Background: Open tibial fractures are common injuries in low and middle-income countries, but there is no consensus regarding treatment with intramedullary nailing versus external fixation. The purpose of the present study was to compare the outcomes of initial treatment with intramedullary nailing or external fixation in adults with open tibial fractures. Methods: We conducted a randomized clinical trial (RCT) at a tertiary orthopaedic center in Tanzania. Adults with acute diaphyseal open tibial fractures were randomly assigned to statically locked, hand-reamed intramedullary nailing or uniplanar external fixation. The primary outcome was death or reoperation for the treatment of deep infection, nonunion, or malalignment. Secondary outcomes included quality of life as measured with the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire, radiographic alignment, and healing as measured with the modified Radiographic Union Scale for Tibial fractures (mRUST). Results: Of the 240 patients who were enrolled, 221 (92.1%) (including 111 managed with intramedullary nailing and 110 managed with external fixation) completed 1-year follow-up. There were 44 primary outcome events (with rates of 18.0% and 21.9% in the intramedullary nailing and external fixation groups, respectively) (relative risk [RR] = 0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49 to 1.41]; p = 0.505). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the rate of deep infection. Intramedullary nailing was associated with a lower risk of coronal malalignment (RR = 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.85]; p = 0.01) and sagittal malalignment (RR = 0.17 [95% CI, 0.02 to 1.35]; p = 0.065) at 1 year. The EQ-5D index favored intramedullary nailing at 6 weeks (mean difference [MD] = 0.07 [95% CI = 0.03 to 0.11]; p < 0.001), but this difference dissipated by 1 year. Radiographic healing (mRUST) favored intramedullary nailing at 6 weeks (MD = 1.2 [95% CI = 0.4 to 2.0]; p = 0.005), 12 weeks (MD = 1.0 [95% CI = 0.3 to 1.7]; p = 0.005), and 1 year (MD = 0.8 [95% CI = 0.2 to 1.5]; p = 0.013). Conclusions: To our knowledge, the present study is the first RCT assessing intramedullary nailing versus external fixation for the treatment of open tibial fractures in sub-Saharan Africa. Differences in primary events were not detected, and only coronal alignment significantly favored the use of intramedullary nailing. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Open tibial shaft fractures are an important source of disability in Latin America. High-income countries (HICs) worldwide have established standardized treatment protocols for open tibial fractures, but less is known about their treatment in middle-income countries (MICs) in Latin America. This survey of Latin American orthopaedic surgeons characterizes open tibial fracture treatment patterns. Methods: Orthopaedic surgeons from 20 national orthopaedic societies throughout Latin America completed an online survey assessing their treatment of open tibial fractures. Demographic information was collected. Treatment patterns were queried according to 2 groupings of Gustilo-Anderson (GA) fracture types: treatment of type-I and type-II fractures (GA-I/II) and treatment of type-III fractures (GA-III). Treatment patterns were evaluated across 4 domains: antibiotic prophylaxis, irrigation and debridement, fracture stabilization, and wound management. Summary statistics were reported; analysis was performed using the Fisher exact test (p < 0.05). Results: There were 616 survey participants from 20 Latin American countries (4 HICs and 16 MICs). Initial external fixation followed by staged internal fixation was preferred for GA-I/II (51.0%) and GA-III fractures (86.0%). Nearly one-third (31.5%) of GA-IIIB fractures did not receive a soft-tissue coverage procedure. Stratifying by country socioeconomic status, surgeons in MICs more commonly utilized delayed internal fixation for GA-I/II (53.3% versus 22.0%, p < 0.001) and GA-III fractures (94.0% versus 80.4%, p = 0.002). Surgeons in MICs more commonly used primary closure for GA-I/II (88.9% versus 62.8%, p < 0.001) and GA-III fractures (32.6% versus 9.8%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This survey reports Latin American orthopaedic surgeons’ treatment patterns for open tibial shaft fractures. Surgeons in MICs reported higher delayed internal fixation use for all fracture types, while surgeons in HICs more routinely avoid primary closure. Soft-tissue coverage procedures are not performed in nearly one-third of GA-IIIB fractures because of a lack of operative personnel and training.

Introduction: Interest in clinical rotations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has grown among high-income country (HIC) orthopaedic residents. This study addresses the following questions: (1) What motivates HIC surgical residents to rotate in LMICs? (2) What is the impact of rotations on HIC residents? (3) What are the LMIC partner perceptions of HIC collaboration? Materials and Methods: A search strategy of multiple databases returned 3,740 unique articles pertaining to HIC surgical resident motivations for participating in rotations in LMICs or the LMIC host perspective. Data extraction was dually performed using meta-ethnography, the qualitative equivalent of meta-analysis. Results: Twenty-one studies were included in the final analysis. HIC residents were primarily motivated to rotate in LMICs by altruistic intent, with greatest impact on professional development. LMIC partners mostly valued HIC sustained investment and educational opportunities for LMIC partners. From LMIC's perspective, potential harm from collaboration arose from system-level and individual-level discordance between HIC and LMIC expectations and priorities. HIC priorities included the following: (1) adequate operative time, (2) exposure to varied pathology, and (3) mentorship. LMIC priorities included the following: (1) avoiding competition with HIC residents for surgical cases, (2) that HIC groups not undermine LMIC internal authority, (3) that HIC initiatives address local LMIC needs, and (4) that LMIC partners be included as authors on HIC research initiatives. Both HIC and LMIC partners raised ethical concerns regarding collaboration and perceived HIC residents to be underprepared for their LMIC rotation. Discussion: This study synthesizes the available literature on HIC surgical resident motivations for and impact of rotating in LMICs and the LMIC host perception of collaboration. Three improvement categories emerged: that residents (1) receive site-specific preparation before departure, (2) remain in country long enough to develop site-specific skills, and (3) cultivate flexibility and cultural humility. Specific suggestions based on synthesized data are offered for each concept and can serve as a foundation for mutually beneficial international electives in LMICs for HIC orthopaedic trainees.

Objective: To determine the total cost for a 30-day episode of care for high-energy tibial plateau fractures and the aspects of care associated with total cost. Design: Time-driven activity-based costing analysis. Setting: One Level 1 adult trauma center. Patients: One hundred twenty-one patients with isolated, bicondylar tibial plateau fractures undergoing staged treatment were reviewed. Primary Outcome: Total cost. Results: A total of 85 patients were included and most sustained Schatzker VI fractures (n = 66, 77%). All patients were treated with biplanar external fixation before definitive fixation. A total of 26 patients (31%) were discharged to skilled nursing facilities, and 37 patients (43%) were not discharged between procedures. Total cost for a 30-day episode of care was $22,113 ± 4056. External fixation components ($5952, 26.9%), length of hospital stay ($5606, 25.4%), discharge to skilled nursing facility (SNF) ($3061, 13.8%), and definitive fixation implants ($2968, 13.4%) contributed to the total cost. The following were associated with total cost: patient discharged to SNFs (P < 0.001), patient remaining inpatient after external fixation (P < 0.001), days of admission for open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) (P = 0.005), days spent with external fixation (P < 0.001), days in a SNF after ORIF (P < 0.001), and external fixation component cost (P < 0.001). Conclusions: External fixation component selection is the largest contributor to cost of a 30-day episode of care for high-energy bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. Reduction in cost variability may be possible through thoughtful use of external fixation components and care pathways. Level of Evidence: Economic analyses Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.