Skip to main content
PMC home page
Medline Book to support NIHPA logoLink to Medline Book to support NIHPA
. 2022 Jul;26(33):1–78. doi: 10.3310/BDNS6122

Offer of a bandage versus rigid immobilisation in 4- to 15-year-olds with distal radius torus fractures: the FORCE equivalence RCT.

Daniel C Perry, Juul Achten, Ruth Knight, Susan J Dutton, Melina Dritsaki, James M Mason, Duncan E Appelbe, Damian T Roland, Shrouk Messahel, James Widnall, Phoebe Gibson, Jennifer Preston, Louise M Spoors, Marta Campolier, Matthew L Costa; FORCE Trial Collaborators; PERUKI
PMCID: PMC9376802  PMID: 35904496

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Torus (buckle) fractures of the wrist are the most common fractures in children involving the distal radius and/or ulna. It is unclear if children require rigid immobilisation and follow-up or would recover equally as well by being discharged without any immobilisation or a bandage. Given the large number of these injuries, identifying the optimal treatment strategy could have important effects on the child, the number of days of school absence and NHS costs.

OBJECTIVES

To establish whether or not treating children with a distal radius torus fracture with the offer of a soft bandage and immediate discharge (i.e. offer of a bandage) provides the same recovery, in terms of pain, function, complications, acceptability, school absence and resource use, as treatment with rigid immobilisation and follow-up as per usual practice (i.e. rigid immobilisation).

DESIGN

A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled equivalence trial.

SETTING

Twenty-three UK emergency departments.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 965 children (aged 4-15 years) with a distal radius torus fracture were randomised from January 2019 to July 2020 using a secure, centralised, online-encrypted randomisation service. Exclusion criteria included presentation > 36 hours after injury, multiple injuries and an inability to complete follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

A bandage was offered to 489 participants and applied to 458, and rigid immobilisation was carried out in 476 participants. Participants and clinicians were not blinded to the treatment allocation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The pain at 3 days post randomisation was measured using the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes were the patient-reported outcomes measurement system upper extremity limb score for children, health-related quality of life, complications, school absence, analgesia use and resource use collected up to 6 weeks post randomisation.

RESULTS

A total of 94% of participants provided primary outcome data. At 3 days, the primary outcome of pain was equivalent in both groups. With reference to the prespecified equivalence margin of 1.0, the adjusted difference in the intention-to-treat population was -0.10 (95% confidence interval -0.37 to 0.17) and the per-protocol population was -0.06 (95% confidence interval -0.34 to 0.21). There was equivalence of pain in both age subgroups (i.e. 4-7 years and 8-15 years). There was no difference in the rate of complications, with five complications (1.0%) in the offer of a bandage group and three complications (0.6%) in the rigid immobilisation group. There were no differences between treatment groups in functional recovery, quality of life or school absence at any point during the follow-up. Analgesia use was marginally higher at day 1 in the offer of a bandage group than it was in the rigid immobilisation group (83% vs. 78% of participants), but there was no difference at other time points. The offer of a bandage significantly reduced the cost of treatment and had a high probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

LIMITATIONS

Families had a strong pre-existing preference for the rigid immobilisation treatment. Given this, and the inability to blind families to the treatment allocation, observer bias was a concern. However, there was clear evidence of equivalence.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings support the offer of a bandage in children with a distal radius torus fracture.

FUTURE WORK

A clinical decision tool to determine which children require radiography is an important next step to prevent overtreatment of minor wrist fractures. There is also a need to rationalise interventions for other common childhood injuries (e.g. 'toddler's fractures' of the tibia).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN13955395 and UKCRN Portfolio 39678.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Plain language summary

BACKGROUND

Torus fractures (also called buckle fractures) of the wrist are the most common type of broken bone in children, affecting 60,000 children in the UK per year. They are the mildest form of broken bone, in which the bone crushes (or buckles). Despite these fractures being so common, there is no ‘standard treatment’. The traditional treatment is to use a plaster cast and arrange outpatient follow-up. Recent medical research has suggested that wearing a bandage, or even having no treatment, might result in similar healing. In this study, we looked into whether or not a bandage (which was optional to wear) and no further follow-up resulted in the same recovery as a hard splint and usual follow-up. A total of 965 children aged 4–15 years from 23 emergency departments in the UK took part in the study. Children were evenly divided between the bandage and hard splint groups in a process called randomisation. Prior to the study, families told us that managing pain after injury was the most important issue to them. We asked children and their families to tell us about pain, recovery using the arm, quality of life, complications encountered and school absences. We also looked at the financial costs to families and the NHS.

WHAT DID THE TRIAL FIND?

The two treatments resulted in the same outcomes. The majority of those offered a bandage chose to wear it immediately. There was no difference at all in the levels of pain between those treated with a hard splint and usual outpatient follow-up and those offered a bandage and discharge (i.e. no further follow up) from hospital the same day. Similarly, there was no difference in the recovery using the arm, quality of life, complications encountered or school absences. There was a very slight increase in pain killer use in the bandage group at day 1, but not at any other time point. Overall, the cost of the offer of a bandage was slightly lower for families and the NHS. In conclusion, the findings of this study support offering a bandage to be used at the discretion of families to treat children with a torus fracture of the wrist.

Full text of this article can be found in Bookshelf.

References

  1. Perry DC, Achten J, Knight R, Appelbe D, Dutton SJ, Dritsaki M, et al. Immobilisation of torus fractures of the wrist in children (FORCE): a randomised controlled equivalence trial in the UK. Lancet 2022;400:39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01015-7 doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01015-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
  2. Cooper C, Dennison EM, Leufkens HG, Bishop N, van Staa TP. Epidemiology of childhood fractures in Britain: a study using the general practice research database. J Bone Miner Res 2004;19:1976–81. https://doi.org/10.1359/JBMR.040902 doi: 10.1359/JBMR.040902. [DOI] [PubMed]
  3. Baig MN. A review of epidemiological distribution of different types of fractures in paediatric age. Cureus 2017;9:e1624. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1624 doi: 10.7759/cureus.1624. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  4. Solan MC, Rees R, Daly K. Current management of torus fractures of the distal radius. Injury 2002;33:503–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(01)00198-X doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(01)00198-X. [DOI] [PubMed]
  5. Charnley J. The Closed Treatment of Common Fractures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004.
  6. Davidson JS, Brown DJ, Barnes SN, Bruce CE. Simple treatment for torus fractures of the distal radius. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001;83:1173–5. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.83b8.11451 doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.83b8.11451. [DOI] [PubMed]
  7. Oakley EA, Ooi KS, Barnett PL. A randomized controlled trial of 2 methods of immobilizing torus fractures of the distal forearm. Pediatr Emerg Care 2008;24:65–70. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0b013e318163db13 doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e318163db13. [DOI] [PubMed]
  8. Plint AC, Perry JJ, Correll R, Gaboury I, Lawton L. A randomized, controlled trial of removable splinting versus casting for wrist buckle fractures in children. Pediatrics 2006;117:691–7. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2005-0801 doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-0801. [DOI] [PubMed]
  9. Symons S, Rowsell M, Bhowal B, Dias JJ. Hospital versus home management of children with buckle fractures of the distal radius. A prospective, randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001;83:556–60. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.83b4.11211 doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.83b4.11211. [DOI] [PubMed]
  10. Williams KG, Smith G, Luhmann SJ, Mao J, Gunn JD, Luhmann JD. A randomized controlled trial of cast versus splint for distal radial buckle fracture: an evaluation of satisfaction, convenience, and preference. Pediatr Emerg Care 2013;29:555–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0b013e31828e56fb doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e31828e56fb. [DOI] [PubMed]
  11. Hamilton TW, Hutchings L, Alsousou J, Tutton E, Hodson E, Smith CH, et al. The treatment of stable paediatric forearm fractures using a cast that may be removed at home: comparison with traditional management in a randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint J 2013:95-B:1714–20. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B12.31299 doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B12.31299. [DOI] [PubMed]
  12. Hill CE, Masters JP, Perry DC. A systematic review of alternative splinting versus complete plaster casts for the management of childhood buckle fractures of the wrist. J Pediatr Orthop B 2016;25:183–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPB.0000000000000240 doi: 10.1097/BPB.0000000000000240. [DOI] [PubMed]
  13. Handoll HH, Elliott J, Iheozor-Ejiofor Z, Hunter J, Karantana A. Interventions for treating wrist fractures in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;12:CD012470. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012470.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012470.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  14. Karimi Mobarakeh M, Nemati A, Noktesanj R, Fallahi A, Safari S. Application of removable wrist splint in the management of distal forearm torus fractures. Trauma Mon 2013;17:370–2. https://doi.org/10.5812/traumamon.5094 doi: 10.5812/traumamon.5094. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  15. Pountos I, Clegg J, Siddiqui A. Diagnosis and treatment of greenstick and torus fractures of the distal radius in children: a prospective randomised single blind study. J Child Orthop 2010;4:321–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11832-010-0269-3 doi: 10.1007/s11832-010-0269-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  16. West S, Andrews J, Bebbington A, Ennis O, Alderman P. Buckle fractures of the distal radius are safely treated in a soft bandage: a randomized prospective trial of bandage versus plaster cast. J Pediatr Orthop 2005;25:322–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bpo.0000152909.16045.38 doi: 10.1097/01.bpo.0000152909.16045.38. [DOI] [PubMed]
  17. Kropman RH, Bemelman M, Segers MJ, Hammacher ER. Treatment of impacted greenstick forearm fractures in children using bandage or cast therapy: a prospective randomized trial. J Trauma 2010;68:425–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3181a0e70e doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181a0e70e. [DOI] [PubMed]
  18. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Fractures (Non-Complex): Assessment And Management. NG38. London: NICE; 2016. [PubMed]
  19. Achten J, Knight R, Dutton SJ, Costa ML, Mason J, Dritsaki M, et al. A multicentre prospective randomized equivalence trial of a soft bandage and immediate discharge versus current treatment with rigid immobilization for torus fractures of the distal radius in children: protocol for the Forearm Fracture Recovery in Children Evaluation (FORCE) trial. Bone Jt Open 2020;1:214–21. https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.16.BJO-2020-0014.R1 doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.16.BJO-2020-0014.R1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  20. Knight R, Dritsaki M, Mason J, Perry DC, Dutton SJ. The Forearm Fracture Recovery in Children Evaluation (FORCE) trial: statistical and health economic analysis plan for an equivalence randomized controlled trial of treatment for torus fractures of the distal radius in children. Bone Jt Open 2020;1:205–13. https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.16.BJO-2020-0015.R1 doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.16.BJO-2020-0015.R1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  21. FORCE, The FOrearm fracture Recovery in Children Evaluation. A multi-centre prospective randomized equivalence trial of a soft bandage and immediate discharge versus current treatment with rigid immobilisation for torus fractures of the distal radius in children. Health Technol Assess. URL: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta/172302/#/ (accessed September 2021). doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.16.BJO-2020-0014.R1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  22. Parsons N, Odumenya M, Edwards A, Lecky F, Pattison G. Modelling the effects of the weather on admissions to UK trauma units: a cross-sectional study. Emerg Med J 2011;28:851–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.2010.091058 doi: 10.1136/emj.2010.091058. [DOI] [PubMed]
  23. Knapp P, Stones C, Graffy J, Baines P, Preston J, Young B, et al. The TRECA study: TRials Engagement in Children and Adolescents. Health Serv Deliv Res 2021; in press.
  24. Martin-Kerry J, Bower P, Young B, Graffy J, Sheridan R, Watt I, et al. Developing and evaluating multimedia information resources to improve engagement of children, adolescents, and their parents with trials (TRECA study): study protocol for a series of linked randomised controlled trials. Trials 2017;18:265. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1962-z doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-1962-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  25. Ramsay CR, Grant AM, Wallace SA, Garthwaite PH, Monk AF, Russell IT. Statistical assessment of the learning curves of health technologies. Health Technol Assess 2001;5(12). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta5120 doi: 10.3310/hta5120. [DOI] [PubMed]
  26. Ayres-de-Campos D, Silva-Carvalho JL, Oliveira C, Martins-da-Silva I, Silva-Carvalho J, Pereira-Leite L. Inter-observer agreement in analysis of basal body temperature graphs from infertile women. Hum Reprod 1995;10:2010–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136227 doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136227. [DOI] [PubMed]
  27. Royal College of Emergency Medicine. Management of Pain in Children. Best Practice Guideline. 2017. URL: www.rcem.ac.uk/docs/RCEM%20Guidance/RCEM%20Pain%20in%20Children%20-%20Best%20Practice%20Guidance%20(REV%20Jul%202017).pdf (accessed 5 August 2021).
  28. Wong DL, Baker CM. Pain in children: comparison of assessment scales. Pediatr Nurs 1988;14:9–17. [PubMed]
  29. Garra G, Singer AJ, Taira BR, Chohan J, Cardoz H, Chisena E, Thode HC. Validation of the Wong–Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale in pediatric emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med 2010;17:50–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00620.x doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00620.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  30. Tomlinson D, von Baeyer CL, Stinson JN, Sung L. A systematic review of faces scales for the self-report of pain intensity in children 2010;126:e1168–98. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2010-1609 doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-1609. [DOI] [PubMed]
  31. Keck JF, Gerkensmeyer JE, Joyce BA, Schade JG. Reliability and validity of the Faces and Word Descriptor Scales to measure procedural pain. J Pediatr Nurs 1996;11:368–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-5963(96)80081-9 doi: 10.1016/S0882-5963(96)80081-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  32. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Major Trauma: Assessment and Initial Management. NG39. London: NICE; 2016. [PubMed]
  33. HealthMeasures. PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System). URL: www.healthmeasures.net/explore-measurement-systems/promis (accessed 15 June 2020).
  34. Eidt-Koch D, Mittendorf T, Greiner W. Cross-sectional validity of the EQ-5D-Y as a generic health outcome instrument in children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis in Germany. BMC Pediatr 2009;9:55. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-9-55 doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-9-55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  35. Wille N, Badia X, Bonsel G, Burström K, Cavrini G, Devlin N, et al. Development of the EQ-5D-Y: a child-friendly version of the EQ-5D. Qual Life Res 2010;19:875–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9648-y doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9648-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  36. Ravens-Sieberer U, Erhart M, Rajmil L, Herdman M, Auquier P, Bruil J, et al. Reliability, construct and criterion validity of the KIDSCREEN-10 score: a short measure for children and adolescents’ well-being and health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res 2010;19:1487–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9706-5 doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9706-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  37. Widnall J, Capstick T, Wijesekera M, Messahel S, Perry DC. Pain scores in torus fractures. Bone Jt Open 2020;1:3–7. https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.12.BJO-2019-0002 doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.12.BJO-2019-0002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  38. Oliveira A, Batalha L, Fernandes A, Gonçalves J, Viegas R. A functional analysis of the Wong–Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale: linearity, discriminability and amplitude. Rev Enferm Ref 2014;IV:121–30. https://doi.org/10.12707/riv14018 doi: 10.12707/riv14018. [DOI]
  39. Chow SC, Wang H. On sample size calculation in bioequivalence trials. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2001;28:155–69. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1011503032353 doi: 10.1023/a:1011503032353. [DOI] [PubMed]
  40. Christensen E. Methodology of superiority vs. equivalence trials and non-inferiority trials. J Hepatol 2007;46:947–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2007.02.015 doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2007.02.015. [DOI] [PubMed]
  41. Bell ML, King MT, Fairclough DL. Bias in area under the curve for longitudinal clinical trials with missing patient reported outcome data. SAGE Open 2014;4:215824401453485. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014534858. doi: 10.1177/2158244014534858. [DOI]
  42. NHS Business Services Authority. NHS Supply Chain Catalogue 2018/19. 2018. URL: https://my.supplychain.nhs.uk/catalogue (accessed 3 March 2021).
  43. Department of Health. NHS Reference Costs 2015–16. URL: www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-reference-costs-2015-to-2016 (accessed 5 March 2020).
  44. Personal Social Services Research Unit. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care. URL: www.pssru.ac.uk/project-pages/unit-costs/ (accessed 12 December 2018).
  45. Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary (Online). London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press. URL: www.medicinescomplete.com (accessed 12 December 2018).
  46. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. Valuing health states: a comparison of methods. J Health Econ 1996;15:209–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6296(95)00038-0 doi: 10.1016/0167-6296(95)00038-0. [DOI] [PubMed]
  47. Kwon J, Kim SW, Ungar WJ, Tsiplova K, Madan J, Petrou S. Patterns, trends and methodological associations in the measurement and valuation of childhood health utilities. Qual Life Res 2019;28:1705–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02121-z doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02121-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  48. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
  49. Sterne JA, White IR, Carlin JB, Spratt M, Royston P, Kenward MG, et al. Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls. BMJ 2009;338:b2393. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2393 doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2393. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  50. Faria R, Gomes M, Epstein D, White IR. A guide to handling missing data in cost-effectiveness analysis conducted within randomised controlled trials. PharmacoEconomics 2014;32:1157–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-014-0193-3 doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0193-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  51. White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med 2011;30:377–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4067 doi: 10.1002/sim.4067. [DOI] [PubMed]
  52. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Palmer S, Culyer AJ. Causes for concern: is NICE failing to uphold its responsibilities to all NHS patients? Heal Econ 2015;24:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3130 doi: 10.1002/hec.3130. [DOI] [PubMed]
  53. Claxton K, Martin S, Soares M, Rice N, Spackman E, Hinde S, et al. Methods for the estimation of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness threshold. Health Technol Assess 2015;19(14). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta19140 doi: 10.3310/hta19140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  54. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. BMJ 2013;346:f1049. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1049 doi: 10.1136/bmj.f1049. [DOI] [PubMed]
  55. Morgan EM, Mara CA, Huang B, Barnett K, Carle AC, Farrell JE, Cook KF. Establishing clinical meaning and defining important differences for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) measures in juvenile idiopathic arthritis using standard setting with patients, parents, and providers. Qual Life Res 2017;26:565–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1468-2 doi: 10.1007/s11136-016-1468-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  56. Jones S, Tyson S, Young M, Gittins M, Davis N. Patterns of moderate and severe injury in children after the introduction of major trauma networks. Arch Dis Child 2019;104:366–71. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2018-315636 doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2018-315636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  57. Morrongiello BA, McArthur BA, Spence JR. Understanding gender differences in childhood injuries: examining longitudinal relations between parental reactions and boys’ versus girls’ injury-risk behaviors. Health Psychol 2016;35:523–30. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000275 doi: 10.1037/hea0000275. [DOI] [PubMed]
  58. Widnall J, Capstick T, Wijesekera M, Messahel S, Perry DC. Pain scores in torus fractures. Bone Jt Open 2020;1:3–7. https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.12.bjo-2019-0002 doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.12.bjo-2019-0002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  59. NHS. NHS Electronic Drug Tariff. 2020. URL: www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/pharmacies-gp-practices-and-appliance-contractors/drug-tariff (accessed 3 March 2021).
  60. Department of Health and Social Care. Social Care – Charging for Care and Support. London: Department of Health and Social Care; 2017.
  61. Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2019. URL: www.pssru.ac.uk/project-pages/unit-costs/unit-costs-2019/ (accessed September 2021).
  62. Department of Health and Social Care, Social Care – Charging for Care and Support. London: Department of Health and Social Care; 2019.
  63. Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2015. URL: www.pssru.ac.uk/pub/uc/uc2015/full.pdf (accessed 8 October 2021).
  64. Murgia M. NHS to trial artificial intelligence app in place of 111 helpline. Financial Times, 2017.
  65. The Physiotherapy Centre. Prices: How Much? 2020. URL: www.thephysiocentre.co.uk/how_much (accessed 5 March 2020).

RESOURCES