Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: A UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance
Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: A UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance
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.
complex fractures, priority setting, trauma
Bretherton, Christopher Patrick
84103205-3d15-4774-a085-f19971e4111d
Claireaux, Henry A.
3b2a6ae9-8a58-4abc-a037-365a09db04a3
Gower, Jonathan
899dbdf5-f6a0-4c9f-bb6a-12e815bb11b7
Martin, Shan
8932bdf9-3283-4297-8276-743960598b3a
Thornhill, Angela
cb8fc2ee-7e1a-47f8-bf2b-cadb24d4f053
Johnson, Louise
588c1a8f-306f-4d41-be56-23cc81423b69
Silvester, Lucy
44a0f076-b02e-496d-b691-d3781b1f06af
Kearney, Rebecca Samantha
bd14d2bd-9efa-4426-b152-c17e1a2865ef
Baxter, Mark
3415aa9a-8eb0-454e-9b7a-dadb1ce4e5c6
Dixon, Paul
53010e0e-091c-4cff-856f-07059b6697a3
Giblin, Victoria
52de7a96-26e4-497f-a49d-5d1f758cbbaf
Griffin, Xavier Luke
4776eb6b-532f-447c-9750-cc989cd7cc48
Eardley, William
fc276d78-7508-4338-a526-1b37156d8eec
30 November 2021
Bretherton, Christopher Patrick
84103205-3d15-4774-a085-f19971e4111d
Claireaux, Henry A.
3b2a6ae9-8a58-4abc-a037-365a09db04a3
Gower, Jonathan
899dbdf5-f6a0-4c9f-bb6a-12e815bb11b7
Martin, Shan
8932bdf9-3283-4297-8276-743960598b3a
Thornhill, Angela
cb8fc2ee-7e1a-47f8-bf2b-cadb24d4f053
Johnson, Louise
588c1a8f-306f-4d41-be56-23cc81423b69
Silvester, Lucy
44a0f076-b02e-496d-b691-d3781b1f06af
Kearney, Rebecca Samantha
bd14d2bd-9efa-4426-b152-c17e1a2865ef
Baxter, Mark
3415aa9a-8eb0-454e-9b7a-dadb1ce4e5c6
Dixon, Paul
53010e0e-091c-4cff-856f-07059b6697a3
Giblin, Victoria
52de7a96-26e4-497f-a49d-5d1f758cbbaf
Griffin, Xavier Luke
4776eb6b-532f-447c-9750-cc989cd7cc48
Eardley, William
fc276d78-7508-4338-a526-1b37156d8eec
Bretherton, Christopher Patrick, Claireaux, Henry A., Gower, Jonathan, Martin, Shan, Thornhill, Angela, Johnson, Louise, Silvester, Lucy, Kearney, Rebecca Samantha, Baxter, Mark, Dixon, Paul, Giblin, Victoria, Griffin, Xavier Luke and Eardley, William
(2021)
Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: A UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.
BMJ Open, 11 (11), [e057198].
(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.
Text
e057198.full
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 8 November 2021
Published date: 30 November 2021
Additional Information:
Funding Information:
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 previous NIHR and vs Arthritis research grants. RSK is co-investigator on an NIHR funded study receiving additional support from Stryker Ltd.XLG is funded by an NIHR Clinician Scientist Award.
Funding Information:
This work was supported by AOUK&I, grant number HFR03160.
Publisher Copyright:
© 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.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
Keywords:
complex fractures, priority setting, trauma
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 454554
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/454554
ISSN: 2044-6055
PURE UUID: 8bdf19e6-753f-45e2-a39f-8de7ea4c0252
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 16 Feb 2022 17:32
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 12:56
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Christopher Patrick Bretherton
Author:
Henry A. Claireaux
Author:
Jonathan Gower
Author:
Shan Martin
Author:
Angela Thornhill
Author:
Louise Johnson
Author:
Lucy Silvester
Author:
Rebecca Samantha Kearney
Author:
Mark Baxter
Author:
Paul Dixon
Author:
Victoria Giblin
Author:
Xavier Luke Griffin
Author:
William Eardley
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics