks were necessarily not blinded. The learning-effect analysis was inconclusive because of limited CCC applications per surgeon.ConclusionsCCC provides a clinically equivalent outcome to ORIF at reduced cost to the NHS and to society at 6 months.Future workLonger-term follow-up of trial participants is under way to address concerns over potential later complications or additional procedures and their potential to impact on ankle function. Further study of the patient factors, radiological fracture patterns and outcomes, treatment responses and prognosis would also contribute to understanding the treatment pathway.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN04180738.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 75. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This report was developed in association with the National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Unit funding scheme. The pilot phase was funded by the AO Research Foundation.

ObjectiveTo determine whether an injection of platelet rich plasma improves outcomes after acute Achilles tendon rupture.DesignRandomised, placebo controlled, two arm, parallel group, participant and assessor masked, superiority trial.SettingSecondary care trauma units across 19 hospitals in the United Kingdom’s health service.ParticipantsRecruitment commenced in July 2015 and follow-up was completed in March 2018. 230 adults aged 18 years and over were included, with acute Achilles tendon rupture presenting within 12 days of injury and managed with non-surgical treatment. Exclusions were injury at the insertion or musculotendinous junction, major leg injury or deformity, diabetes mellitus, platelet or haematological disorder, systemic corticosteroids, anticoagulation treatment, and other contraindicating conditions.InterventionsParticipants were randomised 1:1 to platelet rich plasma (n=114) or placebo (dry needle; n=116) injection. All participants received standard rehabilitation care (ankle immobilisation followed by physiotherapy).Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was muscle tendon function at 24 weeks, measured objectively with the limb symmetry index (injured/uninjured×100) in maximal work done during the heel rise endurance test (an instrumented measure of repeated single leg heel rises until fatigue). Secondary outcomes included patient reported function (Achilles tendon rupture score), quality of life (short form 12 version 2®), pain (visual analogue scale), goal attainment (patient specific functional scale), and adverse events. A central laboratory analysed the quality and content of platelet rich plasma. Analyses were by modified intention to treat.ResultsParticipants were 46 years old on average, and 57 (25%) of 230 were female. At 24 weeks, 202 (88%) participants completed the heel rise endurance test and 216 (94%) the patient reported outcomes. The platelet rich plasma was of good quality, with expected growth factor content. No difference was detected in muscle tendon function between participants receiving platelet rich plasma injections and those receiving placebo injections (limb symmetry index, mean 34.7% (standard deviation 17.7%) v 38.5% (22.8%); adjusted mean difference −3.9% (95% confidence interval −10.5% to 2.7%)) or in any secondary outcomes or adverse event rates. Complier average causal effect analyses gave similar findings.ConclusionsThere is no evidence to indicate that injections of platelet rich plasma can improve objective muscle tendon function, patient reported function, or quality of life after acute Achilles tendon rupture compared with placebo, or that they offer any patient benefit.Trial registrationISRCTN54992179.

No abstract

Background Corticosteroid injections and physiotherapy exercise programmes are commonly used to treat rotator cuff disorders but the treatments' effectiveness is uncertain. We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and costeffectiveness of a progressive exercise programme with a single session of best practice physiotherapy advice, with or without corticosteroid injection, in adults with a rotator cuff disorder.Methods In this pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial (2 × 2 factorial), we recruited patients from 20 UK National Health Service trusts. We included patients aged 18 years or older with a rotator cuff disorder (new episode within the past 6 months). Patients were excluded if they had a history of significant shoulder trauma (eg, dislocation, fracture, or full-thickness tear requiring surgery), neurological disease affecting the shoulder, other shoulder conditions (eg, inflammatory arthritis, frozen shoulder, or glenohumeral joint instability), received corticosteroid injection or physiotherapy for shoulder pain in the past 6 months, or were being considered for surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (centralised computer-generated system, 1:1:1:1) to progressive exercise (≤6 sessions), best practice advice (one session), corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise, or corticosteroid injection then best practice advice. The primary outcome was the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score over 12 months, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis (statistical significance set at 1%). The trial was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Register, ISRCTN16539266, and EuDRACT, 2016-002991-28.Findings Between March 10, 2017, and May 2, 2019, we screened 2287 patients. 708 patients were randomly assigned to progressive exercise (n=174), best practice advice (n=174), corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise (n=182), or corticosteroid injection then best practice advice (n=178). Over 12 months, SPADI data were available for 166 (95%) patients in the progressive exercise group, 164 (94%) in the best practice advice group, 177 (97%) in the corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise group, and 175 (98%) in the corticosteroid injection then best practice advice group. We found no evidence of a difference in SPADI score between progressive exercise and best practice advice when analysed over 12 months (adjusted mean difference -0•66 [99% CI -4•52 to 3•20]). We also found no evidence of a difference between corticosteroid injection compared with no injection when analysed over 12 months (-1•11 [-4•47 to 2•26]). No serious adverse events were reported.Interpretation Progressive exercise was not superior to a best practice advice session with a physiotherapist in improving shoulder pain and function. Subacromial corticosteroid injection provided no long-term benefit in patients with rotator cuff disorders.

T he incidence of ankle fracture is 71 per 100 000 person-years. There are age and sex differences, with peak incidence in younger men (between 15 and 29 years of age), whereas in women the incidence peaks at over 50 years of age. 38 Ankle fracture is caused by injury during physical activity and sport, and, in older people, osteoporosis is an important contributor. 19 Projections from Scandinavia suggest that the number of ankle fractures will increase 3-fold between 2006 and 2030, driven by the aging population 18 and increased participation of older people in sporting activities.1 Displaced and/or unstable ankle fractures often require surgery to restore and maintain congruence of ankle mortise. 15 The recommended surgical technique in developed countries over the last few decades has been open reduction and internal fixation. T T OBJECTIVES:To compare early ankle movement versus ankle immobilization after surgery for ankle fracture on clinical and patient-reported outcomes. T T BACKGROUND:A significant proportion of patients undergoing surgery for ankle fracture experience postoperative complications and delayed return to function. The risks and benefits of movement of the ankle in the first 6 weeks after surgery are not known, and clinical practice varies widely. T T METHODS:We searched bibliographic databases and reference lists to identify eligible trials. Two independent reviewers conducted data extraction and risk-of-bias assessments. T T RESULTS: Fourteen trials (705 participants)were included in the review, 11 of which were included in the meta-analysis. The quality of the trials was universally poor. The pooled effect of early ankle movement on function at 9 to 12 weeks after surgery compared to immobilization was inconclusive (standardized mean difference, 0.46; 95% confidence interval: -0.02, 0.93; P = .06; I 2 = 72%), and no differences were observed between groups at 1 year. The odds of venous thromboembolism were significantly lower with early ankle movement compared to immobilization (Peto odds ratio = 0.12; 95% confidence interval: 0.02, 0.71; P = .02; I 2 = 0%). Deep surgical site infection (Peto odds ratio = 7.08; 95% confidence interval: 1.39, 35.99; P = .02; I 2 = 0%), superficial surgical site infection, fixation failure, and reoperation to remove metalwork were more common after early ankle movement compared to immobilization. T T CONCLUSION:The quality of evidence is poor. The effects of early movement after ankle surgery on short-term functional outcomes are unclear, but there is no observable difference in the longer term. There is a small reduction in risk of postoperative thromboembolism with early ankle movement. Current evidence suggests that deep and superficial surgical site infections, fixation failure, and the need to remove metalwork are more common after early ankle movement. T T LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapy, level 1a-. Ther 2014;44(9):690-701. Epub 6 August 2014. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014 Complete immobilization of the ankle by restraining ankle movement in a neutral position c...

ObjectiveTo determine research priorities in fragility fractures of the lower limb and pelvis which represent the shared priorities of patients, their friends and families, carers and healthcare professionals.Design/settingA national (UK) research priority setting partnership.ParticipantsPatients over 60 years of age who have experienced a fragility fracture of the lower limb or pelvis; carers involved in their care (both in and out of hospital); family and friends of patients; healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of these patients including but not limited to surgeons, anaesthetists, paramedics, nurses, general practitioners, physicians, physiotherapists and occupational therapists.MethodsUsing a multiphase methodology in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 18 months (August 2016–January 2018), a national scoping survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties. These were amalgamated into a smaller number of research questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not been answered. A second national survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 25 questions was taken to a multistakeholder workshop where a consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities.ResultsThere were 963 original uncertainties submitted by 365 respondents to the first survey. These original uncertainties were refined into 88 research questions of which 76 were judged to be true uncertainties following a review of the research evidence. Healthcare professionals and other stakeholders (patients, carers, friends and families) were represented equally in the responses. The top 10 represent uncertainties in rehabilitation, pain management, anaesthesia and surgery.ConclusionsWe report the top 10 UK research priorities in patients with fragility fractures of the lower limb and pelvis. The priorities highlight uncertainties in rehabilitation, postoperative physiotherapy, pain, weight-bearing, infection and thromboprophylaxis. The challenge now is to refine and deliver answers to these research priorities.

No abstract