scholarly journals SOFIE: Surgery for Olecranon Fractures in the Elderly: a randomised controlled trial of operative versus non-operative treatment

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Symes ◽  
Ian A. Harris ◽  
John Limbers ◽  
Mithun Joshi
Gut ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. gutjnl-2020-321585 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne E Mahady ◽  
Karen L Margolis ◽  
Andrew Chan ◽  
Galina Polekhina ◽  
Robyn L Woods ◽  
...  

ObjectiveThere is a lack of robust data on significant gastrointestinal bleeding in older people using aspirin. We calculated the incidence, risk factors and absolute risk using data from a large randomised, controlled trial.DesignData were extracted from an aspirin versus placebo primary prevention trial conducted throughout 2010–2017 (‘ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE)’, n=19 114) in community-dwelling persons aged ≥70 years. Clinical characteristics were collected at baseline and annually. The endpoint was major GI bleeding that resulted in transfusion, hospitalisation, surgery or death, adjudicated independently by two physicians blinded to trial arm.ResultsOver a median follow-up of 4.7 years (88 389 person years), there were 137 upper GI bleeds (89 in aspirin arm and 48 in placebo arm, HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.66, p<0.01) and 127 lower GI bleeds (73 in aspirin and 54 in placebo arm, HR 1.36, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.94, p=0.08) reflecting a 60% increase in bleeding overall. There were two fatal bleeds in the placebo arm. Multivariable analyses indicated age, smoking, hypertension, chronic kidney disease and obesity increased bleeding risk. The absolute 5-year risk of bleeding was 0.25% (95% CI 0.16% to 0.37%) for a 70 year old not on aspirin and up to 5.03% (2.56% to 8.73%) for an 80 year old taking aspirin with additional risk factors.ConclusionAspirin increases overall GI bleeding risk by 60%; however, the 5-year absolute risk of serious bleeding is modest in younger, well individuals. These data may assist patients and their clinicians to make informed decisions about prophylactic use of aspirin.Trial registration numberASPREE. NCT01038583.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e024916 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antti P Launonen ◽  
Tore Fjalestad ◽  
Minna K Laitinen ◽  
Tuomas Lähdeoja ◽  
Carl Ekholm ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe proximal humerus fracture (PHF) is one of the most common fractures in the elderly. The majority of PHFs are treated non-operatively, while 15%–33% of patients undergo surgical treatment. Recent randomised controlled trial (RCT) and meta-analyses have shown that there is no difference in outcome between non-operative treatment and locking plate or hemi-arthroplasty. During the past decade, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has gained popularity in the treatment of PHF, although there is a lack of RCTs comparing RTSA to non-operative treatment.MethodsThis is a prospective, single-blinded, randomised, controlled, multicentre and multinational trial comparing RTSA with non-operative treatment in displaced proximal humeral fractures in patients 65–85 years. The primary outcome in this study is QuickDASH-score measured at 2 years. Secondary outcomes include visual analogue scale for pain, grip strength, Oxford shoulder score, Constant score and the number of reoperations and complications.The hypothesis of the trial is that operative treatment with RTSA produces better outcome after 2 and 5 years measured with QuickDASH.Ethics and disseminationIn this protocol, we describe the design, method and management of the Nordic DeltaCon trial. The ethical approval for the trial has been given by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics, Norway. There have been several examples in orthopaedics of innovations that result in failure after medium-term follow-ups . In order to prevent such failures and to increase our knowledge of RSTA, we feel a large-scale study of the effects of the surgery on the outcome that focuses on the complications and reoperations is warranted. After the trial 2-year follow-up, the results will be disseminated in a major orthopaedic publication.Trial registration numberNCT03531463; Pre-Results.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E P De Kluiver ◽  
A E Van Der Velde ◽  
E P Meindersma ◽  
L F Prins ◽  
M Wilhelm ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Knowledge about effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in the elderly is limited. Participation rates in supervised CR are consistently lower in the elderly and innovative interventions are needed. The EU has granted a CR study project; a randomised controlled trial conducted in 5 European countries, investigating the effectiveness of mobile telemonitoring guided CR (mCR) in elderly cardiac patients who declined regular CR. Methods Patients ≥65 years with indication for CR who declined regular CR were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomised between regular care (without CR) and a 6-month mCR programme: dedicated programmed smartphone, heartrate monitoring (target HR zones) and coaching. The primary endpoint is the difference in VO2peak between 6-months follow-up and baseline. Results Between 2015 and 2018 179 patients were included. Baseline characteristics between groups (table 1) did not differ significantly, except for hypertension. The difference in VO2peak was significantly better in the mCR group (table 1). After correction (mixed linear model) for baseline VO2 peak (fixed factor) and centre (random factor) this difference remained significant. Mean number of registered activity sessions was 4.79 (95% CI; 4.07–5.50) per patient per week. Table 1. Baseline and primary outcome parameters Baseline Control Programme (n=90) mCR Programme (n=89) P-value Gender (m/f) 76/14 69/20 0.238 Age (mean±SD) 73.57±5.46 72.38±5.37 0.121 Diabetes 15 (16.7%) 23 (25.8%) 0.133 Hypertension 60 (66.7%) 73 (82.0%) 0.019* Hypercholesteremia 71 (78.3%) 74 (83.1%) 0.468 Normal LV-function 48/89 (53.9%) 53/89 (59.6%) 0.497 Index event (CABG/Valve/PCI/none) 0.735   Cardiac history prior to index event 48/89 (53.9%) 53/89 (59.6%) 0.702   Non cardiac comorbidity 40 (44.4%) 44 (49.4%) 0.503 Results   Baseline VO2peak (ml/kg/min) (95% CI) 19.83 (18.65–21.01) 18.78 (18.67–19.89) 0.191   Delta VO2peak at 6 months (ml/kg/min) (95% CI) 0.20 4 (−0.34–0.83) 1.62 (0.86–2.39) 0.005*   Corrected delta VO2peak at 6 months (ml/kg/min) 0.50 (−1.04–2.04) 1.65 (0.11–3.2) 0.015* *Significant. Conclusions The application of mCR in elderly patients who declined regular CR results in a better physical condition after 6 months. Compliance to mCR was excellent. Acknowledgement/Funding European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 634439, and funding from the Swiss Government.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. P1198-P1199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edo Richard ◽  
Sandrine Andrieu ◽  
Francesca Mangialsche ◽  
Mariagenese Barbera ◽  
Cathrien Beishuizen ◽  
...  

The Lancet ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 353 (9147) ◽  
pp. 93-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Close ◽  
Margaret Ellis ◽  
Richard Hooper ◽  
Edward Glucksman ◽  
Stephen Jackson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (10) ◽  
pp. 1-192
Author(s):  
Nigel J Hall ◽  
Frances C Sherratt ◽  
Simon Eaton ◽  
Isabel Reading ◽  
Erin Walker ◽  
...  

Background Although non-operative treatment is known to be effective for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children, randomised trial data comparing important outcomes of non-operative treatment with those of appendicectomy are lacking. Objectives The objectives were to ascertain the feasibility of conducting a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a non-operative treatment pathway with appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children. Design This was a mixed-methods study, which included a feasibility randomised controlled trial, embedded and parallel qualitative and survey studies, a parallel health economic feasibility study and the development of a core outcome set. Setting This study was set in three specialist NHS paediatric surgical units in England. Participants Children (aged 4–15 years) clinically diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis participated in the feasibility randomised controlled trial. Children, their families, recruiting clinicians and other health-care professionals involved in caring for children with appendicitis took part in the qualitative study. UK specialist paediatric surgeons took part in the survey. Specialist paediatric surgeons, adult general surgeons who treat children, and children and young people who previously had appendicitis, along with their families, took part in the development of the core outcome set. Interventions Participants in the feasibility randomised controlled trial were randomised to a non-operative treatment pathway (broad-spectrum antibiotics and active observation) or appendicectomy. Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was the proportion of eligible patients recruited to the feasibility trial. Data sources Data were sourced from NHS case notes, questionnaire responses, transcribed audio-recordings of recruitment discussions and qualitative interviews. Results Overall, 50% (95% confidence interval 40% to 59%) of 115 eligible patients approached about the trial agreed to participate and were randomised. There was high acceptance of randomisation and good adherence to trial procedures and follow-up (follow-up rates of 89%, 85% and 85% at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months, respectively). More participants had perforated appendicitis than had been anticipated. Qualitative work enabled us to communicate about the trial effectively with patients and families, to design and deliver bespoke training to optimise recruitment and to understand how to optimise the design and delivery of a future trial. The health economic study indicated that the main cost drivers are the ward stay cost and the cost of the operation; it has also informed quality-of-life assessment methods for future work. A core outcome set for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children and young people was developed, containing 14 outcomes. There is adequate surgeon interest to justify proceeding to an effectiveness trial, with 51% of those surveyed expressing a willingness to recruit with an unchanged trial protocol. Limitations Because the feasibility randomised controlled trial was performed in only three centres, successful recruitment across a larger number of sites cannot be guaranteed. However, the qualitative work has informed a bespoke training package to facilitate this. Although survey results suggest adequate clinician interest to make a larger trial possible, actual participation may differ, and equipoise may have changed over time. Conclusions A future effectiveness trial is feasible, following limited additional preparation, to establish appropriate outcome measures and case identification. It is recommended to include a limited package of qualitative work to optimise recruitment, in particular at new centres. Future work Prior to proceeding to an effectiveness trial, there is a need to develop a robust method for distinguishing children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis from those with more advanced appendicitis, and to reach agreement on a primary outcome measure and effect size that is acceptable to all stakeholder groups involved. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15830435. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e031607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elsa Pihl ◽  
Målfrid Holen Kristoffersen ◽  
Anne-Mari Rosenlund ◽  
Sofia Laszlo ◽  
Mida Berglöf ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe treatment of proximal hamstring avulsions is controversial. While several trials have investigated the outcome for patients treated surgically, there is today no prospective trial comparing operative treatment with non-operative treatment. This protocol describes the design for the proximal hamstring avulsion clinical trial (PHACT)—the first randomised controlled trial of operative versus non-operative treatment for proximal hamstring avulsions.Methods and analysisPHACT is a multicentre randomised controlled trial conducted across Sweden, Norway and Finland. Eligible patients (60 participants/treatment arm) with a proximal hamstring avulsion of at least two of three tendons will be randomised to either operative or non-operative treatment. Participants allocated to surgery will undergo reinsertion of the tendons with suture anchors. The rehabilitation programme will be the same for both treatment groups. When patient or surgeon equipoise for treatment alternatives cannot be reached and randomisation therefore is not possible, patients will be invited to participate in a parallel observational non-randomised cohort. The primary outcome will be the patient-reported outcome measure Perth hamstring assessment tool at 24 months. Secondary outcomes include the Lower Extremity Functional Score, physical performance and muscle strength tests, patient satisfaction and MR imaging. Data analysis will be blinded and intention-to-treat analysis will be preformed.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted by the Ethical Committee of Uppsala University (DNR: 2017–170) and by the Norwegian ethical board (REC: 2017/1911). The study will be conducted in agreement with the Helsinki declaration. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberNCT03311997


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document