Summary Background Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. Methods For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. Findings Between March 3, 2008, and March 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 1108 patients to receive a sliding hip screw (n=557) or cancellous screws (n=551). Reoperations within 24 months did not differ by type of surgical fixation in those included in the primary analysis: 107 (20%) of 542 patients in the sliding hip screw group versus 117 (22%) of 537 patients in the cancellous screws group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% CI 0.63–1.09; p=0.18). Avascular necrosis was more common in the sliding hip screw group than in the cancellous screws group (50 patients [9%] vs 28 patients [5%]; HR 1.91, 1.06–3.44; p=0.0319). However, no significant difference was found between the number of medically related adverse events between groups (p=0.82; appendix); these events included pulmonary embolism (two patients [<1%] vs four [1%] patients; p=0.41) and sepsis (seven [1%] vs six [1%]; p=0.79). Interpretation In terms of reoperation rates the sliding hip screw shows no advantage, but some groups of patients (smokers and those with displaced or base of neck fractures) might do better with a sliding hip screw than with cancellous screws. Funding National Institutes of Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Stichting NutsOhra, Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Physicians’ Services Incorporated.

Acute compartment syndrome remains a challenging problem for orthopedic surgeons because its diagnosis is not always straightforward and it has a high risk of associated limb morbidity if left undiagnosed or untreated. Failure to diagnose and treat acute compartment syndrome is one of the most common causes of successful medical liability claims. The authors review the current literature concerning the diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome and discuss new non-invasive technologies that may allow for earlier and more accurate diagnosis of impending acute compartment syndrome.

PURPOSE: Although mammography screening is crucial for cancer detection, screening rates have been declining, particularly in patients of low socioeconomic status and minorities. We sought to evaluate and improve the compliance rates at our safety net hospital through a prospective randomized controlled trial of a volunteer-run patient navigation intervention. METHODS: Baseline 90-day institutional mammography compliance rates were evaluated for patients who received a physician order for screening mammograms over a 1-month period. This analysis aided in the creation of a prospective randomized controlled trial of a volunteer-run patient navigation intervention to improve compliance, with 49 total participants. The primary outcome was 14-day mammography compliance rates. Secondary analysis examined the efficacy of the intervention with respect to patient demographics, prior mammography compliance, family history of cancer, beliefs on mammography, and past medical history. RESULTS: Analysis of baseline institutional compliance revealed a 47.87% compliance rate, with the majority of compliance occurring within 14 days of order placement. The patient navigation intervention significantly improved compliance by 34% (42% in the control group, 76% in the intervention group). Additional findings included significantly improved compliance in patients who believed they had a low susceptibility to cancer, those who understood the benefits of mammography and early diagnosis, those who had a prior mammogram, those who were employed, and those with a family history of cancer. CONCLUSION: A system to monitor compliance and intervene using patient navigation significantly improved mammography compliance of patients in a safety net hospital. The relatively straightforward design of this volunteer-based intervention makes it affordable, easily replicable, and perhaps beneficial at other institutions.

This review highlights the need for more objective studies on the educational implications of work-hour restrictions. Studies to date have not demonstrated a measurable difference based on case logs or training scores. Opinion-based surveys demonstrate an overall negative perception by both residents and attending physicians, on the impact of work-hour restrictions on orthopaedic education. Current published data is limited and stronger evidence-based data are needed before definitive conclusions can be reached.