Timothy R. C. Davis

Background: Proximal phalanx finger shaft fractures are common and can impair hand function. There is controversy, but no high-quality evidence, on how they are best treated. We compared the clinical and cost-effectiveness of surgery versus non-surgical splint treatment. Objective: The primary objective was to compare hand function following surgical fixation with hand function following non-surgical splint treatment using the Hand Health Profile of the Patient Evaluation Measure at 6 months post randomisation. Design: Pragmatic multicentre, parallel superiority randomised (1 : 1) trial. Setting: Twenty-four acute hospitals in the United Kingdom National Health Service. Participants: Patients ≥ 16 years with one or more proximal phalanx shaft fracture(s), which can be treated via either surgery or non-surgical splint treatment. Patients with intra-articular, base-metaphyseal, neck, open proximal phalanx fractures, injury ≥ 14 days or unable to adhere to trial procedures/complete questionnaires were excluded. Interventions: Surgery was any mode of surgical fixation that was considered as appropriate by the treating specialist. Non-surgical splint treatment consisted of any technique/material used in routine care, which may involve manipulation of the fracture with analgesia or local anaesthetic, and subsequent bracing through an externally applied support, usually performed in a clinic or therapy room environment. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the Hand Health Profile of the Patient Evaluation Measure (possible range 11–77, higher scores indicate worst function). Measurements were collected at 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months; 6 months was the primary outcome time point. The primary health outcome for economic evaluation was quality-adjusted life-years in accordance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Results: Between 9 November 2020 and 2 February 2023, 113 participants were randomised to surgery ( n = 56) or non-surgical treatment ( n = 55); 2 were excluded. Participants were 60% male, with mean age of 38 years. Treatment arms were balanced. Fifty-three participants in the surgical and 46 in the non-surgical group were included in the primary analysis. At 6 months, the mean Patient Evaluation Measure was 27.1 (standard deviation = 13.6, n = 48) in the surgical group and 25 (standard deviation 12.4, n = 41) in the non-surgical group, with no clinically important difference between groups (adjusted difference in means for surgery vs. non-surgical groups 3, 95% confidence interval −1.6 to 7.7). There were no differences at 6 weeks and 3 months. There were more complications in the surgery group. Surgery was more expensive, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £39,686 per quality-adjusted life-year, with a 3.2% probability of being cost-effective at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold of £20,000. Conclusions: This study supports the conclusion that surgery does not restore better hand function than non-surgical treatment. Surgery results in additional complications and is more expensive. Limitations: We were unable to further determine if surgery is worse than splint or if the two treatments are equivalent, because of slow recruitment and the smaller than the planned sample size. Future work: Research should be directed towards further comparisons of treatments for common hand fractures. Funding: This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number NIHR127292.

Background: Dupuytren’s contractures (DC) are fibrous cords under the skin of the hand that cause one or more fingers to curl gradually and irreversibly towards the palm. These contractures are usually painless but can cause a loss of hand function. Two treatments for Dupuytren’s contractures are widely used within the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK: removal of the contractures via surgery (limited fasciectomy) and division of the contractures via a needle inserted through the skin (needle fasciotomy). This study aims to establish the clinical and cost-effectiveness of needle fasciotomy (NF) versus limited fasciectomy (LF) for the treatment of DC in the NHS, in terms of patient-reported hand function and resource utilisation. Methods/design: Hand-2 is a national multi-centre, two-arm, parallel-group randomised, non-inferiority trial. Patients will be eligible to join the trial if they are aged 18 years or older, have at least one previously untreated finger with a well-defined Dupuytren’s contracture of 30° or greater that causes functional problems and is suitable for treatment with either LF or NF. Patients with a contracture of the distal interphalangeal joint only are ineligible. Eligible consenting patients will be randomised 1:1 to receive either NF or LF and will be followed up for 24 months post-treatment. A QuinteT Recruitment Intervention will be used to optimise recruitment. The primary outcome measure is the participant-reported assessment of hand function, assessed by the Hand Health Profile of the Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM) questionnaire at 12 months post-treatment. Secondary outcomes include other patient-reported measures, loss of finger movement, and cost-effectiveness, reported over the 24-month post-treatment. Embedded qualitative research will explore patient experiences and acceptability of treatment at 2 years post-surgery. Discussion: This study will determine whether treatment with needle fasciotomy is non-inferior to limited fasciectomy in terms of patient-reported hand function at 12 months post-treatment. Trial registration: International Standard Registered Clinical/soCial sTudy ISRCTN12525655. Registered on 18th September 2020.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a large, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing needle fasciotomy with limited fasciectomy for treatment of Dupuytren’s contractures. Design: The design of this study is a parallel, two-arm, multicentre, randomised feasibility trial with embedded QuinteT Recruitment Intervention. Participants: Patients aged 18 years or over who were referred from primary to secondary care for treatment of a hand with Dupuytren’s contractures of one or more fingers of more than 30° at the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and/or proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints and well-defined cord(s). Patients were excluded if they had undergone previous Dupuytren’s contracture surgery on the same hand. Methods: Potential participants were screened for eligibility. Recruited participants randomised (1:1) to treatment with either needle fasciotomy or limited fasciectomy and followed-up for up to 6 months after treatment. Data on recruitment rates, completion of follow-up, and procedure costs were collected. Four patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and objective outcome measures were collected before intervention and 6 weeks and 6 months afterwards. Results: One hundred and fifty-three of 267 (57%) primary-care referrals for Dupuytren’s contractures met the eligibility criteria for the study. Seventy-one of the 153 (46%) agreed to participate and were randomly allocated to treatment with needle fasciotomy or limited fasciectomy. Sixty-seven of these underwent their allocated treatment, two were crossovers from limited fasciectomy to needle fasciotomy, and two (both allocated limited fasciectomy) received no treatment. Fifty-nine participants (85%) completed 6-month follow-up PROMs. Participants felt the MYMOP, PEM and URAM PROMs allowed them to better describe how their treatment affected their hand function than the DASH PROM. The estimated costs of limited fasciectomy (in an operating theatre) and needle fasciotomy (in a clinic room) were £777 and £111 respectively. Conclusion: A large RCT comparing treatment of Dupuytren’s contractures by needle fasciotomy and limited fasciectomy is feasible. Data from this study will help determine the number of sites and duration of recruitment required to complete an adequately powered RCT and will assist the selection of PROMs in future studies on the treatment of Dupuytren’s contractures. (Level 1 feasibility study). Trial registration: Trial registered with ISRCTN (registration number: ISRCTN11164292), date assigned - 28/08/2015.

Collaborations between researchers and practitioners are valuable for community development but are challenging to implement. This study aimed to assess how researchers and practitioners perceive such collaborations and examine their ideas about how collaborations can be conducted more effectively. Developing one such research-practice collaboration to conduct this project, we examined the collaboration experiences of youth development researchers and 4-H practitioners in New York State. Quantitative and qualitative data from this investigation illustrate the challenges and rewards of collaboration and point to communication as a key element in success. Results also highlight the importance of researchers and practitioners having the interpersonal and practical skills to overcome considerable challenges and reveal that, although the benefit may not be equal, many on both sides are passionate about developing these partnerships. The results of this study can enable future collaborations to be more effective and useful for researchers and the communities who engage with them.

Data on 806 patients undergoing bone graft surgery for a scaphoid fracture nonunion were retrospectively collected at 19 centres in the United Kingdom. Each centre contributed at least 30 cases. Sufficient data were available in 462 cases to study factors that influenced the outcome of surgery. Overall union occurred in at least 69%, and nonunion in at least 22%, with 9% of cases having ‘uncertain union status’. Union appeared to be adversely influenced by smoking and the time between acute scaphoid fracture and nonunion surgery, with adjusted odds ratios of 1.8 and 2.4, respectively, but neither achieved the pre-determined significance level of 0.003. The type of bone graft (vascular vs non-vascular; iliac crest vs distal radius) did not appear to influence outcome. Further large multicentre prospective studies with clear definitions of ‘union’ and other factors are needed to clarify whether modification of surgical technique can influence union. Level of evidence: IV

Dupuytren’s contractures are fibrous cords under the skin of the palm of the hand. The contractures are painless but cause one or more fingers to curl into the palm, resulting in loss of function. Standard treatment within the NHS is surgery to remove (fasciectomy) or divide (fasciotomy) the contractures, and the treatment offered is frequently determined by surgeon preference. This study aims to determine the feasibility of conducting a large, multicentre randomised controlled trial to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of needle fasciotomy versus limited fasciectomy for the treatment of Dupuytren’s contracture. HAND-1 is a parallel, two-arm, multicentre, randomised feasibility trial. Eligible patients aged 18 years or over who have one or more fingers with a Dupuytren’s contracture of more than 30° in the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and/or proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints, well-defined cord(s) causing contracture, and have not undergone previous surgery for Dupuytren’s on the same hand will be randomised (1:1) to treatment with either needle fasciotomy or limited fasciectomy. Participants will be followed-up for up to 6 months post surgery. Feasibility outcomes include number of patients screened, consented and randomised, adherence with treatment, completion of follow-up and identification of an appropriate patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) to use as primary outcome for a main trial. Embedded qualitative research, incorporating a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention, will focus on understanding and optimising the recruitment process, and exploring patients’ experiences of trial participation and the interventions. This study will assess whether a large multicentre trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of needle fasciotomy and limited fasciectomy for the treatment of Dupuytren’s contractures is feasible, and if so will provide data to inform its design and successful conduct. International Standard Registered Clinical/soCial sTudy Number: ISRCTN11164292 . Registered on 28 August 2015.

The aim of this systematic review was to develop an evidence-based guideline to assist clinicians in the treatment of adult trigger digits. There is moderate evidence to suggest that local corticosteroid injection is a safe and effective short-term treatment and it may, therefore, be recommended as an initial treatment for this condition. However, when compared with surgery, there is strong evidence that corticosteroid injection is associated with increased rates of ongoing or recurrent symptoms at 6 months after intervention. There is strong evidence suggesting that trigger digit can be managed safely by surgical release. There is weak evidence to support the use of splinting or other non-operative modalities. Hence a single corticosteroid injection may be offered as the first line in treatment of adult trigger digits, but percutaneous release is a safe alternative. Surgery should be the next line if the injection fails, symptoms recur or the patient chooses. Level of evidence: I

This prospective cohort study investigated the responsiveness and interpretability of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main (URAM) outcome measures for assessing recovery after fasciectomy and dermofasciectomy for Dupuytren’s disease. DASH outcome scores at 1 year were significantly better than at 6 weeks, suggesting that recovery is not complete by 6 weeks. Of the 101 patients recruited to the DASH cohort, 71 completed preoperative, 6 week and 1 year postoperative DASH scores; 68 of them completed preoperative and 1 year postoperative DASH scores and an external anchor question. In the URAM cohort, 30/44 completed the preoperative and the 1 year postoperative URAM scores and the anchor question. The DASH score exhibited moderate responsiveness but poor interpretability on receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, such that a minimal important change could not be estimated. The URAM score showed acceptable responsiveness, and an MIC of 10.5 on receiver operating characteristic analysis. Level of evidence: II

Variables associated with recurrent Dupuytren’s disease, or a ‘diathesis’, have been investigated, but those associated with functional outcome and complications are less well studied. Outcomes 1 or 5 years after an aponeurotomy, fasciectomy or dermofasciectomy were assessed by patient interview and examination at five UK centres. A total of 432 procedures were studied. The reoperation rate did not differ at 1 year (p = 0.396, Chi-square test with Monte Carlo simulation), but was higher after aponeurotomy in the 5-year group (30%, versus 6% after fasciectomy and 0% after dermofasciectomy, p = 0.003, Chi square test with Monte Carlo simulation). Loss of function (DASH>15) did not differ between procedures at 5 years, even when reoperation and other variables were controlled. Diabetes, female gender and previous ipsilateral surgery were associated with poorer function in logistic regression analysis. The variables associated with poor function after treatments differ from diathesis variables. Aponeurotomy had lower complication rates than fasciectomy and dermofasciectomy. This may counterbalance the former’s higher recurrence rate and explain why aponeurotomy demonstrated similar long-term functional outcome compared with excisional surgery in this study. Level of evidence: III