Woodcast vs Standard casting material for the immobilisation of non-operatively treated distal radius fractures– a randomised parallel-group feasibility trial

Background: Distal radius fractures are the most common fracture sustained by the adult population. Most such fractures can be treated using cast immobilisation without the need for surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a definitive trial comparing the commonly used fibreglass cast immobilisation with an alternative product called Woodcast. Woodcast is a biodegradable casting material with theoretical benefits in terms of patient comfort as well as benefits to the environment. Methods: This was a multicentre, two arm, open-label, parallel-group randomised controlled feasibility trial. Patients with a fracture of the distal radius aged 16+ were recruited from four UK centres and randomised (1:1) to receive a Woodcast or fibreglass cast. Data was collected on participant recruitment and retention, clinical efficacy, safety and patient acceptability. Results: Over an eight month period, 833 patients were screened, 271 were found to be eligible and 120 were randomised. Patient reported outcome measures were available for 97% of participants at five weeks and 83% at three months. Clinical outcomes and patient acceptability was similar between the two interventions and no serious adverse events were reported in either intervention arm. Conclusions: Both interventions were deemed efficacious and safe in the cohort studied. This study showed that a definitive study comparing Woodcast and fibreglass was feasible in terms of patient recruitment and retention.