BACKGROUND: Distal radius fracture treatments provide similar functional outcomes. It has been hypothesized that the use of internal fixation is increasing because of physician preferences. The multisite randomized Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial provides a unique opportunity to examine patient preferences in the absence of surgeon influence. The authors' objective was to investigate patient preference for internal fixation even after being informed of the equipoise among treatments. METHODS: The authors performed 30 semistructured interviews with older individuals, all older than 60 years, approached at their institution for the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial. The authors' sample included three groups: those with a preference for internal fixation (n = 11), those with preference for nonsurgical treatment (n = 6), and those without a preference who consented to surgical randomization (n = 13). We used grounded theory for data collection and analysis. RESULTS: All participants indicated their chief concern was regaining full function. Patients based their preferences for internal fixation on multiple values, including obstacles to recovery, autonomy, aesthetics, and pain relief. Some patients who did not select internal fixation reflected on their experiences, questioning whether they would have had a potentially different outcome with internal fixation treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Without evidence for a superior treatment, patients focus on factors that pertain to recovery rather than outcomes, with most preferring the volar locking plating system. To best align with patient values, physicians should focus their discussion with patients on aspects of the recovery period rather than functional outcomes. Evidence from the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial will provide high-level information about patient-reported, functional, and radiographic outcomes.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Distal radius fracture treatments provide similar functional outcomes. It has been hypothesized that the use of internal fixation is increasing because of physician preferences. The multisite randomized Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial provides a unique opportunity to examine patient preferences in the absence of surgeon influence. The authors' objective was to investigate patient preference for internal fixation even after being informed of the equipoise among treatments. METHODS: The authors performed 30 semistructured interviews with older individuals, all older than 60 years, approached at their institution for the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial. The authors' sample included three groups: those with a preference for internal fixation (n = 11), those with preference for nonsurgical treatment (n = 6), and those without a preference who consented to surgical randomization (n = 13). We used grounded theory for data collection and analysis. RESULTS: All participants indicated their chief concern was regaining full function. Patients based their preferences for internal fixation on multiple values, including obstacles to recovery, autonomy, aesthetics, and pain relief. Some patients who did not select internal fixation reflected on their experiences, questioning whether they would have had a potentially different outcome with internal fixation treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Without evidence for a superior treatment, patients focus on factors that pertain to recovery rather than outcomes, with most preferring the volar locking plating system. To best align with patient values, physicians should focus their discussion with patients on aspects of the recovery period rather than functional outcomes. Evidence from the Wrist and Radius Injury Surgical Trial will provide high-level information about patient-reported, functional, and radiographic outcomes.
Authors: Kevin F Lutsky; Pedro K Beredjiklian; Stephen Hioe; Justin Bilello; Nayoung Kim; Jonas L Matzon Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 2.230