Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT:

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.

SUBMITTER: Kearney R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8256800 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of using a removable boot versus a cast following ankle fracture from the National Health Service and Personal Social Services (NHS+PSS) payer and societal perspectives and explore the impact of both treatments on participants' activities of daily living.DesignCost-effectiveness analyses and qualitative interviews performed alongside a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial.SettingEight UK NHS secondary care trusts.Participants243 participants (60.5% female, on average 48.2 years of age (SD 16.4)) with ankle fracture. Qualitative interviews with 16 participants. Interventions removable air boot versus plaster cast 2 weeks after surgery weight bearing as able with group-specific exercises.Primary and secondary outcome measuresQuality-adjusted life years (QALYs) estimated from the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, costs and incremental net monetary benefit statistics measured 12 weeks after surgery, for a society willing-to-pay £20 000 per QALY.ResultsCare in the boot group cost, on average, £88 (95% CI £22 to £155) per patient more than in the plaster group from the NHS+PSS perspective. When including all societal costs, the boot saved, on average, £676 per patient (95% CI -£337 to £1689). Although there was no evidence of a QALY difference between the groups (-0.0020 (95% CI -0.0067 to 0.0026)), the qualitative findings suggest participants felt the boot enhanced their quality of life. Patients in the boot felt more independent and empowered to take on family responsibilities and social activities.ConclusionsWhile the removable boot is slightly more expensive than plaster cast for the NHS+PSS payer at 12 weeks after surgery, it reduces productivity losses and the need for informal care while empowering patients. Given that differences in QALYs and costs to the NHS are small, the decision to use a boot or plaster following ankle surgery could be left to patients' and clinicians' preferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN15497399, South Central-Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee (reference 14/SC/1409).

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether treatment of isolated stable Weber B type ankle fractures with a cast or a simple orthotic device for three weeks produces non-inferior outcomes compared with conventional immobilisation in a cast for six weeks.DesignRandomised, pragmatic, non-inferiority, clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment.SettingTwo major trauma centres in Finland, 22 December 2012 to 6 June 2016.Participants247 skeletally mature patients aged 16 years or older with an isolated Weber B type fibula fracture and congruent ankle mortise in static ankle radiographs.InterventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to conventional six week cast immobilisation (n=84) or three week treatment either in a cast (n=83) or in a simple orthosis (n=80).Main outcome measuresThe primary, non-inferiority, intention-to-treat outcome was the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score at 12 months (OMAS; range 0-100; higher scores indicate better outcomes and fewer symptoms). The predefined non-inferiority margin for the primary outcome was -8.8 points. Secondary outcomes were ankle function, pain, quality of life, ankle motion, and radiographic outcome. Follow-up assessments were performed at 6, 12, and 52 weeks.Results212 of 247 randomised participants (86%) completed the study. At 52 weeks, the mean OMAS was 87.6 (SD 18.3) in the six week cast group, 91.7 (SD 12.9) in the three week cast group, and 89.8 (SD 18.4) in the three week orthosis group. The between group difference at 52 weeks for the three week cast versus six week cast was 3.6 points (95% confidence interval -1.9 to 9.1, P=0.20), and for the three week orthosis versus six week cast was 1.7 points (-4.0 to 7.3, P=0.56). In both comparisons, the confidence intervals did not include the predefined inferiority margin of -8.8 points. The only statistically significant between group differences observed in the secondary outcomes and harms in the two primary comparisons were slight improvement in ankle plantar flexion and incidence of deep vein thrombosis, both in the three week orthosis group versus six week cast group.ConclusionImmobilisation for three weeks with a cast or orthosis was non-inferior to conventional cast immobilisation for six weeks in the treatment of an isolated stable Weber B type fracture.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01758835.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with Achilles tendon rupture who have non-operative treatment have traditionally been treated with immobilisation of the tendon in plaster casts for several weeks. Functional bracing is an alternative non-operative treatment that allows earlier mobilisation, but evidence on its effectiveness and safety is scarce. The aim of the UKSTAR trial was to compare functional and quality-of-life outcomes and resource use in patients treated non-operatively with plaster cast versus functional brace.MethodsUKSTAR was a pragmatic, superiority, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done at 39 hospitals in the UK. Patients (aged ≥16 years) who were being treated non-operatively for a primary Achilles tendon rupture at the participating centres were potentially eligible. The exclusion criteria were presenting more than 14 days after injury, previous rupture of the same Achilles tendon, or being unable to complete the questionnaires. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a plaster cast or functional brace using a centralised web-based system. Because the interventions were clearly visible, neither patients nor clinicians could be masked. Participants wore the intervention for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was patient-reported Achilles tendon rupture score (ATRS) at 9 months, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all patients in the groups to which they were allocated, excluding participants who withdrew or died before providing any outcome data). The main safety outcome was the incidence of tendon re-rupture. Resource use was recorded from a health and personal social care perspective. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN62639639.FindingsBetween Aug 15, 2016, and May 31, 2018, 1451 patients were screened, of whom 540 participants (mean age 48·7 years, 79% male) were randomly allocated to receive plaster cast (n=266) or functional brace (n=274). 527 (98%) of 540 were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, and 13 (2%) were excluded because they withdrew or died before providing any outcome data. There was no difference in ATRS at 9 months post injury (cast group n=244, mean ATRS 74∙4 [SD 19∙8]; functional brace group n=259, ATRS 72∙8 [20∙4]; adjusted mean difference -1∙38 [95% CI -4∙9 to 2∙1], p=0·44). There was no difference in the rate of re-rupture of the tendon (17 [6%] of 266 in the plaster cast group vs 13 [5%] of 274 in the functional brace group, p=0·40). The mean total health and personal social care cost was £1181 for the plaster cast group and £1078 for the functional bract group (mean between-group difference -£103 [95% CI -289 to 84]).InterpretationTraditional plaster casting was not found to be superior to early weight-bearing in a functional brace, as measured by ATRS, in the management of patients treated non-surgically for Achilles tendon rupture. Clinicians may consider the use of early weight-bearing in a functional brace as a safe and cost-effective alternative to plaster casting.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Up to 30% of patients with a dislocated distal radial fracture (DRF) treated with closed reduction and cast immobilisation suffer from long-term functional restrictions. It remains unclear, whether duration of cast immobilisation influences functional outcome. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the functional outcome of dislocated DRFs could be improved by shortening the period of immobilisation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A single blinded multicentre randomised controlled trial is initiated. Four weeks of plaster cast immobilisation is compared with six week plaster cast immobilisation in adult patients with adequate reduced DRFs. Primary outcome parameters are functional outcome measured with the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation after 1 year of follow-up (FU). Secondary outcomes are: Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score after 1 year, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey after 1 year, functional outcome earlier in FU (6 weeks, 12 weeks and 6 months), range of motion, pain level and complications: number of re-interventions, secondary dislocation, delayed and non-union. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The medical ethical committee VUmc approved the study protocol (2018.004, NL62861.029.17). The expectation of this study is that a shorter duration of plaster cast immobilisation is beneficial. This risk of specific complications is low and generally similar in both treatment options. FU is standardised according to current trauma guidelines. Present literature indicates that both treatment options that are used within this study are accepted protocols for treatment of dislocated DRFs. This trial will provide Level-I evidence for the comparison of functional outcome between the two treatment options for dislocated DRFs. Results of this study are expected to be published as a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial article in 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The Netherlands National Trial Register: NTR 6600, ABR: NL62861.029.17. Medical Ethical Committee VUmc registration number: 2018.004.

Project description:IntroductionAnkle fractures result in significant morbidity in adults, with prognosis worsening with increasing age. Previous trials have not found evidence supporting supervised physiotherapy sessions, but these studies have not focused on older adults or tailored the exercise interventions to the complex needs of this patient group. The Ankle Fracture Treatment: Enhancing Rehabilitation study is a pilot randomised controlled trial to assess feasibility of a later definitive trial comparing best-practice advice with progressive functional exercise for adults aged 50 years and over after ankle fracture.The main objectives are to assess: (i) patient engagement with the trial, measured by the participation rate of those eligible; (ii) establish whether the interventions are acceptable to participants and therapists, assessed by intervention adherence levels, participant interviews and a therapist focus group; (iii) participant retention in the trial, measured by the proportion of participants providing outcome data at 6 months; (iv) acceptability of measuring outcomes at 3 and 6 month follow-up.Methods and analysisA multicentre pilot randomised controlled trial with an embedded qualitative study. At least 48 patients aged 50 years and over with an ankle fracture requiring surgical management, or non-operative management by immobilisation for at least 4 weeks, will be recruited from a minimum of three National Health Service hospitals in the UK. Participants will be allocated 1:1 via a central web-based randomisation system to: (i) best-practice advice (one session of face-to-face self-management advice delivered by a physiotherapist and up to two optional additional sessions) or (ii) progressive functional exercise (up to six sessions of individual face-to-face physiotherapy). An embedded qualitative study will include one-to-one interviews with up to 20 participants and a therapist focus group.Ethics and disseminationHampshire B Research Ethics Committee (18/SC/0281) gave approval on 2nd July 2018.Trial registration numberISRCTN16612336.