Literature DB >> 25822598

The ProFHER (PROximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation) trial - a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical compared with non-surgical treatment for proximal fracture of the humerus in adults.

Helen Handoll1, Stephen Brealey2, Amar Rangan3, Ada Keding2, Belen Corbacho2, Laura Jefferson2, Ling-Hsiang Chuang4, Lorna Goodchild5, Catherine Hewitt2, David Torgerson2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Proximal humeral fractures account for 5-6% of all fractures in adults. There is considerable variation in whether or not surgery is used in the management of displaced fractures involving the surgical neck.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical compared with non-surgical treatment of the majority of displaced fractures of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck in adults.
DESIGN: A pragmatic parallel-group multicentre randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation. Follow-up was for 2 years.
SETTING: Recruitment was undertaken in the orthopaedic departments of 33 acute NHS hospitals in the UK. Patient care pathways included outpatient and community-based rehabilitation. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (aged ≥ 16 years) presenting within 3 weeks of their injury with a displaced fracture of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck.
INTERVENTIONS: The choice of surgical intervention was left to the treating surgeons, who used techniques with which they were experienced. Non-surgical treatment was initial sling immobilisation followed by active rehabilitation. Provision of rehabilitation was comparable in both groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months. Secondary outcomes were the 12-item Short Form health survey, surgical and other shoulder fracture-related complications, secondary surgery to the shoulder or increased/new shoulder-related therapy, medical complications during inpatient stay and mortality. European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions data and treatment costs were also collected.
RESULTS: The mean age of the 250 trial participants was 66 years and 192 (77%) were female. Independent assessment using the Neer classification identified 18 one-part fractures, 128 two-part fractures and 104 three- or four-part fractures. OSS data were available for 215 participants at 2 years. We found no statistically or clinically significant differences in OSS scores between the two treatment groups (scale 0-48, with a higher score indicating a better outcome) over the 2-year period [difference of 0.75 points in favour of the surgery group, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.33 to 2.84; p = 0.479; data from 114 surgery and 117 non-surgery participants] or at individual time points. We found no statistically significant differences between surgical and non-surgical group participants in SF-12 physical or mental component summary scores; surgical or shoulder fracture-related complications (30 vs. 23 respectively); those undergoing further shoulder-related therapy, either surgery (11 vs. 11 respectively) or other therapy (seven vs. four respectively); or mortality (nine vs. five respectively). The base-case economic analysis showed that, at 2 years, the cost of surgical intervention was, on average, £1780.73 more per patient (95% CI £1152.71 to £2408.75) than the cost of non-surgical intervention. It was also slightly less beneficial in terms of utilities, although this difference was not statistically significant. The net monetary benefit associated with surgery is negative. There was only a 5% probability of surgery achieving the criterion of costing < £20,000 to gain a quality-adjusted life-year, which was confirmed by extensive sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Current surgical practice does not result in a better outcome for most patients with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck and is not cost-effective in the UK setting. Two areas for future work are the setting up of a national database of these fractures, including the collection of patient-reported outcomes, and research on the best ways of informing patients with these and other upper limb fractures about initial self-care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN50850043. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25822598      PMCID: PMC4781052          DOI: 10.3310/hta19240

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Technol Assess        ISSN: 1366-5278            Impact factor:   4.014


  28 in total

1.  Practice guidelines for proximal humeral fractures.

Authors:  Shashank Misra; Raju Vaishya; Vivek Trikha; Jitendra Maheshwari
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-04-11

Review 2.  Outcomes following non operative management for proximal humerus fractures.

Authors:  Al-Achraf Khoriati; Tony Antonios; Nik Bakti; Paras Mohanlal; Bijayendra Singh
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-03-03

Review 3.  The Benefits and Harms of Early Mobilization and Supervised Exercise Therapy after Non-surgically Treated Proximal Humerus or Distal Radius fracture: A systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Helle K Østergaard; Inger Mechlenburg; Antti P Launonen; Marianne T Vestermark; Ville M Mattila; Ville T Ponkilainen
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2021-03-10

4.  The Foundation of the British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS).

Authors:  William Angus Wallace; Michael Selby Watson
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2016-12-15

5.  The fragility and reverse fragility indices of proximal humerus fracture randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.

Authors:  Peter William Kyriakides; Blake Joseph Schultz; Kenneth Egol; Philipp Leucht
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 3.693

Review 6.  Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults.

Authors:  Helen Hg Handoll; Joanne Elliott; Theis M Thillemann; Patricia Aluko; Stig Brorson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-06-21

7.  Construct Validity and Precision of Different Patient-reported Outcome Measures During Recovery After Upper Extremity Fractures.

Authors:  Prakash Jayakumar; Teun Teunis; Ana-Maria Vranceanu; Sarah Lamb; Mark Williams; David Ring; Stephen Gwilym
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  What Factors Are Associated With Poor Shoulder Function and Serious Complications After Internal Fixation of Three-part and Four-part Proximal Humerus Fracture-dislocations?

Authors:  Ashok S Gavaskar; Kirubakaran Pattabiraman; Parthasarathy Srinivasan; Rufus V Raj; Balamurugan Jayakumar; Naveen Kumar Rangasamy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 4.755

9.  Why do we operate proximal humeral fractures?

Authors:  Per Aspenberg
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 3.717

10.  Impact of the PROFHER trial findings on surgeons' clinical practice: An online questionnaire survey.

Authors:  L Jefferson; S Brealey; H Handoll; A Keding; L Kottam; I Sbizzera; A Rangan
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 5.853

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.