We performed two independent, randomised, controlled trials in order to assess the potential benefits of immediate weight-bearing mobilisation after rupture of the tendo Achillis. The first trial, on operatively-treated patients showed an improved functional outcome for patients mobilised fully weight-bearing after surgical repair. Two cases of rerupture in the treatment group suggested that careful patient selection is required as patients need to follow a structured rehabilitation regimen. The second trial, on conservatively-treated patients, provided no evidence of a functional benefit from immediate weight-bearing mobilisation. However, the practical advantages of immediate weight-bearing did not predispose the patients to a higher complication rate. In particular, there was no evidence of tendon lengthening or a higher re-rupture rate. We would advocate immediate weight-bearing mobilisation for the rehabilitation of all patients with rupture of the tendo Achillis.

Objectives To compare the clinical effectiveness of Kirschner wire fixation with locking plate fixation for patients with a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius.

ObjectiveTo explore what patients consider important when evaluating their recovery from hip fracture and to consider how these priorities could be used in the evaluation of the quality of hip fracture services.DesignSemistructured interviews exploring the experience of recovery from hip fracture at two time points—4 weeks and 4 months postoperative hip fixation. Two approaches to analysis: thematic analysis of data specifically related to recovery from hip fracture; summarising the participant's experience overall.Participants31 participants were recruited, of whom 20 were women and 12 were cognitively impaired. Mean age was 81.5 years. Interviews were provided by 19 patients, 14 carers and 8 patient/carer dyad; 10 participants were interviewed twice.SettingSingle major trauma centre in the West Midlands of the UK.ResultsStable mobility (without falls or fear of falls) for valued activities was considered most important by participants who had some prefracture mobility and were able to articulate what they valued during recovery. Mobility was important for managing personal care, for day-to-day activities such as shopping and gardening, and for maintenance of mental well-being. Some participants used assistive mobility devices or adapted to their limitations. Others maintained their previous limited function through increased care provision. Many participants were unable to articulate what they valued as hip fracture was perceived as part of their decline with age. The fracture and problems from other health conditions were an inseparable part of one health experience.ConclusionsPrefracture mobility, adaptations to reduced mobility before or after fracture, and whether or not patients perceive themselves to be declining with age influence what patients consider important during recovery from hip fracture. No single patient-reported outcome measure could evaluate quality of care for all patients following hip fracture. General health-related quality of life tools may provide useful information within clinical trials.

Hip fracture is a global public health problem. The National Hip Fracture Database provides a framework for service evaluation in this group of patients in the United Kingdom, but does not collect patient-reported outcome data and is unable to provide meaningful data about the recovery of quality of life. We report one-year patient-reported outcomes of a prospective cohort of patients treated at a single major trauma centre in the United Kingdom who sustained a hip fracture between January 2012 and March 2014. There was an initial marked decline in quality of life from baseline measured using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions score (EQ-5D). It was followed by a significant improvement to 120 days for all patients. Although their quality of life improved during the year after the fracture, it was still significantly lower than before injury irrespective of age group or cognitive impairment (mean reduction EQ-5D 0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.26). There was strong evidence that quality of life was lower for patients with cognitive impairment. There was a mean reduction in EQ-5D of 0.28 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.35) in patients < 80 years of age. This difference was consistent (and fixed) throughout follow-up. Quality of life does not improve significantly during recovery from hip fracture in patients over 80 years of age (p = 0.928). Secondary measures of function showed similar trends. Hip fracture marks a step down in the quality of life of a patient: it accounts for approximately 0.22 disability adjusted life years in the first year after fracture. This is equivalent to serious neurological conditions for which extensive funding for research and treatment is made available.