Injury
-
Hip fractures are a common orthopaedic injury affecting a particularly frail and vulnerable patient cohort. They are at risk of many complications, including prolonged length of stay and mortality. Efforts to identify those at high risk may be beneficial. Over 25 risk prediction models are published for patients with hip fractures. ⋯ Nottingham Hip Fracture Score remains the most extensive reported scoring system and performs fair overall with AUROCs of 0.64-0.80 and good fit in calibration across all studies. However, new systems utilise many similar predictors. There is a need for the standardisation of publications on scoring systems to allow further systematic review and meta-analyses.
-
Open Tibia fractures are associated with high rates of Fracture Related Infection (FRI). Given the negative outcomes and increased costs related to the latter, several prophylactic local antibiotic delivery methods have been proposed, aiming to decrease the FRI rate. Our objective with this study was to determine the effectiveness of antibiotic-coated intramedullary nails for open tibia FRI prevention. ⋯ Global infection, deep infection and non-union rates were 8.4%, 5.4% and 3.7% in the antibiotic-coated nail group and 22%, 14% and 14% in the non-antibiotic-coated nail group respectively. The meta-analysis showed a protective trend that favored the antibiotic-coated nail group although it didn't achieve statistical significance: deep infection Relative Risk (RR) (RR = 0.17 CI95% [0.02 - 1.31]); global infection RR = 0.36 CI95% [0.10 - 1.35]) and non-union (RR = 0.14 CI95% [0.02 - 1.22]), CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest a favorable trend towards antibiotic-coated nail, with decreased risk of global infection, deep infection and non-union as compared to non-antibiotic-coated nail in patients with open tibia fractures. Nonetheless, higher level evidence studies are required to confirm our findings.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Risk of wound infection with use of sterile versus clean gloves in wound repair at the Emergency Department: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Sterile gloves are widely used during wound repair procedures in Emergency Departments (ED) worldwide. It is unclear whether sterile gloves protect against postoperative wound infections. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine if sterile gloves offer significant protection against wound infections compared to clean gloves for wound repair in the ED. ⋯ No evidence of additional protection against wound infections with the use of sterile gloves for wound repair in the ED compared to clean gloves was found. However, the review was limited by nonreporting of antibiotic history and time between wound repair and follow-up amongst included studies. Considering the ergonomics, potential cost-savings and environmental impact, clean gloves are a viable alternative to sterile gloves, without compromising wound infection risk in this setting.