Need for pharmacological analgesia after cast immobilisation in children with bone fractures: an observational cross-sectional study

BackgroundBone fractures are a common reason for children and adolescents to seek evaluation in the ED. Little is known about the pain experienced after cast immobilisation and discharge from the ED and its optimal management. We aimed to investigate the administration of pharmacological analgesia in the first days after cast immobilisation and to identify possible influencing variables.MethodsA prospective observational cross-sectional study was conducted at the ED of the children’s hospital, Institute for Maternal and Child Health of Trieste, Italy, from October 2019 to June 2020. Patients aged 0–17 years with bone fractures were included. The primary outcome was the administration of analgesia during the 10 days following discharge, while secondary outcomes were the associated variables, including age, gender, fracture type and location, the mean limitation in usual activities and the frequency of re-evaluation at the ED for pain. Data were recorded through a questionnaire, completed by caregivers and collected by the researchers mainly through a telephone interview. The primary endpoint was evaluated as the ratio between the number of children who took at least one analgesic dose and the total enrolled children, while Χ2 or Fisher’s exact tests were used to assess secondary outcomes.ResultsDuring the study period, 213 patients, mean age 10 years (IQR: 8–13), were enrolled. Among them, 137 (64.3%) did not take any analgesic during follow-up. Among children who were administered analgesia, 22 (28.9%) received it only on the first day, and 47 (61.8%) for less than 5 days. One hundred and sixty one patients (75.6%) did not report any limitation in usual activities because of pain. The administration of analgesia was not related to the child’s age, gender or fracture site. Displaced fractures were associated with significantly more frequent analgesia being taken (OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 21.0).ConclusionAlthough some studies recommend scheduled analgesic treatment after discharge for bone fractures, this study would suggest analgesia on demand in children with non-displaced fractures, limiting scheduled analgesia to children with displaced fractures.

Does position of the wrist during cast immobilisation in patients with distal radius fractures affect outcome?

Purpose The position of the wrist during cast immobilisation following closed reduction of distal radius fractures is disputed. A systematic review was initiated to assess if there was any relation between wrist position in the cast and outcome in adult patients with non-operatively treated distal radius fractures. Methods A comprehensive search was performed in the bibliographic databases Medline, Embase and Wiley/Cochrane Library from inception up to 27 November 2020. Eligible studies were: randomised controlled trials, prospective and retrospective comparative cohort studies, analysing different positions of the wrist in cast-immobilisation following closed reduction. Primary outcome of the study was functional outcome measured by range of motion. Secondary outcomes were functional outcomes measured by grip strength, patient-reported outcome, radiological outcome and complications such as secondary dislocation and pain. Results The initial search yielded 2733 studies. Five trials, with 519 patients, were included in this systematic review. Range of motion and radiological outcome was significantly better in patients who were immobilised in dorsiflexion compared to palmar flexion or neutral position, although no clinical important difference was found. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcome, pain, grip strength or complications. Due to heterogeneity of the included studies, data were unsuitable for a meta-analysis. Conclusion This systematic review showed statistically significant better results in favour of cast immobilisation in dorsiflexion, although this small difference does not seem to be relevant in patients daily activities. Systematic review registration number Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018085546.

Casting versus flexible intramedullary nailing in displaced forearm shaft fractures in children aged 7–12 years: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

IntroductionThe forearm is the most common fracture location in children, with an increasing incidence. Displaced forearm shaft fractures have traditionally been treated with closed reduction and cast immobilisation. Diaphyseal fractures in children have poor remodelling capacity. Malunion can cause permanent cosmetic and functional disability. Internal fixation with flexible intramedullary nails has gained increasing popularity, without evidence of a better outcome compared with closed reduction and cast immobilisation.Method and analysisThis is a multicentre, randomised superiority trial comparing closed reduction and cast immobilisation to flexible intramedullary nails in children aged 7–12 years with >10° of angulation and/or >10 mm of shortening in displaced both bone forearm shaft fractures (AO-paediatric classification: 22D/2.1–5.2). A total of 78 patients with minimum 2 years of expected growth left are randomised in 1:1 ratio to either treatment group. The study has a parallel non-randomised patient preference arm. Both treatments are performed under general anaesthesia. In the cast group a long arm cast is applied for 6 weeks. The flexible intramedullary nail group is immobilised in a collar and cuff sling for 4 weeks. Data are collected at baseline and at each follow-up until 1 year.Primary outcome is (1) PROMIS paediatric upper extremity and (2) forearm pronation-supination range of motion at 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes are Quick DASH, Paediatric Pain Questionnaire, Cosmetic Visual Analogue Scale, wrist and elbow range of motion as well as any complications and costs of treatment.We hypothesise that flexible intramedullary nailing results in a superior outcome.Ethics and disseminationWe have received ethical board approval (number: 78/1801/2020) and permissions to conduct the study from all five participating university hospitals. Informed consent is obtained from the parent(s). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberNCT04664517.

Use of cast immobilisation versus removable brace in adults with an ankle fracture: multicentre randomised controlled trial

Objectives To assess function, quality of life, resource use, and complications in adults treated with plaster cast immobilisation versus a removable brace for ankle fracture. Design Multicentre randomised controlled trial. Setting 20 trauma units in the UK National Health Service. Participants 669 adults aged 18 years and older with an acute ankle fracture suitable for cast immobilisation: 334 were randomised to a plaster cast and 335 to a removable brace. Interventions A below the knee cast was applied and ankle range of movement exercises started on cast removal. The removable brace was fitted, and ankle range of movement exercises were started immediately. Main outcome measures Primary outcome was the Olerud Molander ankle score at 16 weeks, analysed by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes were Manchester-Oxford foot questionnaire, disability rating index, quality of life, and complications at 6, 10, and 16 weeks. Results The mean age of participants was 46 years (SD 17 years) and 381 (57%) were women. 502 (75%) participants completed the study. No statistically significant difference was found in the Olerud Molander ankle score between the cast and removable brace groups at 16 weeks (favours brace: 1.8, 95% confidence interval −2.0 to 5.6). No clinically significant differences were found in the Olerud Molander ankle scores at other time points, in the secondary unadjusted, imputed, or per protocol analyses. Conclusions Traditional plaster casting was not found to be superior to functional bracing in adults with an ankle fracture. No statistically difference was found in the Olerud Molander ankle score between the trial arms at 16 weeks. Trial registration ISRCTN registry ISRCTN15537280 .

Radiusfraktur: schneller beweglich mit zusätzlicher Mobilisation mit Bewegung

Reid SA, Andersen JM, Vicenzino B. Adding Mobilisation with Movement to Exercise and Advice Hastens the Improvement in Range, Pain and Function after Non-Operative Cast Immobilisation for Distal Radius Fracture: a Multicentre, Randomised Trial. J Physiother 2020; 66: 105–112. doi:10.1016/j.jphys.2020.03.010

Surgical fixation compared with cast immobilisation for adults with a bicortical fracture of the scaphoid waist: the SWIFFT RCT

Background Scaphoid fractures account for 90% of carpal fractures and occur predominantly in young men. Immediate surgical fixation of this fracture has increased. Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical fixation with cast treatment and early fixation in adults with scaphoid waist fractures that fail to unite. Design Multicentre, pragmatic, open-label, parallel two-arm randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation and a nested qualitative study. Setting Orthopaedic departments of 31 hospitals in England and Wales recruited from July 2013, with final follow-up in September 2017. Participants Adults (aged ≥ 16 years) presenting within 2 weeks of injury with a clear, bicortical fracture of the scaphoid waist on plain radiographs. Interventions Early surgical fixation using Conformité Européenne-marked headless compression screws. Below-elbow cast immobilisation for 6–10 weeks and urgent fixation of confirmed non-union. Main outcome measures The primary outcome and end point was the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation total score at 52 weeks, with a clinically relevant difference of 6 points. Secondary outcomes included Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation pain and function subscales, Short Form questionnaire 12-items, bone union, range of movement, grip strength, complications and return to work. Results The mean age of 439 participants was 33 years; 363 participants were male (83%) and 269 participants had an undisplaced fracture (61%). The primary analysis was on 408 participants with valid Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation outcome data for at least one post-randomisation time point (surgery, n = 203 of 219; cast, n = 205 of 220). There was no clinically relevant difference in the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation total score at 52 weeks: the mean score in the cast group was 14.0 (95% confidence interval 11.3 to 16.6) and in the surgery group was 11.9 (95% confidence interval 9.2 to 14.5), with an adjusted mean difference of –2.1 in favour of surgery (95% confidence interval –5.8 to 1.6; p = 0.27). The non-union rate was low (surgery group, n = 1; cast group, n = 4). Eight participants in the surgery group had a total of 11 reoperations and one participant in the cast group required a reoperation for non-union. The base-case economic analysis at 52 weeks found that surgery cost £1295 per patient more (95% confidence interval £1084 to £1504) than cast treatment. The base-case analysis of a lifetime-extrapolated model confirmed that the cast treatment pathway was more cost-effective. The nested qualitative study identified patients’ desire to have a ‘sense of recovering’, which surgeons should address at the outset. Limitation There were 17 participants who had initial cast treatment and surgery for confirmed non-union, which in 14 cases was within 6 months from randomisation and in three cases was after 6 months. Three of the four participants in the cast group who had a non-union at 52 weeks were not offered surgery. Conclusions Adult patients with an undisplaced or minimally displaced scaphoid waist fracture should have cast immobilisation and suspected non-unions immediately confirmed and urgently fixed. Patients should be followed up at 5 years to investigate the effect of partial union, degenerative arthritis, malunion and screw problems on their quality of life. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN67901257. 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. 24, No. 52. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effects of Cast Immobilisation on Skin Barrier Function

Introduction: Cast immobilisation remains the mainstay of treatment for various fractures in paediatric patients, yet patients commonly complain of skin irritation and discomfort. This study aimed to perform a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the effects of cast immobilisation on the skin of children and adolescents. Materials and Methods: Patients aged 6–17 years of age with a fracture treated in a fiberglass short-arm or short-leg cast were recruited. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL), stratum corneum (SC) hydration, hair density and presence of any skin signs were assessed before and after cast. Patients were required to complete a weekly questionnaire to rate itch, malodour, warmth, and dampness of the skin under the cast. Results: A total of 60 subjects completed the study. Thirty-six patients received a short-arm cast; 24 received a short-leg cast. Upon cast removal, TEWL was significantly increased on the volar surface of the arms and legs (P <0.05), and the dorsal surface of the arm (P <0.05). Likewise, SC hydration was significantly increased at most sites (P <0.05), except the volar surface of the leg (P = 0.513). There was no change in hair density. Throughout the duration of casting, there was an increase in itch and malodour scores. Conclusions: Moderate but significant changes in TEWL, SC hydration and subjective symptoms were observed during the duration of cast immobilisation, demonstrating that cast immobilisation for up to 4 weeks exerts moderate adverse impact on patients’ skin. Further studies to explore the use of better materials for cast immobilisation to improve skin barrier function and overall patient satisfaction are warranted. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2020;49:285–93 Ann Acad Med Singapore 2020;49:354–59 Key words: Cast immobilisation, Transepidermal water loss, Stratum corneum hydration