MRH is common after hospital discharge in older adults, but methodological inconsistencies between studies and a paucity of data on risk factors limits clear understanding of the epidemiology. There is a need for international consensus on conducting and reporting MRH studies. Data from large, multicenter studies examining a range of biopsychosocial risk factors could provide insight into this important area of safety.

Background: Distal biceps tendon injuries typically occur in the dominant arm of men in their fourth decade of life. Surgical repair restores flexion and supination strength, resulting in good functional outcome. The complication profile of each surgical approach and fixation technique has not been widely studied in the literature. Purpose: To report the rate of complications after repair of complete distal biceps ruptures, to classify them according to surgical approach and fixation technique, and to analyze risk factors and outcomes of the individual complications. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: Studies published in English on primary repair of the distal biceps between January 1998 and January 2019 were identified. Data on complications were extracted and classified as major and minor for analysis. A quantitative synthesis of data was done to compare the complication rates between (1) limited anterior incision, extensile anterior incision, and double incision and (2) 4 fixation methods. Results: Seventy-two articles including 3091 primary distal biceps repairs were identified. The overall complication rate was 25% (n = 774). The major complication rate was 4.6% (n = 144) and included a 1.6% (n = 51) rate of posterior interosseous nerve injury; 0.3% (n = 10), median nerve injury; 1.4% (n = 43), rerupture; and a 0.1% (n = 4), synostosis. Brachial artery injury, ulnar nerve injury, compartment syndrome, proximal radius fracture, and chronic regional pain syndrome occurred at a rate of <0.1% each. The majority of nerve injuries resolved with an expectant approach. The minor complication rate was 20.4% (n = 630). The most common complication was lateral cutaneous nerve injury (9.2%, n = 283). An extensile single incision was associated with a higher rate of superficial radial nerve injury when compared to limited single incision(6% vs 2.1%, P = .002). Limited anterior single incision technique had a higher rate of lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve injury compared to extensile single incision. (9.7% vs 5.2%, P = .03). Synostosis occurred only with double incision. Fixation technique had no significant effect on rerupture rate and posterior interosseous nerve injury rate. Conclusion: This is the largest analysis of complications after distal biceps repair, indicating a major complication rate of 4.6%. This study provides valuable data with regard to the choice of technique, surgical approach, and rate of complications, which is essential for surgical planning and patient consent. Registration: CRD42017074066 (PROSPERO).

No abstract

We present the updated British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) guidelines for post‐exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to HIV following sexual exposures, occupational exposures and other nonoccupational exposures in the community. This serves as an update to the 2015 BASHH guideline on PEP following sexual exposures and the 2008 Expert Advisory Group on AIDS guidelines on HIV PEP. We aim to provide evidence‐based guidance on best clinical practice in the provision, monitoring and support of PEP for the prevention of HIV acquisition following sexual, occupational and other nonoccupational exposures in the community. The guideline covers when to prescribe PEP, what antiretroviral agents to use and how to manage PEP. This includes (i) evidence of PEP efficacy; (ii) evidence relating to individual‐level efficacy of antiretroviral therapy to prevent the sexual transmission of HIV; (iii) data on the detectable (transmissible) prevalence of HIV in specific populations; (iv) risk of HIV transmission following different types of sexual and occupational exposure; (v) baseline risk assessment; (vi) drug regimens and dosing schedules; (vii) monitoring PEP; (viii) baseline and follow‐up blood‐borne virus testing; (ix) the role of PEP within broader HIV prevention strategies, for example, HIV pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). The guideline also covers special scenarios such as PEP in pregnancy, breastfeeding and chronic hepatitis B virus infection, and when PEP should be considered in people using HIV PrEP. The guidelines are aimed at clinical professionals directly involved in PEP provision and other stakeholders in the field. A proforma to assist PEP consultations is included. A public consultation process was undertaken prior to finalizing the recommendations.