Introducing and Prospective Efficacy Comparison of an Innovative and Affordable Technique for the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures.
Distal radius fractures
External fixator
Pins and plaster
Journal
Journal of orthopaedics
ISSN: 0972-978X
Titre abrégé: J Orthop
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101233220
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
12
01
2019
accepted:
26
05
2019
entrez:
12
11
2019
pubmed:
12
11
2019
medline:
12
11
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There are different treatments as well as controversies surrounding the adequate treatment for Distal Radius Fractures (DRF). In the absence of enough evidence[HYPHEN]base data regarding clinical effectiveness of available treatments, cost should be considered as an essential factor in selecting the surgical technique for DRF treatment. The goal of this study is introducing an improved and modified pin[HYPHEN]and[HYPHEN]plaster (MP&P) technique as an affordable alternative for treatment of DRF. This study also assesses and compares the outcomes of DRF treatment by using the introduced method versus external fixation (EF) technique. In this clinical cohort study, 98 patients presenting with closed DRF Types III or IV, randomly were classified into two modified P&P (50 patients) and EF (48 patients) groups and assessed for functional, clinical, radiographic and overall outcome at the time, 2, 10 and 22 months after surgery. They were also followed[HYPHEN]up for up to 3 years to determine the rate of complications. Eighty one percent of EF and 86% of MP&P group were female. The average ages in the EF and MP&P groups were 44.9 ± 12.4 and 46.1 ± 5.4, respectively. Around 70% of the patients in each group had a Type III fracture, and 30% had Type IV. The rate of complications was higher among EF group patients (seven major and seven minor complications) compared to the MP&P (only 4 minor complications), however the difference between two groups regarding the complications and treatment outcome were insignificant, except in extension ROM and the quick[HYPHEN]dash score (only in two and four months follow up visits) and also returning to work (only in two month follow up visit). This study introduces a modified P&P technique that protects the transverse palmar curvature, prevents the collapse of the distal radius, and simplifies casting, thereby obviating a full arm cast and mitigating elbow stiffness in patient outcomes. This modified technique could be considered as a more cost[HYPHEN]conscious alternative to external fixation for patients with distal radius fractures.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There are different treatments as well as controversies surrounding the adequate treatment for Distal Radius Fractures (DRF). In the absence of enough evidence[HYPHEN]base data regarding clinical effectiveness of available treatments, cost should be considered as an essential factor in selecting the surgical technique for DRF treatment. The goal of this study is introducing an improved and modified pin[HYPHEN]and[HYPHEN]plaster (MP&P) technique as an affordable alternative for treatment of DRF. This study also assesses and compares the outcomes of DRF treatment by using the introduced method versus external fixation (EF) technique.
METHODS
METHODS
In this clinical cohort study, 98 patients presenting with closed DRF Types III or IV, randomly were classified into two modified P&P (50 patients) and EF (48 patients) groups and assessed for functional, clinical, radiographic and overall outcome at the time, 2, 10 and 22 months after surgery. They were also followed[HYPHEN]up for up to 3 years to determine the rate of complications.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Eighty one percent of EF and 86% of MP&P group were female. The average ages in the EF and MP&P groups were 44.9 ± 12.4 and 46.1 ± 5.4, respectively. Around 70% of the patients in each group had a Type III fracture, and 30% had Type IV. The rate of complications was higher among EF group patients (seven major and seven minor complications) compared to the MP&P (only 4 minor complications), however the difference between two groups regarding the complications and treatment outcome were insignificant, except in extension ROM and the quick[HYPHEN]dash score (only in two and four months follow up visits) and also returning to work (only in two month follow up visit).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study introduces a modified P&P technique that protects the transverse palmar curvature, prevents the collapse of the distal radius, and simplifies casting, thereby obviating a full arm cast and mitigating elbow stiffness in patient outcomes. This modified technique could be considered as a more cost[HYPHEN]conscious alternative to external fixation for patients with distal radius fractures.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31708608
doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2019.05.007
pii: S0972-978X(19)30018-2
pmc: PMC6831844
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
596-602Informations de copyright
© 2019 Professor P K Surendran Memorial Education Foundation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Références
Injury. 2009 Dec;40(12):1279-81
pubmed: 19524910
J Hand Surg Am. 2006 Jan;31(1):9-16
pubmed: 16443097
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2014 Apr;27(4):341-5
pubmed: 25029846
Chin J Traumatol. 2014;17(4):214-9
pubmed: 25098848
J Trauma. 2011 Oct;71(4):939-42; discussion 942-3
pubmed: 21986738
J Hand Surg Am. 1986 Mar;11(2):157-65
pubmed: 3958443
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001 Apr;83(4):509-19
pubmed: 11315779
Osteoporos Int. 2002 Jul;13(7):565-71
pubmed: 12111017
Injury. 2007 Nov;38(11):1259-67
pubmed: 17631882
Z Orthop Unfall. 2015 Feb;153(1):25-8
pubmed: 25723576
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996 May;78(3):404-9
pubmed: 8636175
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD003209
pubmed: 12917953
Injury. 2006 Mar;37(3):252-8
pubmed: 16324702
Scand J Surg. 2004;93(1):64-7
pubmed: 15116824
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014 Aug;134(8):1179-88
pubmed: 24935661
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Apr;85(4):660-6
pubmed: 12672842
Hand Clin. 2012 May;28(2):113-25
pubmed: 22554654
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010 Mar;18(3):180-9
pubmed: 20190108
J Hand Ther. 2003 Jan-Mar;16(1):64; author reply 64
pubmed: 12611448
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Oct;90(10):1271-5
pubmed: 18827233
Injury. 2014 Oct;45(10):1579-84
pubmed: 25042062
Injury. 2000 May;31(4):229-32
pubmed: 10719100
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998 Mar;80(2):243-8
pubmed: 9546453
Qual Life Res. 2013 Nov;22(9):2509-47
pubmed: 23479209
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23;(1):CD006522
pubmed: 18254105
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Jan;44(1):30-9
pubmed: 24175606
Arch Intern Med. 1989 Nov;149(11):2445-8
pubmed: 2818106
Unfallchirurg. 2014 Nov;117(11):1037-44
pubmed: 25398511
Hand Clin. 2012 May;28(2):135-44
pubmed: 22554656
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014 Sep;22(9):566-75
pubmed: 25157038
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Sep;90(9):1855-61
pubmed: 18762644
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002 Jan;50(1):97-103
pubmed: 12028253
Bone Joint J. 2015 Aug;97-B(8):1082-9
pubmed: 26224825
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 08;(3):CD003209
pubmed: 19588339
Hand (N Y). 2008 Sep;3(3):245-50
pubmed: 18780104
Scand J Surg. 2008;97(4):290-6; discussion 296-7
pubmed: 19211382
Hand (N Y). 2008 Jun;3(2):111-7
pubmed: 18780086
J Hand Surg Br. 1995 Jun;20(3):365-72
pubmed: 7561414
J Hand Surg Am. 2011 Aug;36(8):1282-7
pubmed: 21705154
Hand Clin. 2012 May;28(2):245-8
pubmed: 22554668
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19;(3):CD003324
pubmed: 16856004
J Hand Surg Am. 2012 Nov;37(11):2368-73
pubmed: 23101534