Abstract

PurposeThere is variability among surgeons on definitions regarding the degree of bone healing of long-bone fractures. A lack of consensus may negatively affect communication between surgeons, and lead to unintended and unwanted variability in treatment of patients suffering from abnormal healing of long-bone fractures. We aimed to identify differences between surgeons regarding their views on the degree of union of long-bone fractures.MethodsWe performed a survey among 114 surgeons who worked at 11 level I trauma centers and 68 level II/III hospitals in the Netherlands. We asked them to represent their institutional colleagues and answer questions regarding their views on the definition, factors influencing bone healing, clinical practice, views on scientific evidence, and the use or need of guidelines for non-union of long-bone fractures. A total of 26 trauma surgeons and 37 orthopedic surgeons responded (59%).ResultsCompared to trauma surgeons, more orthopedic surgeons maintain 6 months as the timeframe for classifying a fracture without healing tendencies as a non-union fracture (50 vs 70%; P = 0.019). Compared to orthopedic surgeons, trauma surgeons use the bone scan (46 vs 19%; P = 0.027) and the PET scan (50 vs 5.4%; P < 0.001) more often, and consider medication use to be a factor influencing bone healing more often (92 vs 69%; P = 0.040). Furthermore, they utilize bone marrow aspiration (35 vs 11%; P = 0.029), reaming of long bones (96 vs 70%; P = 0.010), synthetic bone substitutes (31 vs 5.4%; P = 0.012), bone morphogenetic proteins (58 vs 16%; P = 0.001), and the Diamond concept (92 vs 8.1%) more often as treatment modalities for non-union of long-bone fractures. Surgeons agreed on that intramedullary nail osteosynthesis was the treatment option supported by the highest level of evidence. 80% of the respondents feel a need for a clinical guideline on the management of long-bone non-union.ConclusionThere is no consensus among surgeons on the definition, factors influencing healing, clinical practice, and scientific evidence regarding non-union of long-bone fractures. The vast majority of surgeons believe that their practice would benefit from (inter)national guidelines on this topic, and efforts should be made to reduce surgeon-to-surgeon variability in treatment recommendations and facilitate more homogenous scientific research on non-union of long-bone fractures.Level of evidenceLevel V.

Highlights

  • Materials and methodsUp to one in ten fractures of long bones may not show signs of bone union [1, 2]

  • We may have an increasing understanding in factors influencing delayed union and non-union [10], but there is still no consensus on when a fracture is to be considered a delayed union or a non-union. This means that scientists, clinicians, and policy makers are referring to different entities when discussing delayed union or non-union of non-union fractures

  • Six trauma surgeons (23%) chose ‘other than above’ when asked for the timeframe used for defining non-union of long-bone fractures

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Materials and methodsUp to one in ten fractures of long bones may not show signs of bone union [1, 2]. We noticed that—among the different institutions of the authors— there still is no homogeneity on nomenclature regarding the degree of union of long bones among surgeons treating long-bone fractures. This negatively affects communication between physicians, scientists, and patients [11]. Through this study, we aimed to identify differences among Dutch surgeons’ views on degree of union of non-union fractures, on: (1) the definition, (2) factors influencing bone healing, (3) clinical practice (e.g. diagnostic work-up or treatment strategy), (3) views on scientific evidence regarding the treatment, and (4) the use and/or need of guidelines

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.