Display options
Cite
Bretherton CP, Claireaux HA, Gower J, et al. Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance. BMJ Open. 2021;11(11):e057198doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057198.
Bretherton, C. P., Claireaux, H. A., Gower, J., Martin, S., Thornhill, A., Johnson, L., Silvester, L., Kearney, R. S., Baxter, M., Dixon, P., Giblin, V., Griffin, X. L., & Eardley, W. (2021). Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance. BMJ open, 11(11), e057198. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057198
Bretherton, Christopher Patrick, et al. "Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance." BMJ open vol. 11,11 (2021): e057198. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057198
Bretherton CP, Claireaux HA, Gower J, Martin S, Thornhill A, Johnson L, Silvester L, Kearney RS, Baxter M, Dixon P, Giblin V, Griffin XL, Eardley W. Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance. BMJ Open. 2021 Nov 30;11(11):e057198. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057198. PMID: 34848529; PMCID: PMC8634374.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

BMJ Open. 2021 Nov 30;11(11):e057198. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057198.

Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

BMJ open

Christopher Patrick Bretherton, Henry A Claireaux, Jonathan Gower, Shan Martin, Angela Thornhill, Louise Johnson, Lucy Silvester, Rebecca Samantha Kearney, Mark Baxter, Paul Dixon, Victoria Giblin, Xavier Luke Griffin, William Eardley

Affiliations

  1. Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK [email protected].
  2. Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  3. James Lind Alliance, Southampton, UK.
  4. Patient Representative, Wessex, UK.
  5. Patient Representative, East Midlands, UK.
  6. Clinical Psychology, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK.
  7. Physiotherapy, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
  8. Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
  9. Orthogeriatrics, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
  10. Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
  11. Plastic Surgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
  12. Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

PMID: 34848529 PMCID: PMC8634374 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057198

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine research priorities for the management of complex fractures, which represent the shared priorities of patients, their families, carers and healthcare professionals.

DESIGN/SETTING: A national (UK) research priority setting partnership.

PARTICIPANTS: People who have experienced a complex fracture, their carers and relatives, and relevant healthcare professionals and clinical academics involved in treating patients with complex fractures. The scope includes open fractures, fractures to joints broken into multiple pieces, multiple concomitant fractures and fractures involving the pelvis and acetabulum.

METHODS: A multiphase priority setting exercise was conducted in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 21 months (October 2019 to June 2021). A national survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties which were then combined into several indicative questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not already been sufficiently answered. A second national survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 18 questions was taken to a stakeholder workshop, where a consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities.

RESULTS: A total of 532 uncertainties, submitted by 158 respondents (including 33 patients/carers) were received during the initial survey. These were refined into 58 unique indicative questions, of which all 58 were judged to be true uncertainties after review of the existing evidence. 136 people (including 56 patients/carers) responded to the interim prioritisation survey and 18 questions were taken to a final consensus workshop between patients, carers and healthcare professionals. At the final workshop, a consensus was reached for the ranking of the top 10 questions.

CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 research priorities for complex fracture include questions regarding rehabilitation, complications, psychological support and return to life-roles. These shared priorities will now be used to guide funders and teams wishing to research complex fractures over the coming decade.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Keywords: complex fractures; priority setting; trauma

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: RSK is a member of the UK NIHR HTA CET board, NIHR ICA Doctoral panel, chair of the NIHR RfPB board and holder of a NIHR Senior Fellowship award. RSK has been awarded current and

References

  1. Ir J Med Sci. 2020 Nov;189(4):1435-1443 - PubMed
  2. JAMA. 2018 Jun 12;319(22):2280-2288 - PubMed
  3. World J Emerg Surg. 2021 Feb 23;16(1):6 - PubMed
  4. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008 Feb;62(2):174-80 - PubMed
  5. BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928 - PubMed
  6. Emerg Med J. 2020 Jan;37(1):25-30 - PubMed
  7. Age Ageing. 2020 Feb 27;49(2):218-226 - PubMed
  8. EClinicalMedicine. 2018 Aug 05;2-3:13-21 - PubMed
  9. BMJ Open. 2019 Oct 9;9(10):e031261 - PubMed
  10. BMJ Open. 2019 Dec 15;9(12):e030028 - PubMed
  11. Bone Joint J. 2021 Jun;103-B(6):1047-1054 - PubMed
  12. BMJ Open. 2018 Oct 3;8(10):e023301 - PubMed

Publication Types