Is a low-cost drill cover system non-inferior to conventional surgical drills for skeletal traction pin placement?

Abstract

The Drill Cover system was developed as a low-cost alternative to conventional surgical drills with specific applicability to low- and middle-income countries. However, the system may also be useful for the sterile placement of traction pins in the emergency department of high-income country hospitals. In September 2019, a US-based Level-1 trauma center began using the Drill Cover system to apply skeletal traction pins in patients with femoral shaft fractures. With these data, we performed a retrospective interrupted time series study to determine if the Drill Cover system was non-inferior to conventional surgical drills in terms of infections at the traction pin site. The study included 205 adult patients with femoral shaft fractures initially placed in skeletal traction using a conventional surgical drill (n=150, pre-intervention group) or the Drill Cover system (n=55, post-intervention group). The primary outcome was an infection at the site of skeletal traction pin placement that required surgery or antibiotics was compared between groups using a non-inferiority test with a one-sided alpha of 0.05 and a non-inferiority margin of 3%. No infections at the site of skeletal traction pin placement were found in either the pre-intervention or the post-intervention group (difference 0%, 95% CI: 0.0 to 1.4%, non-inferiority p-value<0.01). The results suggest that the Drill Cover system was non-inferior to conventional surgical drills regarding infections at the site of skeletal traction pins. The Drill Cover system may be a safe alternative to the more expensive surgical drills for skeletal traction pin placement in the emergency room environment.