Supplementary Online Content

Similar documents
Aaisha Ghauri Savvas Amber Curry

Tibial Intramedullary Nailing

Naylor JM, Descallar J, Grootemaat M, Badge H, Simpson G, Harris IA, Jenkin D Funding: HCF Research Foundation

Fracture Care Coding September 28, 2011

Sports Injuries of the Foot and Ankle. Dr. Travis Kieckbusch August 7, 2014

Malleolar fractures Anna Ekman, Lena Brauer

UNILATERAL VS. BILATERAL FIRST RAY SURGERY: A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF 186 CONSECUTIVE CASES COMPLICATIONS, PATIENT SATISFACTION, AND COST TO SOCIETY

.org. Ankle Fractures (Broken Ankle) Anatomy

.org. Distal Radius Fracture (Broken Wrist) Description. Cause

Wrist Fracture. Please stick addressograph here

We compared the long-term outcome in 61

Wrist and Hand. Patient Information Guide to Bone Fracture, Bone Reconstruction and Bone Fusion: Fractures of the Wrist and Hand: Carpal bones

Non Operative Management of Common Fractures

Is 1-to-1 therapy superior to group- or home-based programs after TKA? A randomised trial.

Clinical Study Synopsis

George E. Quill, Jr., M.D. Louisville Orthopaedic Clinic Louisville, KY

Marc A. Cohen, MD, FAAOS, FACS Diplomate American Board of Spinal Surgery Fellow American College of Spinal Surgery

AMERICAN BURN ASSOCIATION BURN CENTER VERIFICATION REVIEW PROGRAM Verificatoin Criterea EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, Criterion. Level (1 or 2) Number

NeuroStar TMS Therapy Patient Guide for Treating Depression

Ankle Fractures - OrthoInfo - AAOS. Copyright 2007 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Ankle Fractures

Rehabilitation for ankle fractures in adults (Review)

Physiotherapy-Based Rehabilitation after Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty. CURRENT AUSTRALIAN PRACTICE Hart AJ, Chua MJ, Naylor JM, Mittal R, Harris IA

MN Community Measurement Total Knee Replacement Impact and Recommendation Document June 2010

Explanation of the Procedure

Ankle Fractures: A Guide to Recovery

OPERATION:... Proximal tibial osteotomy Distal femoral osteotomy

THE BENEFITS OF LIVING DONOR KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION. feel better knowing

ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting

Neurodegenerative diseases Includes multiple sclerosis, Parkinson s disease, post-polio syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus

CMS Office of Public Affairs MEDICARE PROPOSES NEW HOSPITAL VALUE-BASED PURCHASING PROGRAM

Case Report Reconstructive Osteotomy for Ankle Malunion Improves Patient Satisfaction and Function

The Ankle Sprain That Won t Get Better. By: George E. Quill, Jr., M.D. With springtime in Louisville upon us, the primary care physician and the

.org. Fractures of the Thoracic and Lumbar Spine. Cause. Description

Neurodegenerative diseases Includes multiple sclerosis, Parkinson s disease, postpolio syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus

Endoscopic Plantar Fasciotomy

Prevention and Recognition of Obstetric Fistula Training Package. Module 8: Pre-repair Care and Referral for Women with Obstetric Fistula

Anatomic Percutaneous Ankle Reconstruction of Lateral Ligaments (A Percutaneous Anti ROLL)

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Surgical Technique 2. Indications 4. Product Information Patient Positioning and Approach 2

Extended Stay Recovery Centers: Enhancing the Patient Experience and Lowering Healthcare Costs

Hip replacements: Getting it right first time

Y O U R S U R G E O N S. choice of. implants F O R Y O U R S U R G E R Y

Heel pain and Plantar fasciitis

INFORMED CONSENT FOR SLEEVE GASTRECTOMY

4/13/2016. Injury Rate (%) Common Foot and Ankle Injuries in the Football Player Surgery or Not. Common Injuries. Common Injuries

Plastic, Vascular & Podiatry the Georgetown Model

GENERAL ADMISSION CRITERIA INPATIENT REHABILITATION PROGRAMS

INFUSE Bone Graft. Patient Information Brochure

The New Oral Anticoagulants. Yes

Motiva Implant Matrix Silicone Breast Implants Summary of Clinical Data 4-Year Follow Up

Calcaneus (Heel Bone) Fractures

General Medical Rehabilitation

Back Pain Measure Group Patient Visit Form

For Technical Assistance with HCUP Products: Phone: HCUP

Integumentary System Individual Exercises

Service delivery interventions

Physiotherapy Rehabilitation After Total Knee or Hip Replacement

Value-Based Purchasing Program Overview. Maida Soghikian, MD Grand Rounds Scripps Green Hospital November 28, 2012

Plantar Fascia Release

1 new lease on life. Zero hospital stay.

Semmelweis University Department of Traumatology Dr. Gál Tamás

.org. Rotator Cuff Tears: Surgical Treatment Options. When Rotator Cuff Surgery is Recommended. Surgical Repair Options

Patient Optimization Improves Outcomes, Lowers Cost of Care >

Neurodegenerative diseases Includes multiple sclerosis, Parkinson s disease, postpolio syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus

Adult Forearm Fractures

Posttraumatic medial ankle instability

Spinal Cord Stimulators (SCS) for Injured Workers with Chronic Back and Leg

Outline. The Agony of the Foot: Disclosure. Plantar Fasciitis. Top 5 Foot and Ankle Problems in Primary Care. Daniel Thuillier, M.D.

Leadership Summit for Hospital and Post-Acute Long Term Care Providers May 12, 2015

How to implement a successful Clinical Supply Chain. Terry Wooten, VP Clinical Supply Chain St Joseph Health

.org. Posterior Tibial Tendon Dysfunction. Anatomy. Cause. Symptoms

The Total Ankle Replacement

ANESTHESIA. Anesthesia for Ambulatory Surgery

If several different trials are mentioned in one publication, the data of each should be extracted in a separate data extraction form.

Learning objectives. History International. History NP in The Netherlands

frequently asked questions Knee and Hip Joint Replacement Technology

Syndesmosis Injuries

Quality standard Published: 11 June 2015 nice.org.uk/guidance/qs89

INNOVATION TITLE: HOSPITAL: Innovation Category: select all that apply

Kaiser Permanente. National Total Joint Replacement Registry. Liz Paxton Director of Surgical Outcomes & Analysis

Basic Results Database

INFORMED CONSENT DERMABRASION

Having Surgery? What you need to know. Questions to ask your doctor and your surgeon

Achilles Tendon Repair Surgery Post-operative Instructions Phase One: The First Week After Surgery

Spinal Cord Stimulation

Specific Standards of Accreditation for Residency Programs in Orthopedic Surgery

BACK PAIN MEASURES GROUP OVERVIEW

UROLOGY GROUP of PRINCETON

Marina Richardson, M.Sc. Deb Willems, BSc.PT David Ure, OT Robert Teasell, MD FRCPC

Managing Surgical Services Lines Under Accountable Care and Value-Based Purchasing. Becker s Healthcare Jeffry Peters February 28, 2013

Cite as National Patient Safety Agency 2010 Slips trips and falls data update NPSA: London Available from

INFORMED CONSENT - CARPAL TUNNEL RELEASE

Hip Replacement Surgery Understanding the Risks

Homecare Health & Medical Billing Data Science Study

STUDENT ACCIDENT INSURANCE. Parents & Guardians

Meditec.com Free Trial Offer Medical Coding Mini Course. Notice to user:

Nationwide Life Insurance Co.: University of Phoenix NJ Coverage Period: 9/24/13-8/23/14

The Impact of Regional Anesthesia on Perioperative Outcomes By Dr. David Nelson

Name: (Please print/type name on all pages) QUALIFICATIONS FOR PODIATRY CORE PRIVILEGES

Preauthorization Requirements * (as of January 1, 2016)

By James D. Gould, MD FACS

Transcription:

Supplementary Online Content Willett K, Keene DJ, Mistry D, et al; for the Ankle Injury Management (AIM) Trial Collaborators. Effect of close contact casting vs surgery for initial treatment of unstable ankle fractures on functional outcomes in older adults: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.14719 etable 1. Detailed reasons for exclusion category of other in Figure 1. etable 2. Primary and secondary outcomes at 6 weeks follow-up (per protocol analysis) etable 3. Primary and secondary outcomes at 6 week and 6 month follow-up (ITT analysis) etable 4. Comparison of mean 6-month Olerud and -Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) by treatment arm for each type of malunion. Only the mean has been presented for the malunion types with small frequencies etable 5. Comparison of mean 6 month Olerud and -Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) for those who experienced and did not experience infection and/or wound breakdown for surgery (open reduction and internal fixation) (n=291) and Close Contact Casting (n=267). Frequencies are participants with the event and a 6 month OMAS score etable 6. Resource use over the initial operating room procedure, additional operations during the initial hospital stay, readmission and the 6 month follow-up period (per protocol analysis) etable 7. Resource use over the initial operating room procedure, additional operations during the initial hospital stay, readmission and the 6 month follow-up period (intention-to-treat analysis) etable 8. Treatment related adverse events: complications and additional procedures in the operating theatre by treatment group (intention-to-treat analysis) etable 9. Summary of radiological malunion and non-union at 6 months follow-up (intention-totreat analysis) This supplementary material has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work. 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

etable 1. Detailed reasons for exclusion category of other in Figure 1. Reason for exclusion within other category n Multiple injuries (bilateral ankle fracture or other significant injuries) 50 Participant entered into another research study 3 Post emergency reduction(s) acceptable (no need for further treatment under anesthetic) 114 Previously entered into AIM trial 1 Not an acute fracture (over 3 weeks from injury) 18 Other medical/limb issue resulting in patient being not suitable 138 No trial trained surgeon available 40 Received surgery in less than 24 hours 40 No research team available or team not notified 62 Surgeon decision not to enter patient into study 184 Patient had substantial memory capacity issues identified prior to formal screening 65 Declined approach by research team prior to screening 63 Patient indicated preference for a particular treatment 117 Other reason patient not suitable for study 38 Total: 933* *one participant had two reasons marked therefore there were 932 patients with other exclusion reason in total. 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

etable 2. Primary and secondary outcomes at 6 weeks follow-up (per protocol analysis) Measure Surgery Casting Treatment comparison n Mean (95% CI) n Mean (95% CI) Adjusted Difference (95% CI) a Olerud and Molander Ankle Score 297 37 9 (36.2, 39.5) 273 38 1 (36.2, 39.9) 0 3 (-2 1 to 2 7) (OMAS) b SF-12 mental score c 297 48 3 (47.0, 49.6) 274 48 6 (47.4, 49.9) 0 1 (-1 6 to 1 7) SF-12 physical score c 297 33 3 (32.5, 34.1) 274 33 4 (32.6, 34.1) 0 2 (-0 8 to 1 3) EQ-5D d 272 0 52 (0.49, 0.56) 248 0 48 (0.45, 0.51) -0 04 (-0 08 to 0 01) Ankle range of dorsiflexion, degrees 283 5 1 (4.1, 6.1) 262 3 7 (2.5, 4.9) -1 4 (-2 7, -0 1) Ankle range of plantar flexion, degrees 283 24 5 (23.0, 26.0) 262 22 7 (21.1, 24.3) -1 9 (-4 0, 0 2) Ankle range of eversion, % compared to uninjured ankle Ankle range of inversion, % compared to uninjured ankle 277 50 2 (45.4, 55.0) 252 51 0 (43.8, 58.1) 0 6 (-7.7, 8.9) 281 47 9 (43.6, 52.2) 258 56 6 (49.8, 63.4) 9 0 (1 2, 16.8) EQ-5D pain rating e 272 1 5 (1.5, 1.6) 248 1 5 (1.4, 1.6) -0 03 (-0 12, 0 06) OMAS pain rating f 298 1 7 (1.5, 1.8) 273 1 7 (1.6, 1.9) 0 1 (-0 1, 0 3) Patient Satisfaction g 255 4 5 (4.4, 4.6) 232 4 5 (4.3, 4.6) -0 02 (-0 2, 0 2) CI = confidence interval. a Differences were adjusted for baseline outcome values, age, gender, recruitment hospital, fracture pattern (trans- and infra-syndesmotic vs. supra-syndesmotic). A negative value implies that the treatment effect is in favor of surgery. b range 0-100 higher scores indicating better ankle function. c range 0 to 100, higher scores indicating better functioning. d range typically from 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health); negative scores can be obtained, reflective of a patient s quality of life being worse than death. e Scores were from 1 to 3, with 1 indicating no pain or discomfort and 3 indicating extreme pain or discomfort. f Scores were from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating none and 5 indicating constant and severe. g Patient satisfaction with treatment was rated from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating very dissatisfied and 5 indicating very satisfied. 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

etable 3. Primary and secondary outcomes at 6 week and 6 month follow-up (ITT analysis) 6 Weeks 6 Months Measure Surgery Casting Treatment comparison n Mean (95% CI) n Mean (95% CI) Adjusted Difference (95% CI) a Olerud and Molander 304 38 0 (36.4, 39.6) 301 38 0 (36.2, 39.8) -0 01 (-2 3 to Ankle Score (OMAS) b 2 3) Surgery Casting Treatment comparison n Mean (95% CI) n Mean (95% CI) Adjusted Difference (95% CI) a 298 66 0 (63.6, 68.4) 294 64 7 (62.1, 67.2) -0 2 (-3 3 to 2.9) SF-12 mental score c 304 48 3 (47.1, 49.6) 302 48 7 (47.5, 49.9) 0 1 (-1 7, 1 5) 298 52 0 (50.8, 53.2) 294 52 2 (51.1, 53.3) -0 1 (-1 5, 1 3) SF-12 physical score c 304 33 4 (32.6, 34.2) 302 33 3 (32.6, 34.1) 0 1 (-0 9, 1 2) 298 45 6 (44.4, 46.7) 294 44 2 (43.0, 45.4) -0 6 (-2 0, 0 9) EQ-5D d 275 0 53 (0.50, 0.56) 275 0 48 (0.45, 0.51) -0 04 (-0 08, 0 01) 268 0 76 (0.73, 0.79) 267 0 76 (0.73, 0.78) -0 001 (-0 04 to 0 04) Ankle range of dorsiflexion, degrees Ankle range of plantar flexion, degrees 290 5 0 (4.0, 6.0) 288 4 3 (3.2, 5.4) -1 0 (-2 2, 0 3) 289 11 9 (10.7, 13.1) 282 11 9 (10.6, 13.3) 0 3 (-1 3, 1 9) 290 24 5 (23.0, 26.0) 288 22 5 (21.0, 24.0) -1.9 (-4 0, 0 1) 289 33 7 (32.2, 35.3) 282 31 3 (29.8, 32.8) -2 2 (-4 2, -0 3) Ankle range of eversion, 284 49 4 (44.7, 54.1) 278 50 2 (43.7, 56.8) -0 2 (-8 1, 7.7) 289 87 6 (78.1, 97.1) 277 86 8 (80.5, 93.1) -0 7 (-11.8, 10 4) % compared to uninjured ankle Ankle range of inversion, 288 47 9 (43.8, 52.1) 284 56 0 (49.7, 62.3) 7 8 (0 4, 15 3) 289 83 3 (75.9, 90.7) 282 83 6 (78.6, 88.5) 0 4 (-8 3, 9 1) % compared to uninjured ankle EQ-5D pain rating e 275 1 5 (1.5, 1.6) 275 1 5 (1.4, 1.6) -0 02 (-0 11, 0 06) 269 1 6 (1.5, 1.7) 267 1 6 (1.5, 1.7) 0 01 (-0 08, 0 10) 4

6 Weeks 6 Months OMAS pain rating f 305 1 6 (1.5, 1.8) 301 1 7 (1.6, 1.9) 0 1 (-0 1, 0 3) 298 2 0 (1.9, 2.1) 294 1 9 (1.8, 2.0) -0 1 (-0 3, 0 1) Patient Satisfaction g 259 4 5 (4.3, 4.6) 259 4 5 (4.3, 4.6) -0 01 (-0 2, 0 2) 252 4 5 (4.4, 4.6) 250 4 5 (4.4, 4.6) -0 03 (-0 2, 0 1) Timed Up and Go mobility 283 18 0 (14 5 to test, seconds h 22 6) 267 18 3 (15 1 to 24 0) -0.8 (-1.8, 0.1) CI = confidence interval. a Differences were adjusted for baseline outcome values, age, gender, recruitment hospital, fracture pattern (trans- and infra-syndesmotic vs. supra-syndesmotic). A negative value implies that the treatment effect is in favor of surgery. b range 0-100 higher scores indicating better ankle function. c range 0 to 100, higher scores indicating better functioning. d range typically from 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health); negative scores can be obtained, reflective of a patient s quality of life being worse than death. e Scores were from 1 to 3, with 1 indicating no pain or discomfort and 3 indicating extreme pain or discomfort. f Scores were from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating none and 5 indicating constant and severe. g Patient satisfaction with treatment was rated from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating very dissatisfied and 5 indicating very satisfied. h Collected at 6 months only. Data not-normally distributed, hence median (Interquartile range) presented instead of Mean (SD). Hodges-Lehmann estimate (95% CI) reported for the treatment comparison. 5

etable 4. Comparison of mean 6-month Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) by treatment arm for each type of malunion. Only the mean has been presented for the malunion types with small frequencies. Surgery (open reduction and internal fixation) Close Contact Casting Malunion type n Mean OMAS a (95% CI) n Mean OMAS a (95% CI) None 264 67 (64.5 to 69.5) 211 66 (63.5 to 69.5) Talar shift 3 60 (22.7 to 97.3) 20 57 (47.6 to 66.9) Talar tilt 1 45 - - Talar shift and tilt 1 70 15 49 (34.9 to 63.8) Talar shift and diastasis 1 75 - - Talar tilt and diastasis - - 1 75 Talar tilt, shift and diastasis 2 7.5 2 45 a OMAS score ranges from 0-100 where a higher scores indicates better outcome. 6

etable 5. Comparison of mean 6 month Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) for those who experienced and did not experience infection and/or wound breakdown for surgery (open reduction and internal fixation) (n=291) and Close Contact Casting (n=267). Frequencies are participants with the event and a 6 month OMAS score. Surgery (open reduction and internal fixation) Close Contact Casting n Mean OMAS a (95% CI) n Mean OMAS a (95% CI) Complication 29 62.6 (54.4 to 70.8) 4 50 (8.9 to 91.1) No complication 262 66.4 (63.9 to 69.0) 263 64.7 (62.0 to 67.4) a OMAS score ranges from 0-100 where a higher scores indicates better outcome. 7

etable 6. Resource use over the initial operating room procedure, additional operations during the initial hospital stay, readmission and the 6 month follow-up period (per protocol analysis). Surgery (open reduction and internal fixation) (n=272) Close Contact Casting (n=248) Difference (mean 95%CI) P-value Operating room time, mean (95%CI), mins/patient -Initial procedure 79 (22 to 136) 25 (4 to 46) -54 (-58 to -50) p<0.001 -All procedures 85 (20 to 151) 44 (-38 to 125) -41 (-48 to -35) p<0.001 Surgical implants () 8.3 (3.0 to 13.6) 1.6 (0.0 to 8.3) 6.7 (6.1 to 7.3) p<0.001 Anesthesia, no. (%) a -Initial procedure 272 (100) 248 (100) 0.00 (0 to 0) 1.00 -Additional procedures b 22 (65) 55 (80) 15 (7.7 to 0.08 22.3) Casts, median (IQR) c, 0 (0 to 0) 1 (1 to 2) 1.5 (1.4 to 1.6) p<0.001 Hospital length of stay, median 7 (4-11) 7 (4-12) -0.01 (-3.2 to 0.52 (IQR) c, days 3.2) Community and intermediate 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 0.1 (-2.5 to 0.14 care hospital length of stay, median (IQR) c, days 2.8) General Physician consultation, 0 (0 to 1) 0 (0 to 1) -0.1 (-0.3 to 0.46 median (95%CI) c, 0.2) Nurse consultation, median 0 (0 to 1) 0 (0 to 0) -0.3 (-2.7 to 0.02 (IQR) c, 2.2) Physiotherapy consultation, median (IQR) c, - Inpatient 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 0.4 (-0.4 to 0.52 1.2) - Outpatient 2 (0 to 5) 2 (0 to 5) -0.2 (-0.9 to 0.45 0.5) - Home 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 0.1 (-0.3 to 0.89 0.4) Hospital specialist consultation, 0 (0 to 1) 0 (0 to 2) 0.3 (-0.2 to 0.09 median (IQR) c, Orthopedic trauma outpatient consultation, median (IQR) c, 0.7) 2 (0 to 3) 3 (0 to 4) 0.8 (0.4 to 1.2) p<0.001 Hospital transport use, median (IQR) c, Community care, median (IQR) c, a Difference given as percentage point difference. b Restricted to those who had an additional procedure during initial inpatient stay or readmission. c Differences are displayed for the mean and 95%CI. 0 (0 to 2) 0 (0 to 3) 0.8 (0.4 to 1.3) 0.001 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 2.3 (-3.4 to 7.9) 0.06 8

etable 7. Resource use over the initial operating room procedure, additional operations during the initial hospital stay, readmission and the 6 month follow-up period (intention-to-treat analysis). Surgery (open reduction and internal fixation) (n=276) Close Contact Casting (n=275) Difference P-value Operating room time, mean (95%CI), mins/patient -Initial procedure 78 (21 to 137) 30 (0 to 77) -48 (-53 to -44) <0.001 -All procedures 84 (18 to 151) 48 (0 to 144) -37 (-44 to -30) <0.001 Surgical implants () 8.2 (2.6 to 13.7) 2.0 (0.0 to 9.5) -6.2 (-6.8 to -5.6) <0.001 Anesthesia, no. (%) a -Initial procedure 274 (99) 269 (98) -1.5 (-3.5 to 0.5) 0.18 -Additional procedures b 22 (63) 59 (79) 15.8 (8.3 to 23.3) 0.09 Casts, median (IQR) c, 0 (0 to 0) 1 (1 to 2) 1.4 (1.3 to 1.5) <0.001 Hospital length of stay, median (IQR) c, days 7 (4 to 11) 7 (4 to 12) 0.3 (-2.9 to 3.4) 0.63 Community and intermediate care 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 0.8 (-2.2 to 3.7) 0.12 hospital length of stay, median (IQR) c, days General Physician consultation, median 0 (0 to 1) 0 (0 to 1) -0.1 (-0.3 to 0.2) 0.35 (IQR) c, Nurse consultation, median (IQR) c, 0 (0 to 1) 0 (0 to 0) -0.5 (-2.8 to 1.8) 0.02 Physiotherapy consultation, median (IQR) c, - Inpatient 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 0.7 (-0.4 to 1.7) 0.67 - Outpatient 2 (0 to 5) 3 (0 to 5) -0.1 (-0.8 to 0.5) 0.98 - Home 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 0.3 (-0.3 to 0.8) 0.88 Hospital specialist consultation, median 0 (0 to 1) 0 (0 to 1) 0.2 (-0.3 to 0.6) 0.22 (IQR) c, Orthopedic trauma outpatient consultation, 2 (0 to 3) 2 (0 to 4) 0.7 (0.3 to 1.0) 0.003 median (IQR) c, Hospital transport use, median (IQR) c, 0 (0 to 2) 0 (0 to 3) 0.6 (0.2 to 1.0) 0.01 Community care, median (IQR) c, 0 (0 to 0) 0 (0 to 0) 2.7 (-3.2 to 8.6) 0.11 a Difference given as percentage point difference. b Restricted to those who had an additional procedure during initial inpatient stay or readmission. c Differences are displayed for the mean and 95%CI. 9

etable 8. Treatment related adverse events: complications and additional procedures in the operating theatre by treatment group (intention-to-treat analysis). Surgery (open reduction and Close Contact Casting (n=311) internal fixation) (n=309) Participants affected no. (%) Participants affected no. (%) Complications, no. (%) Intra-operative fracture 1 (0 3%) 0 Neurovascular injury 3 (1 0%) 3 (1 0%) Wound complications: -Infection -Breakdown 8 (2 6%) a 27 (8 7%) a 2 (0 6%) 6 (1 9%) Non-wound lower limb skin complication 13 (4 2%) 12 (3 9%) Internal fixation complications: -implant failure -other clinical issue Casting complications: -Pain from cast -Plaster sore -Plaster saw laceration 5 (1 6%) 4 (1 3%) 12 (3 9%) 15 (4 9%) 1 (0 3%) 16 (5 1%) 22 (7 1%) 5 (1 6%) Venous thromboembolism 4 (1 3%) 12 (3 9%) Additional operating room procedures, no. (%) Revision of internal fixation 3 (1 0%) 1 (0 3%) Wound washout 2 (0 6%) 1 (0 3%) Wound debridement 1(0 3%) 0 Incision and drainage of haematoma 1(0 3%) 0 Removal of internal fixation implants: -syndesmosis screws -other metalwork 6 (1 9%) 4 (1 3%) a 1 (0 3%) 2 (0 6%) a One affected participant experienced the event twice. 0 0 10

etable 9. Summary of radiological malunion and non-union at 6 months follow-up (intention-totreat analysis). n Surgery (open reduction n Close Contact Casting P-value and internal fixation) Malunion 281 11 (3 9%) 275 42 (15 3%) <0 001 Lateral malleolar non-union 281 0 274 8 (2 9%) 0 003 Medial malleolar non-union 281 3 (1 1%) 274 20 (7 3%) <0 001 11