Skip to main content
Article
Impact of centre volume, surgeon volume, surgeon experience and geographic location on reoperation after intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures
Canadian Journal of Surgery
  • Marc Swiontkowski, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
  • David Teague, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
  • Sheila Sprague, McMaster University
  • Sofia Bzovsky, McMaster University
  • Diane Heels-Ansdell, McMaster University
  • Mohit Bhandari, McMaster University
  • Emil H. Schemitsch, Western University
  • David W. Sanders, Western University
  • Paul Tornetta, Boston Medical Center
  • Stephen D. Walter, McMaster University
  • Gordon Guyatt
  • Lisa Buckingham, McMaster University
  • Pamela Leece, McMaster University
  • Helena Viveiros, McMaster University
  • Tashay Mignott, McMaster University
  • Natalie Ansell, McMaster University
  • Natalie Sidorkewicz, McMaster University
  • Julie Agel, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
  • Claire Bombardier
  • Jesse A. Berlin
  • Michael Bosse
  • Bruce Browner
  • Peter O'Brien
  • Rudolf Poolman
  • Ana Johnson
  • William Creevy
  • Mark D. Macleod, Western University
  • Timothy Carey, Western University
  • Kellie Leitch, Western University
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
7-1-2021
URL with Digital Object Identifier
10.1503/CJS.004020
Abstract

Background: Tibial shaft fractures are the most common long-bone injury, with a reported annual incidence of more than 75 000 in the United States. This study aimed to determine whether patients with tibial fractures managed with intramedullary nails experience a lower rate of reoperation if treated at higher-volume hospitals, or by higher-volume or more experienced surgeons. Methods: The Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures (SPRINT) was a multicentre randomized clinical trial comparing reamed and nonreamed intramedullary nailing on rates of reoperation to promote fracture union, treat infection or preserve the limb in patients with open and closed fractures of the tibial shaft. Using data from SPRINT, we quantified centre and surgeon volumes into quintiles. We performed analyses adjusted for type of fracture (open v. closed), type of injury (isolated v. multitrauma), gender and age for the primary outcome of reoperation using multivariable logistic regression. Results: There were no significant differences in the odds of reoperation between high- and low-volume centres (p = 0.9). Overall, surgeon volume significantly affected the odds of reoperation (p = 0.03). The odds of reoperation among patients treated by moderate-volume surgeons were 50% less than those among patients treated by very-low-volume surgeons (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.88), and the odds of reoperation among patients treated by high-volume surgeons were 47% less than those among patients treated by very-low-volume surgeons (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.93). Conclusion: There appears to be no significant additional patient benefit in treatment by a higher-volume centre for intramedullary fixation of tibial shaft fractures. Additional research on the effects of surgical and clinical site volume in tibial shaft fracture management is needed to confirm this finding. The odds of reoperation were higher in patients treated by very-low-volume surgeons; this finding may be used to optimize the results of tibial shaft fracture management.

Citation Information
Marc Swiontkowski, David Teague, Sheila Sprague, Sofia Bzovsky, et al.. "Impact of centre volume, surgeon volume, surgeon experience and geographic location on reoperation after intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures" Canadian Journal of Surgery Vol. 64 Iss. 4 (2021) p. E371 - E376
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/timothy-carey/4/