Assessment of Fixation Strategies for Severe Open Tibia Fractures (FIXIT)
| Tracking Information | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Received Date ICMJE | August 25, 2011 | ||||
| Last Updated Date | November 26, 2012 | ||||
| Start Date ICMJE | July 2011 | ||||
| Estimated Primary Completion Date | June 2013 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
| Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Re-hospitalization for Complication. [ Time Frame: 1 year ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ] A hospital re-admission for a complication is defined as any re-admission to the hospital secondary to the treatment of the open tibia fracture for a defined set of complications. The list of complications includes: amputation (at any level), infection (defined using CDC criteria), flap failure, non-union, mal-union, loss of reduction, or hardware failure. |
||||
| Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current | ||||
| Change History | Complete list of historical versions of study NCT01494519 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site | ||||
| Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
||||
| Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current | ||||
| Current Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Original Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Descriptive Information | |||||
| Brief Title ICMJE | Assessment of Fixation Strategies for Severe Open Tibia Fractures | ||||
| Official Title ICMJE | A Prospective Randomized Trial to Assess Fixation Strategies for Severe Open Tibia Fractures:Modern Ring External Fixators versusInternal Fixation | ||||
| Brief Summary | The purpose of this study is to compare the use of modern ring external fixation versus internal fixation for fracture stabilization of severe open tibia fractures. |
||||
| Detailed Description | Severe open fractures of the tibia (shin) bone are difficult to treat and are associated with high rates of infection and other complications. There is controversy regarding the best treatment, particularly in fractures with large wounds from trauma. The two current standard treatment options are to place an internal fixation device (a nail or plates with screws) or to use a device with pins that stick out of the skin and attach to rings outside the body (modern ring external fixator). It is unknown which of these standard of care treatment options will result in lower complication rates and better function of the leg. Our goal is to perform a multi-center randomized controlled trial of the use of modern ring external fixation versus internal fixation for fracture stabilization of severe open tibia fractures. Primary Aim: To compare the outcomes associated with modern ring external fixators versus standard internal fixation techniques in treating "severe" open tibia shaft or metaphyseal fractures with or without a bone defect of any size. Primary Hypothesis: Among patients with open tibia shaft or metaphyseal fractures (with or without a bone defect of any size), the rate of re-hospitalization for major limb complications will be lower for patients treated with ring fixators than those treated with standard internal fixation. Secondary Hypotheses: Among patients with open tibia shaft or metaphyseal fractures (with or without a bone defect of any size), the overall rate of infections will be lower for patients treated with ring fixators than those treated with standard internal fixation. Measures of fracture healing, limb function, and patient reported outcomes (including pain) will be as good or better among patients treated with ring fixators than those treated with standard internal fixation. Secondary Aim #1: To determine the percentage of Gustilo IIIB open tibia shaft fractures that can be treated successfully (i.e. without amputation) without a soft tissue flap secondary to the use of ring external fixators. Secondary Aim #2: To determine the one-year treatment costs associated with fixation of "severe" open tibia shaft or metaphyseal fractures (with or without a bone defect of any size) using modern ring external fixators versus standard internal fixation techniques. Secondary Aim #3: To determine patient reported levels of satisfaction with the fixation method and overall treatment and to compare satisfaction between the two treatment groups. |
||||
| Study Type ICMJE | Interventional | ||||
| Study Phase | Phase 3 | ||||
| Study Design ICMJE | Allocation: Randomized Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment Masking: Open Label Primary Purpose: Treatment |
||||
| Condition ICMJE | Severe Open Fractures of the Tibia (Shin) Bone | ||||
| Intervention ICMJE |
|
||||
| Study Arm (s) |
|
||||
| Publications * | Not Provided | ||||
|
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline. |
|||||
| Recruitment Information | |||||
| Recruitment Status ICMJE | Recruiting | ||||
| Estimated Enrollment ICMJE | 624 | ||||
| Estimated Completion Date | October 2014 | ||||
| Estimated Primary Completion Date | June 2013 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
| Eligibility Criteria ICMJE | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
||||
| Gender | Both | ||||
| Ages | 18 Years to 64 Years | ||||
| Accepts Healthy Volunteers | No | ||||
| Contacts ICMJE |
|
||||
| Location Countries ICMJE | United States | ||||
| Administrative Information | |||||
| NCT Number ICMJE | NCT01494519 | ||||
| Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE | W81XWH-09-2-0108 | ||||
| Has Data Monitoring Committee | Yes | ||||
| Responsible Party | Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium | ||||
| Study Sponsor ICMJE | Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium | ||||
| Collaborators ICMJE | Department of Defense | ||||
| Investigators ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Information Provided By | Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium | ||||
| Verification Date | November 2012 | ||||
|
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP |
|||||