| Summary: | <p>Introduction</p>
<p>In high volume centres, audits are essential to ensure good surgical techniques and fracture fixations to avoid complications, revision surgeries and poor outcomes. A method to assess fixations for fractures of different regions employing different implants and surgical demands is a challenge. We present here a simple method of review and follow-up work flow of more than 6000 fixations every year that helped in improving outcomes and also provide training for residents and junior staff.</p>
<p>Materials and methods</p>
<p>The results of 6348 fracture fixations in 2014, led to a trauma review system in January 2015 to classify all fracture fixations by senior consultants into three categories: category A (good fixations); category B (acceptable fixations; need further follow-up); category C (poor/unacceptable fixations needing revision) combined with a teaching program. A strategy was evolved that included the following practices: (1) identifying ‘red flag’ fractures that led to frequent failures, (2) routine senior surgeons’ involvement in such fractures, (3) evolving ‘intra-operative checklists’, (4) requirement of senior surgeons’ intervention if there was a ‘fiddle time’ of more than 20 min, and (5) approval of post-fixation c-arm image by a senior person before closure. The impact of these rules on the fixations for 2015, 2016 and 2017 were prospectively analysed.</p>
<p>Results</p>
<p>In the years 2015, 2016 and 2017 the number of fracture fixations performed were 6579, 6978 and 7012, respectively. There was a significant increase (p < 0.001) in the number of category A fixations (87.7%, 94.6% and 96.3% in 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively) and also a decrease in the number of category C fixations (2.23%, 0.7% and 0.2% in 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively). The quality of fixations of the ‘red flag’ fractures also improved.</p>
<p>Conclusion</p>
<p>We present here a very effective, tested, simple and easily reproducible method of audit and follow-up work flow that can be used in all high turnover trauma centres to improve outcomes and can also serve as a teaching resource for junior staff.</p>
<p>Study design</p>
Prospective study.</p>
<p>Level of evidence</p>
<p>Level II.</p>
|
|---|