Pediatric lower extremity fracture treatments: a statistical review of randomized controlled trials

IF 1.5 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Matthew D. Ramey , Niklas H. Koehne , Auston R. Locke , Jonathan J. Huang , Laurel Wong , Nikan Namiri , Robert L. Parisien
{"title":"Pediatric lower extremity fracture treatments: a statistical review of randomized controlled trials","authors":"Matthew D. Ramey ,&nbsp;Niklas H. Koehne ,&nbsp;Auston R. Locke ,&nbsp;Jonathan J. Huang ,&nbsp;Laurel Wong ,&nbsp;Nikan Namiri ,&nbsp;Robert L. Parisien","doi":"10.1016/j.jor.2025.06.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Pediatric lower extremity fractures present with significant clinical challenges and largely rely on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for intervention evaluation. The statistical robustness of these trials is seldom evaluated, but when examined reveals issues such as small sample sizes and underpowered results. Therefore, this study aimed to test the statistical robustness of RCTs evaluating pediatric lower extremity fracture interventions using fragility statistics.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE were systematically searched for recent RCTs (2000–2023) assessing outcomes for pediatric patients with lower extremity fractures. The fragility index (FI), or number of event reversals required to alter statistical significance, was calculated for all dichotomous outcomes. The fragility quotient (FQ) was then determined by dividing the FI by the study sample size.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>After screening, 14 studies were included for analysis. Across 83 total dichotomous outcomes, the median FI was 5 (IQR 3–6) with an associated median FQ of 0.070 (IQR 0.033–0.107), suggesting that just event reversal in 5 patients, or 7.0 % of the study population, would alter significance for 50 % of outcomes. 15 outcomes were statistically significant (FQ = 0.029), and 68 outcomes were non-significant (FQ = 0.083). Outcomes were grouped into three categories, including fracture reduction or union (28 outcomes), functional improvement and patient satisfaction (26 outcomes), and adverse events (29 outcomes). Category FQs were 0.061, 0.069, and 0.076, respectively. 47 outcomes were extracted from studies published prior to 2018 (FQ = 0.086), while the 36 outcomes published in 2018 or later resulted in a median FQ of 0.048. Three fracture types were assessed, including tibia (37 outcomes), femur (39 outcomes), and ankle (7 outcomes) fractures, with FQs of 0.075, 0.060, and 0.050, respectively. Across the 59 outcomes from studies with operative interventions, the FQ was 0.075, whereas the 24 outcomes from studies with non-operative interventions reported a FQ of 0.060.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The efficacy of treatments in pediatric lower extremity fractures from RCTs are slightly fragile, particularly among significant outcomes. Over time, these studies have become less robust. Larger RCTs that combine the reporting of p-values with FI and FQ metrics may provide more robust evidence for guiding effective treatment strategies in pediatric lower extremity fractures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16633,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orthopaedics","volume":"65 ","pages":"Pages 329-335"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X25002351","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Pediatric lower extremity fractures present with significant clinical challenges and largely rely on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for intervention evaluation. The statistical robustness of these trials is seldom evaluated, but when examined reveals issues such as small sample sizes and underpowered results. Therefore, this study aimed to test the statistical robustness of RCTs evaluating pediatric lower extremity fracture interventions using fragility statistics.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE were systematically searched for recent RCTs (2000–2023) assessing outcomes for pediatric patients with lower extremity fractures. The fragility index (FI), or number of event reversals required to alter statistical significance, was calculated for all dichotomous outcomes. The fragility quotient (FQ) was then determined by dividing the FI by the study sample size.

Results

After screening, 14 studies were included for analysis. Across 83 total dichotomous outcomes, the median FI was 5 (IQR 3–6) with an associated median FQ of 0.070 (IQR 0.033–0.107), suggesting that just event reversal in 5 patients, or 7.0 % of the study population, would alter significance for 50 % of outcomes. 15 outcomes were statistically significant (FQ = 0.029), and 68 outcomes were non-significant (FQ = 0.083). Outcomes were grouped into three categories, including fracture reduction or union (28 outcomes), functional improvement and patient satisfaction (26 outcomes), and adverse events (29 outcomes). Category FQs were 0.061, 0.069, and 0.076, respectively. 47 outcomes were extracted from studies published prior to 2018 (FQ = 0.086), while the 36 outcomes published in 2018 or later resulted in a median FQ of 0.048. Three fracture types were assessed, including tibia (37 outcomes), femur (39 outcomes), and ankle (7 outcomes) fractures, with FQs of 0.075, 0.060, and 0.050, respectively. Across the 59 outcomes from studies with operative interventions, the FQ was 0.075, whereas the 24 outcomes from studies with non-operative interventions reported a FQ of 0.060.

Conclusion

The efficacy of treatments in pediatric lower extremity fractures from RCTs are slightly fragile, particularly among significant outcomes. Over time, these studies have become less robust. Larger RCTs that combine the reporting of p-values with FI and FQ metrics may provide more robust evidence for guiding effective treatment strategies in pediatric lower extremity fractures.
小儿下肢骨折治疗:随机对照试验的统计回顾
儿童下肢骨折目前具有重大的临床挑战,主要依赖于随机对照试验(rct)进行干预评估。这些试验的统计稳健性很少被评估,但当检查时揭示了诸如样本量小和结果不足等问题。因此,本研究旨在通过脆弱性统计检验评估儿童下肢骨折干预措施的随机对照试验的统计稳健性。方法系统检索spubmed、Embase和MEDLINE最近评估小儿下肢骨折患者预后的rct(2000-2023)。对所有二分类结果计算脆弱性指数(FI),即改变统计显著性所需的事件逆转次数。脆弱性商(FQ)由FI除以研究样本量来确定。结果筛选后纳入14项研究进行分析。在总共83个二分类结果中,中位FI为5 (IQR 3-6),相关中位FQ为0.070 (IQR 0.033-0.107),这表明仅5名患者(占研究人群的7.0%)的事件逆转就会改变50%结果的显著性。15个结局有统计学意义(FQ = 0.029), 68个结局无统计学意义(FQ = 0.083)。结果分为三类,包括骨折复位或愈合(28个结果),功能改善和患者满意度(26个结果)和不良事件(29个结果)。分类fq分别为0.061、0.069和0.076。从2018年之前发表的研究中提取了47个结果(FQ = 0.086),而2018年或之后发表的36个结果的中位FQ为0.048。评估了三种骨折类型,包括胫骨(37例)、股骨(39例)和踝关节(7例)骨折,FQs分别为0.075、0.060和0.050。在59项手术干预研究的结果中,FQ为0.075,而24项非手术干预研究的结果FQ为0.060。结论rct治疗儿童下肢骨折的疗效稍显脆弱,特别是在显著结局中。随着时间的推移,这些研究变得不那么可靠了。将p值报告与FI和FQ指标相结合的大型随机对照试验可能为指导儿童下肢骨折的有效治疗策略提供更有力的证据。
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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
6.70%
发文量
202
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedics aims to be a leading journal in orthopaedics and contribute towards the improvement of quality of orthopedic health care. The journal publishes original research work and review articles related to different aspects of orthopaedics including Arthroplasty, Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, Trauma, Spine and Spinal deformities, Pediatric orthopaedics, limb reconstruction procedures, hand surgery, and orthopaedic oncology. It also publishes articles on continuing education, health-related information, case reports and letters to the editor. It is requested to note that the journal has an international readership and all submissions should be aimed at specifying something about the setting in which the work was conducted. Authors must also provide any specific reasons for the research and also provide an elaborate description of the results.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信