Background: The burden of injuries is high in low-income and middle-income countries such as Malawi, where access to musculoskeletal trauma care is limited. Delayed treatment can worsen trauma-related disability. Understanding risk factors for delayed hospital presentation will assist in guiding trauma system development. Methods: We examined the records of 1,380 pediatric and adult patients with fractures who presented to the orthopaedic clinics of 2 urban referral hospitals and 2 rural district hospitals in Malawi. We used multivariate Poisson regression to evaluate the association between presentation to a hospital ≥2 days after the injury (delayed presentation) and 11 covariates: age, sex, education level, occupation, season of injury, day of injury, injury mechanism, injury type or extremity of injury, referral status, hospital of presentation, and estimated travel time. Results: Twenty-eight percent of pediatric patients and 34% of adult patients presented late. In the pediatric cohort, fall (relative risk [RR], 1.40 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02 to 1.93]), sports injuries (RR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.09 to 2.49]), tibial or fibular injuries (RR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.77]), injury over the weekend (RR, 2.30 [95% CI, 1.88 to 2.80]), estimated travel time of ≥20 minutes (RR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.81]), referral from another facility (RR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.05 to 2.02]), and presentation to Kamuzu Central Hospital, Mangochi District Hospital, or Nkhata Bay District Hospital (RR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.69]) independently increased the risk of delayed presentation. In the adult cohort, fall (RR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.38 to 2.46]), injury over the weekend (RR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.38 to 2.36]), estimated travel time ≥20 minutes (RR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.80]), and presentation to Kamuzu Central Hospital (RR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.30 to 2.33]) independently increased the risk of delayed presentation. Conclusions: Delayed presentation to the hospital after a musculoskeletal injury is common in Malawi. Interventions are needed to improve access to musculoskeletal trauma care, especially for pediatric patients with tibial or fibular injuries, all patients after falls, patients injured over the weekend, and patients living far from health facilities.

Background and purpose — In Malawi, both skeletal traction (ST) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) are used in the treatment of femoral shaft fractures, ST being the mainstay treatment. Previous studies have found that IMN has improved outcomes and is less expensive than ST. However, no cost-effectiveness analyses have yet compared IMN and ST in Malawi. We report the results of a cost-utility analysis (CUA) comparing treatment using either IMN or ST. Patients and methods — This was an economic evaluation study, where a CUA was done using a decision-tree model from the government healthcare payer and societal perspectives with an 1-year time horizon. We obtained EQ5D-3L utility scores and probabilities from a prospective observational study assessing quality of life and function in 187 adult patients with femoral shaft fractures treated with either IMN or ST. The patients were followed up at 6 weeks, and 3, 6, and 12 months post-injury. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated from utility scores using the area under the curve method. Direct treatment costs were obtained from a prospective micro costing study. Indirect costs included patient lost productivity, patient transportation, meals, and childcare costs associated with hospital stay and follow-up visits. Multiple sensitivity analyses assessed model uncertainty. Results — Total treatment costs were higher for ST ($1,349) compared with IMN ($1,122). QALYs were lower for ST than IMN, 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66– 0.76) and 0.77 (CI 0.71–0.82) respectively. Based on lower cost and higher utility, IMN was the dominant strategy. IMN remained dominant in 94% of simulations. IMN would be less cost-effective than ST at a total procedure cost exceeding $880 from the payer’s perspective, or $1,035 from the societal perspective. Interpretation — IMN was cost saving and more effective than ST in the treatment of adult femoral shaft fractures in Malawi, and may be an efficient use of limited healthcare resources.

Background and purpose — Intramedullary nailing (IMN) is underutilized in low-income countries (LICs) where skeletal traction (ST) remains the standard of care for femoral shaft fractures. This prospective study compared patient-reported quality of life and functional status after femoral shaft fractures treated with IMN or ST in Malawi. Patients and methods — Adult patients with femoral shaft fractures managed by IMN or ST were enrolled prospectively from 6 hospitals. Quality of life and functional status were assessed using EQ-5D-3L, and the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) respectively. Patients were followed up at 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months post-injury. Results — Of 248 patients enrolled (85 IMN, 163 ST), 187 (75%) completed 1-year follow-up (55 IMN, 132 ST). 1 of 55 IMN cases had nonunion compared with 40 of 132 ST cases that failed treatment and converted to IMN (p < 0.001). Quality of life and SMFA Functional Index Scores were better for IMN than ST at 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months, but not at 1 year. At 6 months, 24 of 51 patients in the ST group had returned to work, compared with 26 of 37 in the IMN group (p = 0.02). Interpretation — Treatment with IMN improved early quality of life and function and allowed patients to return to work earlier compared with treatment with ST. Approximately one-third of patients treated with ST failed treatment and were converted to IMN.

Background: Large-scale multisite trauma registries with broad geographic coverage in low-income countries are rare. This lack of systematic trauma data impedes effective policy responses. Methods: All patients presenting with trauma at 10 hospitals in Malawi from September 2018 to March 2020 were enrolled in a prospective registry. Using data from 49,241 cases, we analyze prevalence, causes, and distribution of trauma in adult patients, and timeliness of transport to health facilities and treatment. Results: Falls were the most common mechanism of injury overall, but road traffic crashes (RTCs) were the most common mechanism of serious injury, accounting for (48%) of trauma admissions. This pattern was consistent across all central and district hospitals, with only one hospital recording < 40% of admissions due to RTCs. 49% of RTC-linked trauma patients were not in motorized vehicles at the time of the crash. 84% of passengers in cars/trucks/buses and 48% of drivers of cars/trucks/buses from RTCs did not wear seatbelts, and 52% of motorcycle riders (driver and passenger) did not wear helmets. For all serious trauma cases (defined as requiring hospital admission), median time to hospital arrival was 5 h 20 min (IQR 1 h 20 min, 24 h). For serious trauma cases that presented on the same day that trauma occurred, median time to hospital arrival was 2 h (IQR 1 h, 11 h). Significant predictors of hospital admission include being involved in an RTC, age > 55, Glasgow Coma Score < 12, and presentation at hospital on a weekend. Conclusions: RTCs make up almost half of hospitalized trauma cases in this setting, are equally common in referral and district hospitals, and are an important predictor of injury severity. Pedestrians and cyclists are just as affected as those in vehicles. Many of those injured in vehicles do not take adequate safety precautions. Most trauma patients, including those with serious injuries, do not receive prompt medical attention. Greater attention to safety for both motorized and especially non-motorized road users, and more timely, higher quality emergency medical services, are important policy priorities for Malawi and other developing countries with high burdens of RTC trauma.

Traumatic and nontraumatic orthopaedic conditions are major contributors to global morbidity and account for the majority of life-years lived with disability worldwide. Additionally, the burden of musculoskeletal injuries has increased substantially over the past 3 decades. Unfortunately, in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), access to orthopaedic care is limited, leading to a disproportionate burden of disease. The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery has emphasized the urgent need for unified international commitment and research collaboration to achieve universal access to safe and affordable surgical care. However, conducting high-quality orthopaedic research in LMICs remains challenging as a result of disparities in training, access to resources, infrastructure, and equipment availability. Partnerships between high-income countries (HICs) and LMICs have emerged in recent decades as an effective approach to combatting some of these challenges. These partnerships aim to bridge the gaps by facilitating collaborative research and knowledge exchange. The establishment of successful partnerships requires a collaborative and reciprocal approach that starts with a clear understanding of mutual research aims and the availability of resources. Despite the potential benefits, various factors can make establishing such partnerships difficult. However, these partnerships can have a substantial impact in delivering quality orthopaedic education and research training, thus improving access to care in resource-limited environments. This paper represents the collaborative effort of multiple international academic orthopaedic surgeons with extensive experience in HIC-LMIC partnerships. Our aims were to outline the best practices for conducting orthopaedic research within these relationships and to provide guidance for future successful collaborations.

Background: Displaced supracondylar humeral fractures (SCHFs) benefit from closed reduction and percutaneous pinning. In Malawi, many SCHFs are treated nonoperatively because of limited surgical capacity. We sought to assess clinical and functional outcomes of nonoperatively treated SCHFs in a resource-limited setting. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with SCHFs treated at Nkhotakota District Hospital (NKKDH) in Malawi between January 2014 and December 2016. Patients subsequently underwent clinical and functional follow-up assessment. Results: We identified 182 children (54% male, mean age of 7 years) with an SCHF; 151 (83%) of the fractures were due to a fall, and 178 (98%) were extension-type (Gartland class distribution: 63 [35%] type I, 52 [29%] type II, and 63 [35%] type III). Four patients with type-I fractures were treated with an arm sling alone, and 59 were treated with straight-arm traction to reduce swelling and then splint immobilization until union. All 119 of the patients with Gartland type-II and III or flexion-type injuries were treated with straight-arm traction, manipulation under anesthesia without fluoroscopy, and then splint immobilization until union. A total of 137 (75%) of the patients were available for follow-up, at a mean of 3.9 years after injury. The Flynn functional outcome was excellent for 39 (95%) with a type-I fracture, 30 (70%) with type-II, and 14 (29%) with type-III. The Flynn cosmetic outcome was excellent for 40 (98%) with a type-I fracture, 42 (98%) with type-II, and 41 (84%) with type-III. Forty (98%) of the children with a type-I fracture, 41 (95%) with type-II, and 32 (65%) with type-III returned to school without limitation. Controlling for sex, delayed presentation, medical comorbidities, injury mechanism, and skin blistering/superinfection during traction, patients with type-II fractures were 5.82-times more likely (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.71 to 19.85) and those with type-III fractures were 9.81-times more likely (95% CI, 3.00 to 32.04), to have a clinical complication or functional limitation compared with patients with type-I fractures. Conclusions: Nonoperative treatment of type-III SCHFs resulted in a high risk of clinical complications or functional impairment. These results illustrate the urgent need to increase surgical capacity in low-income countries like Malawi to improve pediatric fracture care. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.