An observational study in Pelvic Trauma, Pelvic Fracture and Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis (FFP), sponsored by University Hospital, Aachen. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-12-12.
Sponsored by University Hospital, Aachen · Observational
Multicenter, snapshot cohort studies or audits have the ability to gather large patient numbers in short time periods from many healthcare systems with different resources or practices of care concerning one specific surgical condition. This type of studies allows exploration of differences in patient populations and management across the sampled cohort to identify areas of practice variability that may result in apparent differences in outcome. As such, whilst not providing true evidence of efficacy or the impact of a single variable on overall outcome, these studies can be hypothesis-generating and identify areas warranting further study in future randomized controlled trials (1). Snapshots also shed light on the real world practice, rather than the presumed or guideline suggested patient care (2).
Traumatic Pelvic Ring Injuries (TPRI) represent a broad spectrum of trauma-associated pathologies with a distinct bimodal age distribution in patients admitted through the Emergency Departments of all acute care hospitals. In younger patients, this type of injury is often associated with high-energy trauma, hemodynamic instability, high mortality and morbidity rates (3-6). In the elderly population, pelvic fractures result from low energy trauma mechanisms (e.g. ground level fall) and can affect the long-term independency and life quality of geriatric patients (7).
There is substantial variation in the management of pelvic ring injuries among pelvic trauma surgeons; these variations include but are not limited to the timing of definitive fixation, the indications and protocols of conservative treatment, and the appropriate osteosynthesis of the anterior and/or posterior pelvic fractures (8).
This 'ESTES snapshot audit' -a prospective observational cohort study- has a dual purpose. Firstly, as an epidemiological study, it aims to report the burden of injury in specific hospitals, distributed widely throughout Europe. Secondly, this study aims to demonstrate current strategies for both, younger (after high-energy trauma) and geriatric patients (after low-energy trauma) employed to assess and treat these patients. These twin aims will serve to provide a 'snapshot' of current medical practice, but will also be hypothesis-generating while providing a rich source of patient-level data to allow further analysis of particular clinical questions. The acquired study data can be subsequently evaluated and compared to patient data of established pelvic trauma registries across Europe.
842 studies on the registry are indexed under Hip Fractures; 165 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 500 is above the median of 149 across 280 observational studies indexed under Hip Fractures.
Browse Hip Fractures studies →University Hospital, Aachen is the lead sponsor of 9 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Consecutive patients diagnosed in the emergency department of participating hospitals across Europe with traumatic pelvic ring injuries over a 3-month period.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Other: Snapshot-audit studies do not necessitate any intervention in the defined cohorts.
Other: Snapshot-audit studies do not necessitate any intervention in the defined cohorts.
Other: Snapshot-audit studies do not necessitate any intervention in the defined cohorts.
Snapshot-audit studies do not necessitate any intervention in the defined cohorts.
Mortality after traumatic pelvic ring injuries
Time frame: 6 months
Rate of systemic complications after traumatic pelvic ring injuries
Time frame: 6 months
Re-admission rate for fracture-related implant failure, infections and re-operations within 6 months after traumatic pelvic ring injuries
Time frame: 6 months
Pelvic Outcome Score after traumatic pelvic ring injuries
The Pelvic Outcome Score reflects the outcome after treatment of traumatic pelvic ring injuries. It assesses following three parameters: radiological result (max. 3 points), clinical result (max. 4 points) and social reintegration (max. 3 points). The maximum of 10 points represents an excellent result, while the minimum of 3 points corresponds to the worst outcome (9).
Time frame: 6 months
Rate of social reintegration after traumatic pelvic ring injuries
Rate of retaining same profession, recreational status, activity level in sports and social situation as prior to accident. This outcome measure will be assessed through a questionnaire.
Time frame: 6 months
No study locations are listed for this record.
Plan to share: No
Start is estimated for Mar 2025; primary completion for Nov 2025, 8 months later.
Of 107 non-industry observational studies under Hip Fractures, half reached primary completion within 23 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 65. This study's planned 8 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 124 studies reached it within 28 months; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 83.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Dec 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University Hospital, Aachen