search
Back to results

Intramedullary Nailing Versus External Fixation in Open Tibia Fractures in Tanzania

Primary Purpose

Tibial Fractures, Open Fracture of Tibia, Trauma

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Intramedullary nailing with standard SIGN nail
External Fixation with uniplanar Dispofix external fixator
Sponsored by
University of California, San Francisco
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Tibial Fractures focused on measuring Tibia, Intramedullary nailing, External fixation, Trauma

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Skeletal maturity
  2. AO/OTA 42 open tibia fractures
  3. Wound primarily closeable (no flap or delay in closure due to contamination needed)
  4. Palpable pedal pulses (no vascular injury sustained)
  5. Presentation within 24 hours from injury

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Current injury is a pathologic fracture
  2. Sustained bilateral tibia fracture
  3. Sustained comminuted femur fracture
  4. Sustained severe Traumatic Brain Injury (GCS<12) ***
  5. Sustained severe spinal cord injury (lower extremity paresis/paralysis)
  6. Sustained severe burns (>10% total body surface area (TBSA) or >5% TBSA with full thickness or circumferential injury)
  7. Prior ipsilateral leg injury requiring surgery
  8. Prior or current lower limb deformity or abnormality
  9. Unable to complete follow-up visits

Sites / Locations

    Arms of the Study

    Arm 1

    Arm 2

    Arm Type

    Experimental

    Active Comparator

    Arm Label

    Intramedullary nailing

    External Fixation

    Arm Description

    Patients receive definitive fixation of AO/OTA-42 open tibia diaphyseal fractures via Intramedullary nailing with standard SIGN nail.

    Patients receive definitive fixation of AO/OTA-42 open tibia diaphyseal fractures External Fixation with uniplanar Dispofix external fixator.

    Outcomes

    Primary Outcome Measures

    Rate of composite, all-cause reoperation
    The use of composite outcomes has been validated in a wide range of clinical trials. Primary events included in the composite outcome include: infection or hematoma, bone grafting, implant conversion or exchange >6 weeks after index procedure, implant removal, dynamization of intramedullary nail, osteotomy, amputation.

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    Rate of superficial infection
    As defined by center for disease control (CDC) surveillance definitions, to include pin tract infections and cellulitis which resolves with use of antibiotics and local wound care.
    Rate of deep infection
    As defined by CDC surveillance definitions, to include deep abscess or osteomyelitis.
    Number of participants with clinical nonunion
    Union of fracture healing will be assessed by absence of movement at fracture site and time to painless weight bearing. Non-union will be defined as fracture failure to heal beyond six months from date of injury.
    Number of participants with radiographic nonunion
    Radiographic union will be assessed using rate of callous formation and visibility of fracture line as measured by the Radiographic union score for tibia (RUST) score
    Number of participants with malunion
    Post-operative malalignment will be defined as leg length discrepancy (>1 cm shortening), angular malalignment (> 5 degrees sagittal or coronal angulation referenced contralateral leg radiographs, if non-injured), or malrotation (>10 degrees, determined by Foot-Thigh Angle).
    Number of participants with implant failure
    Implant failure will be defined as breakage or loosening of any implant component at bone-implant interface which necessitates re-operation.
    Health-related quality of life
    Health related quality of life measured by Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EuroQoL-5D, EQ5D) Index. Contains 5 domains: Mobility, Self-Care, Usual activities, Pain/discomfort, Anxiety/depression Each domain contains 3 levels of health state pertaining to that level. Index score is calculated via weighted scores across each domain. Measured from 0 to 1 where 0 is equivalent to death and 1 is equivalent to perfect state of health.
    Visual analogue pain score
    Visual analogue pain score represents a patient's current level of pain scored from 1-10 where 1 = no/minimal pain to 10 = worst possible pain.
    Participant knee range of motion
    Includes: Maximum knee extension/flexion as measured with a goniometer Values are recorded in degrees from neutral/hyperextension to ≥ 30 by intervals of 5 degrees for maximum knee extension Values are recorded in degrees from ≤30 degrees to ≥140 degrees by intervals of 10 degrees for maximum knee flexion
    Participant ankle range of motion
    Includes: Maximum ankle dorsiflexion/plantarflexion as measured with a goniometer Values are recorded in degrees from -15 degrees to >25 degrees by intervals of 5 degrees for maximum ankle dorsiflexion Values are recorded in degrees from <10 degrees to >50 degrees by intervals of 10 degrees for maximum ankle plantarflexion
    Participant ability to perform Squat and Smile test
    The Squat and Smile test (S&S) is a functional assessment of squatting ability used by SIGN Fracture Care International to quickly assess fracture healing. Squat depth is categorized by squat level: unable (1), above knee level (2), at knee level (3) or below knee level (4) -Values are scored from 1 to 4 where 1 is worst and 4 is best. Support component is categorized by: requiring both hands for support with squatting (1), one hand for support with squatting (2), or no hands for support with squatting (3) -Values are scored from 1 to 3 where 1 is worst and 3 is best Smile component is categorized into painful grimace (1), neutral expression (2), and smile (3) where painful grimace is worst and smile is best. -Values are scored from 1 to 3 where 1 is worst and 3 is best Each component is scored and evaluated individually as separate domains. There is no pooling of scores.
    Patient speed in completing walking speed test according to NIH 4 meter walking test
    Measures locomotion Participants walk 4 meters at their usual pace and complete one practice and two timed trials. Raw scores are recorded at the time in seconds required to walk four meters on each of the two trials with the better trial used as the final score.

    Full Information

    First Posted
    February 25, 2019
    Last Updated
    July 26, 2022
    Sponsor
    University of California, San Francisco
    Collaborators
    Wyss Foundation, Inc, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
    search

    1. Study Identification

    Unique Protocol Identification Number
    NCT03861624
    Brief Title
    Intramedullary Nailing Versus External Fixation in Open Tibia Fractures in Tanzania
    Official Title
    Intramedullary Nailing Versus External Fixation in the Treatment of Open Tibia Fractures in Tanzania - Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial
    Study Type
    Interventional

    2. Study Status

    Record Verification Date
    July 2022
    Overall Recruitment Status
    Completed
    Study Start Date
    December 17, 2015 (Actual)
    Primary Completion Date
    March 25, 2017 (Actual)
    Study Completion Date
    March 25, 2017 (Actual)

    3. Sponsor/Collaborators

    Responsible Party, by Official Title
    Sponsor
    Name of the Sponsor
    University of California, San Francisco
    Collaborators
    Wyss Foundation, Inc, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation

    4. Oversight

    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
    No
    Product Manufactured in and Exported from the U.S.
    Yes
    Data Monitoring Committee
    Yes

    5. Study Description

    Brief Summary
    The investigators propose to undertake a randomized, controlled trial which will generate Level 1 evidence concerning optimal fixation methods for the treatment of severe open tibia fractures in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The investigators hope to determine the optimal management of severe open tibial fractures in Sub-Saharan Africa in order to reduce long-term disability, limit the economic impact of injury, and avoid resource costs of reoperation. The investigators plan to compare the all-cause reoperation rate for AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) Type 42 open tibial shaft fractures treated with initial intramedullary nailing versus external fixation at Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to compare rates of secondary clinical endpoints including postoperative superficial and deep infection, clinical union, radiographic union, malunion, and health-related quality of life with minimum one year follow-up, and identify prognostic factors related to the patient, injury, or management protocol that impact the reoperation rate, return to work, and health-related quality of life.
    Detailed Description
    The investigators conducted a prospective randomised controlled trial at a tertiary referral hospital in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania from December 17th, 2015 to March 25th, 2017. All open tibia fractures arriving at the hospital emergency room during the enrollment period were screened for inclusion in the study. Inclusion and exclusion criteria are noted later in this submission.All patients who were eligible after clinical screening were offered enrollment in the study and subsequently completed written informed consent in either English or Swahili depending on the patient's preference. The investigation was approved by ethical review boards at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) and the Tanzanian National Institute for Medical Research (NIMR). All enrolled participants were taken to the operating room for initial irrigation and debridement using a standardized protocol aiming for debridement within 24 hours of hospital admission. Preoperative ceftriaxone was given as soon as possible after presentation to the emergency department. Following debridement, the primary surgeon determined if the wound was amenable to immediate or delayed primary closure. If amenable to primary closure, the patient was randomized by a site research coordinator to one of two treatments (Intramedullary nailing (IMN) or external fixation (EF))using a centralized web-based electronic randomization tool, Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). The study computer analyst developed the REDCap randomization module with input from senior authors. The REDCap randomization module incorporated block randomization to maintain equal patient distribution between each treatment group and to ensure allocation concealment. Data from a pilot study at the site of our investigation informed sample size calculations, which showed reoperation rates of external fixation and intramedullary nailing of 38% versus 3.8%. However, with longer follow-up and more stringent criteria for a primary event, The investigators used a more conservative effect size of 20% compared to 5%. Using a power of 80% and alpha of 0.05, The investigators calculated the study would require 88 patients in each treatment group (176 total). Accounting for 20% loss to follow up, The investigators estimated a total sample size requirement of 240 patients (120 per group). Data monitoring was completed by the adjudication committee at 6 month intervals throughout the study duration and prior to final analysis in December, 2018.

    6. Conditions and Keywords

    Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
    Tibial Fractures, Open Fracture of Tibia, Trauma
    Keywords
    Tibia, Intramedullary nailing, External fixation, Trauma

    7. Study Design

    Primary Purpose
    Treatment
    Study Phase
    Not Applicable
    Interventional Study Model
    Parallel Assignment
    Masking
    None (Open Label)
    Allocation
    Randomized
    Enrollment
    240 (Actual)

    8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

    Arm Title
    Intramedullary nailing
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Patients receive definitive fixation of AO/OTA-42 open tibia diaphyseal fractures via Intramedullary nailing with standard SIGN nail.
    Arm Title
    External Fixation
    Arm Type
    Active Comparator
    Arm Description
    Patients receive definitive fixation of AO/OTA-42 open tibia diaphyseal fractures External Fixation with uniplanar Dispofix external fixator.
    Intervention Type
    Procedure
    Intervention Name(s)
    Intramedullary nailing with standard SIGN nail
    Intervention Description
    Patients meeting eligibility requirements are randomized to either study arm. Patients receive definitive fixation of AO/OTA-42 open tibia diaphyseal fractures using the standard SIGN nail (SIGN Fracture Care International, Richland, WA). The number of interlocking screws is at the discretion of the treating surgeon, who also has the option to use an external fixator for damage control, and later conversion to IMN when clinically appropriate. The experimental group procedure is less common in the study setting, and thus, viewed as the experimental group.
    Intervention Type
    Procedure
    Intervention Name(s)
    External Fixation with uniplanar Dispofix external fixator
    Intervention Description
    Patients meeting eligibility requirements are randomized to either study arm. Patients receive definitive fixation of AO/OTA-42 open tibia diaphyseal fractures using the uniplanar Dispofix external fixator with two Shanz screws placed proximally and two Schanz screws placed distally to fracture site with a single stainless steel bar.The active comparator group procedure is more common in the study setting, and thus, viewed as the comparator group.
    Primary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Rate of composite, all-cause reoperation
    Description
    The use of composite outcomes has been validated in a wide range of clinical trials. Primary events included in the composite outcome include: infection or hematoma, bone grafting, implant conversion or exchange >6 weeks after index procedure, implant removal, dynamization of intramedullary nail, osteotomy, amputation.
    Time Frame
    One year of definitive skeletal stabilization
    Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Rate of superficial infection
    Description
    As defined by center for disease control (CDC) surveillance definitions, to include pin tract infections and cellulitis which resolves with use of antibiotics and local wound care.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at clinical follow-up appointments at 2, 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
    Title
    Rate of deep infection
    Description
    As defined by CDC surveillance definitions, to include deep abscess or osteomyelitis.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at clinical follow-up appointments at 2, 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
    Title
    Number of participants with clinical nonunion
    Description
    Union of fracture healing will be assessed by absence of movement at fracture site and time to painless weight bearing. Non-union will be defined as fracture failure to heal beyond six months from date of injury.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at clinical follow-up appointments at 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
    Title
    Number of participants with radiographic nonunion
    Description
    Radiographic union will be assessed using rate of callous formation and visibility of fracture line as measured by the Radiographic union score for tibia (RUST) score
    Time Frame
    Assessed at clinical follow-up appointments at 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
    Title
    Number of participants with malunion
    Description
    Post-operative malalignment will be defined as leg length discrepancy (>1 cm shortening), angular malalignment (> 5 degrees sagittal or coronal angulation referenced contralateral leg radiographs, if non-injured), or malrotation (>10 degrees, determined by Foot-Thigh Angle).
    Time Frame
    Assessed at clinical follow-up appointments at 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
    Title
    Number of participants with implant failure
    Description
    Implant failure will be defined as breakage or loosening of any implant component at bone-implant interface which necessitates re-operation.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at clinical follow-up appointments at 2, 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks
    Title
    Health-related quality of life
    Description
    Health related quality of life measured by Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EuroQoL-5D, EQ5D) Index. Contains 5 domains: Mobility, Self-Care, Usual activities, Pain/discomfort, Anxiety/depression Each domain contains 3 levels of health state pertaining to that level. Index score is calculated via weighted scores across each domain. Measured from 0 to 1 where 0 is equivalent to death and 1 is equivalent to perfect state of health.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at 2, 6, 12, 26, and 52 week time point.
    Title
    Visual analogue pain score
    Description
    Visual analogue pain score represents a patient's current level of pain scored from 1-10 where 1 = no/minimal pain to 10 = worst possible pain.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at 2, 6, 12, 26, and 52 week time point.
    Title
    Participant knee range of motion
    Description
    Includes: Maximum knee extension/flexion as measured with a goniometer Values are recorded in degrees from neutral/hyperextension to ≥ 30 by intervals of 5 degrees for maximum knee extension Values are recorded in degrees from ≤30 degrees to ≥140 degrees by intervals of 10 degrees for maximum knee flexion
    Time Frame
    Assessed at 6, 12, 26, and 52 week time point.
    Title
    Participant ankle range of motion
    Description
    Includes: Maximum ankle dorsiflexion/plantarflexion as measured with a goniometer Values are recorded in degrees from -15 degrees to >25 degrees by intervals of 5 degrees for maximum ankle dorsiflexion Values are recorded in degrees from <10 degrees to >50 degrees by intervals of 10 degrees for maximum ankle plantarflexion
    Time Frame
    Assessed at 6, 12, 26, and 52 week time point.
    Title
    Participant ability to perform Squat and Smile test
    Description
    The Squat and Smile test (S&S) is a functional assessment of squatting ability used by SIGN Fracture Care International to quickly assess fracture healing. Squat depth is categorized by squat level: unable (1), above knee level (2), at knee level (3) or below knee level (4) -Values are scored from 1 to 4 where 1 is worst and 4 is best. Support component is categorized by: requiring both hands for support with squatting (1), one hand for support with squatting (2), or no hands for support with squatting (3) -Values are scored from 1 to 3 where 1 is worst and 3 is best Smile component is categorized into painful grimace (1), neutral expression (2), and smile (3) where painful grimace is worst and smile is best. -Values are scored from 1 to 3 where 1 is worst and 3 is best Each component is scored and evaluated individually as separate domains. There is no pooling of scores.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at 6, 12, 26, and 52 week time point.
    Title
    Patient speed in completing walking speed test according to NIH 4 meter walking test
    Description
    Measures locomotion Participants walk 4 meters at their usual pace and complete one practice and two timed trials. Raw scores are recorded at the time in seconds required to walk four meters on each of the two trials with the better trial used as the final score.
    Time Frame
    Assessed at 6, 12, 26, and 52 week time point.

    10. Eligibility

    Sex
    All
    Minimum Age & Unit of Time
    18 Years
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers
    No
    Eligibility Criteria
    Inclusion Criteria: Skeletal maturity AO/OTA 42 open tibia fractures Wound primarily closeable (no flap or delay in closure due to contamination needed) Palpable pedal pulses (no vascular injury sustained) Presentation within 24 hours from injury Exclusion Criteria: Current injury is a pathologic fracture Sustained bilateral tibia fracture Sustained comminuted femur fracture Sustained severe Traumatic Brain Injury (GCS<12) *** Sustained severe spinal cord injury (lower extremity paresis/paralysis) Sustained severe burns (>10% total body surface area (TBSA) or >5% TBSA with full thickness or circumferential injury) Prior ipsilateral leg injury requiring surgery Prior or current lower limb deformity or abnormality Unable to complete follow-up visits
    Overall Study Officials:
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    Saam Morshed, MD, MPH
    Organizational Affiliation
    University of California, San Francisco
    Official's Role
    Study Chair
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    David Shearer, MD, MPH
    Organizational Affiliation
    University of California, San Francisco
    Official's Role
    Principal Investigator
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    Billy Haonga, MD
    Organizational Affiliation
    Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute
    Official's Role
    Principal Investigator
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    Edmund Eliezer, MD
    Organizational Affiliation
    Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute
    Official's Role
    Principal Investigator

    12. IPD Sharing Statement

    Plan to Share IPD
    Yes
    IPD Sharing Plan Description
    The data for this study including deidentified participant data and a data dictionary will be made available upon request. The study protocol, statistical analysis plan, and informed consent forms will also be made available upon request. These data and documents will be available with publication. Data and document access can be granted through email correspondence with the corresponding author and will require a signed data access agreement.
    IPD Sharing Time Frame
    Data will be available upon publication. There is no expiration period for data availability.
    IPD Sharing Access Criteria
    Investigators requesting data access will be required to submit a cover letter and email to the primary study contact outlining their reasons for requesting data access and their plan for use of study data. All decisions to allow access will be determined by study principal investigators.
    Citations:
    PubMed Identifier
    20570956
    Citation
    Chandran A, Hyder AA, Peek-Asa C. The global burden of unintentional injuries and an agenda for progress. Epidemiol Rev. 2010;32(1):110-20. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxq009. Epub 2010 Jun 22.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    19748397
    Citation
    Patton GC, Coffey C, Sawyer SM, Viner RM, Haller DM, Bose K, Vos T, Ferguson J, Mathers CD. Global patterns of mortality in young people: a systematic analysis of population health data. Lancet. 2009 Sep 12;374(9693):881-92. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60741-8.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    18679760
    Citation
    Mock C, Cherian MN. The global burden of musculoskeletal injuries: challenges and solutions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 Oct;466(10):2306-16. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0416-z. Epub 2008 Aug 5.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    15292432
    Citation
    Beveridge M, Howard A. The burden of orthopaedic disease in developing countries. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Aug;86(8):1819-22. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200408000-00029.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    14679827
    Citation
    WHO Scientific Group on the Burden of Musculoskeletal Conditions at the Start of the New Millennium. The burden of musculoskeletal conditions at the start of the new millennium. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2003;919:i-x, 1-218, back cover.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    11575908
    Citation
    Dormans JP, Fisher RC, Pill SG. Orthopaedics in the developing world: present and future concerns. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2001 Sep-Oct;9(5):289-96. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200109000-00002.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    12466862
    Citation
    Museru LM, Mcharo CN. The dilemma of fracture treatment in developing countries. Int Orthop. 2002;26(6):324-7. doi: 10.1007/s00264-002-0408-7. Epub 2002 Oct 17. No abstract available.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    18685912
    Citation
    Zirkle LG Jr. Injuries in developing countries--how can we help? The role of orthopaedic surgeons. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 Oct;466(10):2443-50. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0387-0. Epub 2008 Aug 7.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    14714143
    Citation
    Shah RK, Moehring HD, Singh RP, Dhakal A. Surgical Implant Generation Network (SIGN) intramedullary nailing of open fractures of the tibia. Int Orthop. 2004 Jun;28(3):163-6. doi: 10.1007/s00264-003-0535-9. Epub 2004 Jan 9.
    Results Reference
    background
    Citation
    Shearer D, Cunningham, B., Zirkle, L. Population Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes from the SIGN Online Surgical Database. Techniques in Orthopaedics. 2009;24(4):273-276.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    20148329
    Citation
    Ikpeme I, Ngim N, Udosen A, Onuba O, Enembe O, Bello S. External jig-aided intramedullary interlocking nailing of diaphyseal fractures: experience from a tropical developing centre. Int Orthop. 2011 Jan;35(1):107-11. doi: 10.1007/s00264-009-0949-0. Epub 2010 Feb 11.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    19813011
    Citation
    Ogunlusi JD, St Rose RS, Davids T. Interlocking nailing without imaging: the challenges of locating distal slots and how to overcome them in SIGN intramedullary nailing. Int Orthop. 2010 Aug;34(6):891-5. doi: 10.1007/s00264-009-0882-2. Epub 2009 Oct 8.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    20364733
    Citation
    Naeem-Ur-Razaq M, Qasim M, Khan MA, Sahibzada AS, Sultan S. Management outcome of closed femoral shaft fractures by open Surgical Implant Generation Network (SIGN) interlocking nails. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2009 Jan-Mar;21(1):21-4.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    17039384
    Citation
    Ikem IC, Ogunlusi JD, Ine HR. Achieving interlocking nails without using an image intensifier. Int Orthop. 2007 Aug;31(4):487-90. doi: 10.1007/s00264-006-0219-3. Epub 2006 Oct 13.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    22005867
    Citation
    Sekimpi P, Okike K, Zirkle L, Jawa A. Femoral fracture fixation in developing countries: an evaluation of the Surgical Implant Generation Network (SIGN) intramedullary nail. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Oct 5;93(19):1811-8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01322.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    20182243
    Citation
    Kooistra BW, Dijkman BG, Busse JW, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH, Bhandari M. The radiographic union scale in tibial fractures: reliability and validity. J Orthop Trauma. 2010 Mar;24 Suppl 1:S81-6. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181ca3fd1.
    Results Reference
    background

    Learn more about this trial

    Intramedullary Nailing Versus External Fixation in Open Tibia Fractures in Tanzania

    We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs