PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H H Handoll

Publications and source records attributed to H H Handoll.

24 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2000

General versus spinal/epidural anaesthesia for surgery for hip fractures in adults.

BACKGROUND: The majority of hip fracture patients are treated surgically, requiring anaesthesia. OBJECTIVES: To compare different types of anaesthesia for surgical repair of hip fractures (proximal femoral fractures) in adults. This is primarily regional (spinal or epidural) anaesthesia versus inhalation general anaesthesia, but also includes ketamine anaesthesia versus inhalation general anaesthesia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, Medline, selected orthopaedic and anaesthetic journals and conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles. Date of the most recent search: August 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing different methods of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in skeletally mature persons. Trials comparing the use of local nerve blocks are not considered in this review. Neither are trials using different types of drugs or techniques with one type of anaesthesia. The primary outcome was mortality. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a nine item scale, and extracted data. The other two reviewers independently checked these results. Wherever appropriate and possible, results were pooled. MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen trials, involving 2162 patients, which compared regional anaesthesia with general anaesthesia, were included. All trials had methodological flaws. Regional anaesthesia was associated with a decreased mortality at one month (49/766 (6.4%) versus 76/812 (9.4%)) of borderline statistical significance (Peto odds ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.96)). The results for three month mortality were not statistically significant, although the confidence interval does not exclude the possibility of a clinically relevant reduction (86/726 (11.8%) versus 98/765 (12.8%), Peto odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.24). The reduced numbers at one year, coming exclusively from two studies, preclude any useful conclusions for long term mortality (80/354 (22.6%) versus 78/372 (21.0%), Peto odds ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.57). Regional anaesthesia was associated with a tendency to a longer operation (weighted mean difference 4.8 minutes, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 8.6 minutes), and a reduced risk of deep venous thrombosis (39/129 (30%) versus 61/37(76%); Peto odds ratio 0. 41, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.72), although this conclusion is insecure due to possible selection bias in the subgroups in whom this outcome was measured. No other statistically significant differences in outcome were identified. There was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions from a further two included trials, involving a total of 100 patients, which compared other types of anaesthesia. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Regional anaesthesia and general anaesthesia appear to produce comparable results for most of the outcomes studied. Regional anaesthesia may reduce short-term mortality but no conclusions can be drawn for longer term mortality.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Interventions for isolated diaphyseal fractures of the ulna in adults.

BACKGROUND: Isolated fractures of the shaft of the ulna, which are often sustained when the forearm is raised to shield against a blow, are generally treated on an out-patient basis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of various forms of treatment for isolated fractures of the ulnar shaft in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, MEDLINE (1976 to August 1999), EMBASE (1981 to September 1999), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (up to Issue 4, 1999), and bibliographies of trial reports. Date of the most recent search: August 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials of conservative and surgical treatment of isolated fractures of the ulnar shaft in adults. Excluded were fractures of the proximal ulna and Monteggia fracture dislocations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Independent quality assessment and data extraction were performed by all reviewers. Requests for more information were sent to trialists. Given the limited and poor quality evidence available, quantitative analysis was kept to a minimum. MAIN RESULTS: Two small trials of conservative treatment, involving a total of 106 patients were included in this review. Both trials were of poor quality. One randomised trial compared short arm pre-fabricated functional braces with long arm plaster casts. There was no statistically significant difference in the time it took for fracture union. Patient satisfaction and return to work were better in the brace group. The other quasi-randomised trial compared Ace Wrap elastic bandage, short arm plaster cast and long arm plaster cast. The large loss to follow-up in this trial makes any data analysis tentative. However the need for replacement of the Ace wrap by other methods due to pain does indicate the potential for a serious problem with this intervention. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to determine which method of treatment is the most appropriate for isolated fractures of the ulnar shaft in adults. There is a need to establish the incidence of this injury and the outcome and associated costs of the various forms of treatment. Well designed randomised trials of current forms of conservative treatment are recommended.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Surgical treatment for meniscal injuries of the knee in adults.

BACKGROUND: Injuries to the knee menisci are common and operations to treat them are among the most common procedures performed by orthopaedic surgeons. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of common surgical interventions in the treatment of meniscal injuries of the knee. The four comparisons under test were: a) surgery versus conservative treatment, b) partial versus total meniscectomy, c) excision versus repair of meniscal tears, d) surgical access, in particular arthroscopic versus open. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, MEDLINE and bibliographies of published papers. Date of the most recent search: August 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised trials which involved the above four comparisons or which compared other surgical interventions for the treatment of meniscal injury. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial inclusion was agreed by both reviewers who independently assessed trial quality, by use of a 12 item scale, and extracted data. Where possible and appropriate, data were presented graphically. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials, involving 260 patients, which addressed two (partial versus total meniscectomy; surgical access) comparisons were included. Partial meniscectomy may allow a slightly enhanced recovery rate as well as a potentially improved overall functional outcome including better knee stability in the long term. It is probably associated with a shorter operating time with no apparent difference in early complications or re-operation between partial and total meniscectomy. The long term advantage of partial meniscectomy indicated by the absence of symptoms (symptoms or further operation at six years or over: 14/98 versus 22/94; Peto odds ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 1.14) or radiographical outcome was not established. The results available from the only trial comparing arthroscopic with open meniscectomy were very limited in terms of patient numbers and length of follow-up. However it is likely that partial meniscectomy via arthroscopy is associated with shorter operating times and a quicker recovery. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The lack of randomised trials means that no conclusions can be drawn on the issue of surgical versus non-surgical treatment of meniscal injuries, nor meniscal tear repair versus excision. In randomised trials so far reported, there is no evidence of difference in radiological or long term clinical outcomes between arthroscopic and open meniscal surgery, or between total and partial meniscectomy. Partial meniscectomy seems preferable to the total removal of the meniscus in terms of recovery and overall functional outcome in the short term.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Mobilisation strategies after hip fracture surgery in adults.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative care programmes after hip fracture surgery include strategies for mobilisation, such as early weight bearing, gait retraining and other physical therapy interventions. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of different mobilisation strategies and programmes after hip fracture surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, Medline, and reference lists of relevant articles were searched. Date of the most recent search: August 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing different mobilisation strategies/programmes after hip fracture surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a ten item scale, and extracted data. Wherever appropriate and possible, the data are presented graphically. MAIN RESULTS: Each of the four included trials evaluated a different intervention. All had poor and / or poorly reported trial methodology. One trial of 100 patients compared twice daily with once daily physiotherapy. Only limited outcome data were available for checking the claims in the trial report that there was no demonstrable difference in recovery of the two patient groups at nine weeks follow-up. A treadmill gait retraining programme was compared with a conventional gait retraining programme in one trial of 40 patients. More patients in the treadmill group had recovered their pre-fracture level of mobility by the time of hospital discharge, which tended to happen earlier than for the control group. Neither of these differences were statistically significant. One trial of 24 patients compared neuromuscular stimulation of the quadriceps muscle with placebo stimulation. No data were available to test the claims that neuromuscular stimulation improved the recovery of mobility, assessed up to 13 weeks. One trial involving 273 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture treated by internal fixation compared weight bearing at two weeks after surgery with delayed weight bearing at 12 weeks after surgery. From the limited data available, there were no statistically significant differences between the two methods of treatment for the outcomes of non-union, mortality and overall unfavourable outcome at one year (42/141 versus 50/132; relative risk = 0.79, 95%confidence interval = 0.56 to 1.10). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to determine the effects of more frequent physiotherapy, treadmill gait retraining, or neuromuscular stimulation after hip fracture surgery. There is also insufficient evidence to determine the effects of early weight bearing after the internal fixation of an intracapsular proximal femoral fracture.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Nutritional supplementation for hip fracture aftercare in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the hip are an important cause of later ill health and mortality in elderly people. People with hip fractures are often malnourished at the time of fracture, and have poor food intake in hospital. OBJECTIVES: This review assesses the effects of nutritional interventions in elderly people recovering from hip fracture. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Embase, Biosis, Cinahl, Healthstar and reference lists. We contacted investigators, and hand searched Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Clinical Nutrition and The Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. Date of the most recent search: June 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of nutritional interventions of mainly older patients (aged over 65 years) with hip fracture. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial allocation to included, excluded and awaiting assessment categories, was by consensus. Both reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Additional information was sought from all trialists. Pooling of data for primary outcomes and select exploratory analyses were undertaken. MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen randomised trials involving 943 participants were included. Overall the quality of trials was poor; specifically in terms of allocation concealment, assessor blinding and intention to treat analysis. This, and the limited availability of outcome data, mean that the following results must be interpreted with caution. Oral multinutrient feeds (providing non-protein energy, protein, some vitamins and minerals), evaluated by six trials, may reduce unfavourable outcome (death or complications) (14/66 versus 26/73; Peto odds ratio 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.67), but did not demonstrate an effect on mortality (12/91 versus 14/97; Peto odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 1.96). Four trials, examining nasogastric multinutrient feeding, showed no evidence for an effect on mortality (Peto odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 2.17), but the studies were heterogeneous regarding case-mix. Insufficient information was provided to evaluate unfavourable outcome. The effect of protein in an oral feed, tested in two trials, showed no evidence for an effect on mortality (Peto odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 2.79), but may have reduced days spent in rehabilitation wards. Two trials, testing intravenous thiamin (vitamin B1) and other water soluble vitamins, or 1-alpha-hydroxycholecalciferol (an active form of vitamin D) respectively, produced no evidence of benefit for either vitamin supplement. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The strongest evidence for the effectiveness of nutritional supplementation exists for oral protein and energy feeds, but the evidence is still very weak. Future trials are required which overcome the defects of the reviewed studies, particularly inadequate size, methodology and outcome assessment.

Aged↗