Current consensus and clinical approach to fragility fractures of the pelvis: an international survey of expert opinion.

Laura Jill Kleeblad, Sverre A I Loggers, Wietse P Zuidema, Daphne van Embden, Theodore Miclau, Kees-Jan Ponsen
{"title":"Current consensus and clinical approach to fragility fractures of the pelvis: an international survey of expert opinion.","authors":"Laura Jill Kleeblad, Sverre A I Loggers, Wietse P Zuidema, Daphne van Embden, Theodore Miclau, Kees-Jan Ponsen","doi":"10.1097/OI9.0000000000000293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) in elderly patients are an underappreciated injury with a significant impact on mobility, independency, and mortality of affected patients and is a growing burden for society/health care. Given the lack of clinical practice guidelines for these injuries, the authors postulate there is heterogeneity in the current use of diagnostic modalities, treatment strategies (both operative and nonoperative), and follow-up of patients with FFP. The goal of this study was to assess international variation in the management of FFP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All International Orthopaedic Trauma Association (IOTA) steering committee members were asked to select 15 to 20 experts in the field of pelvic surgery to complete a case-driven international survey. The survey addresses the definition of FFP, use of diagnostic modalities, timing of imaging, mobilization protocols, and indications for surgical management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 143 experts within 16 IOTA societies responded to the survey. Among the experts, 86% have >10 years of experience and 80% works in a referral center for pelvic fractures. However, only 44% of experts reported having an institutional protocol for the management of FFP. More than 89% of experts feel the need for a (inter)national evidence-based guideline. Of all experts, 73% use both radiographs and computed tomography (CT) to diagnose FFP, of which 63% routinely use CT and 35% used CT imaging selectively. Treatment strategies of anterior ring fractures were compared with combined (anterior and posterior ring) fractures. Thirty-seven percent of patients with anterior ring fractures get admitted to the hospital compared with 75% of patients with combined fractures. Experts allow pain-guided mobilization in 72% after anterior ring fracture but propose restricted weight-bearing in case of a combined fracture in 44% of patients. Surgical indications are primarily based on the inability to mobilize during hospital admission (33%) or persistent pain after 2 weeks (25%). Over 92% plan outpatient follow-up independent of the type of fracture or treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows that there is a great worldwide heterogeneity in the current use of diagnostic modalities and both nonoperative and surgical management of FFP, emphasizing the need for a consensus meeting or guideline.</p>","PeriodicalId":74381,"journal":{"name":"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma","volume":"6 5 Suppl","pages":"e293"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10750456/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) in elderly patients are an underappreciated injury with a significant impact on mobility, independency, and mortality of affected patients and is a growing burden for society/health care. Given the lack of clinical practice guidelines for these injuries, the authors postulate there is heterogeneity in the current use of diagnostic modalities, treatment strategies (both operative and nonoperative), and follow-up of patients with FFP. The goal of this study was to assess international variation in the management of FFP.

Methods: All International Orthopaedic Trauma Association (IOTA) steering committee members were asked to select 15 to 20 experts in the field of pelvic surgery to complete a case-driven international survey. The survey addresses the definition of FFP, use of diagnostic modalities, timing of imaging, mobilization protocols, and indications for surgical management.

Results: In total, 143 experts within 16 IOTA societies responded to the survey. Among the experts, 86% have >10 years of experience and 80% works in a referral center for pelvic fractures. However, only 44% of experts reported having an institutional protocol for the management of FFP. More than 89% of experts feel the need for a (inter)national evidence-based guideline. Of all experts, 73% use both radiographs and computed tomography (CT) to diagnose FFP, of which 63% routinely use CT and 35% used CT imaging selectively. Treatment strategies of anterior ring fractures were compared with combined (anterior and posterior ring) fractures. Thirty-seven percent of patients with anterior ring fractures get admitted to the hospital compared with 75% of patients with combined fractures. Experts allow pain-guided mobilization in 72% after anterior ring fracture but propose restricted weight-bearing in case of a combined fracture in 44% of patients. Surgical indications are primarily based on the inability to mobilize during hospital admission (33%) or persistent pain after 2 weeks (25%). Over 92% plan outpatient follow-up independent of the type of fracture or treatment.

Conclusion: This study shows that there is a great worldwide heterogeneity in the current use of diagnostic modalities and both nonoperative and surgical management of FFP, emphasizing the need for a consensus meeting or guideline.

骨盆脆性骨折的当前共识和临床方法:国际专家意见调查。
简介老年骨盆脆性骨折(FFP)是一种未得到充分重视的损伤,对患者的活动能力、独立性和死亡率有重大影响,也是社会/医疗保健领域日益沉重的负担。鉴于缺乏针对此类损伤的临床实践指南,作者推测目前在诊断方式、治疗策略(包括手术和非手术)的使用以及对 FFP 患者的随访方面存在异质性。本研究的目的是评估 FFP 管理方面的国际差异:方法:要求国际创伤骨科协会(IOTA)指导委员会的所有成员挑选 15 到 20 名骨盆手术领域的专家完成一项以病例为导向的国际调查。调查涉及 FFP 的定义、诊断方式的使用、影像学检查的时机、动员方案以及手术治疗的适应症:共有 16 个 IOTA 协会的 143 名专家参与了调查。其中,86%的专家拥有超过10年的经验,80%的专家在骨盆骨折转诊中心工作。然而,只有 44% 的专家称他们的机构有处理 FFP 的方案。89%以上的专家认为有必要制定(跨)国家循证指南。在所有专家中,73%的专家同时使用X光片和计算机断层扫描(CT)诊断FFP,其中63%的专家常规使用CT,35%的专家选择性使用CT成像。前环骨折的治疗策略与合并(前环和后环)骨折的治疗策略进行了比较。37%的前环骨折患者需要住院治疗,而75%的合并骨折患者需要住院治疗。专家建议72%的前环形骨折患者可在疼痛指导下活动,但44%的合并骨折患者则建议限制负重。手术指征主要基于入院时无法活动(33%)或两周后持续疼痛(25%)。92%以上的患者计划进行门诊随访,与骨折类型或治疗方法无关:这项研究表明,目前世界范围内对 FFP 的诊断方式、非手术治疗和手术治疗的使用存在很大差异,因此需要召开共识会议或制定指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信