Recent research has highlighted non-operative management (NOM) as a viable alternative for frail older adults with hip fractures in the final phase of life. This study aims to guide Dutch physicians and hospitals nationwide in a standardised implementation of shared decision-making regarding surgery or NOM in selected frail older adults with a hip fracture.

The patient population for implementation includes frail older adults aged ≥70 years with an acute proximal femoral fracture, nursing home care or a similar level of care elsewhere and at least one additional criterion (ie, malnutrition, severe mobility impairment or ASA≥4). The 2-year implementation study will be conducted in four phases. In phases 1 and 2, barriers and facilitators for implementation will be identified and an implementation protocol, educational materials and patient information will be developed. Phase 3 will involve an implementation pilot in 14 hospitals across the Netherlands. The protocol and educational material will be improved based on healthcare provider and patient experiences gathered through interviews. Phase 4 will focus on upscaling to nationwide implementation and the effect of the implementation on NOM rate will be measured using data from the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit.

The study was exempted by the local Medical Research Ethics Committee (MEC-2023-0270, 10 May 2023) and Medical Ethics Committee United (W23.083, 26 April 2023). The study’s results will be submitted to an open access international peer-reviewed journal. Its protocols, tools and results will be presented at several national and international academic conferences of relevant orthogeriatric (scientific) associations.

NCT06079905 .

Audit and Feedback (A&F) is a widely used quality improvement (QI) intervention in healthcare. However, not all feedback is accepted by professionals. While claims-based feedback has been previously used for A&F interventions, its acceptance by medical specialists is largely unknown. This study examined medical specialists’ acceptance of claims-based A&F for QI.

Qualitative design, with focus group discussions. Transcripts were analysed using discourse analysis.

A total of five online focus group discussions were conducted between April 2021 and September 2022 with 21 medical specialists from varying specialties (urology; paediatric surgery; gynaecology; vascular surgery; orthopaedics and trauma surgery) working in academic or regional hospitals in the Netherlands.

Participants described mixed views on using claims-based A&F for QI. Arguments mentioned in favour were (1) A&F stimulates reflective learning and improvement and (2) claims-based A&F is more reliable than other A&F. Arguments in opposition were that (1) A&F is insufficient to create behavioural change; (2) A&F lacks clinically meaningful interpretation; (3) claims data are invalid for feedback on QI; (4) claims-based A&F is unreliable and (5) A&F may be misused by health insurers. Furthermore, participants described several conditions for the implementation of A&F which shape their acceptance.

Using claims-based A&F for QI is, for some clinical topics and under certain conditions, accepted by medical specialists. Acceptance of claims-based A&F can be shaped by how A&F is implemented into clinical practice. When designing A&F for QI, it should be considered whether claims data, as the most resource-efficient data source, can be used or whether it is necessary to collect more specific data.

Conservative treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) using bracing has proven to be effective at reducing curve progression. However, variation in brace design and lack of brace specificity hamper clinical treatment outcomes as well as the predictability and comparison hereof. To overcome this, recent technological developments aim to generate transparent and objective criteria for brace manufacturing by applying computer-aided design software and additive manufacturing to produce braces for scoliosis treatment. Yet, the extent of its applicability and clinical implementation are to be determined. This study will identify and map the available evidence for the methodology and application of three-dimensional technology for the design and production of clinical braces used for treatment in patients with AIS.

This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. This scoping review will consider studies on methodology of three-dimensional technological methodology and applications that have been or are currently being applied in brace treatment of AIS. The following databases will be searched: MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Embase (OVID). Search limits will be applied; for example, only articles written in the English language published after 2000 will be included. The retrieved articles will be screened independently by two researchers. A third researcher will be consulted in case of disagreement. Data from relevant articles will be independently extracted by two researchers and presented in a tabular manner accompanied by a descriptive narration.

Considering the nature of the study, no ethical approval needed to be requested. The study result will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.