The theoretical impact on corrective upper limb elective services following analysis of distal radius fractures managed nonoperatively during COVID-19 pandemic.
BOA BOAST COVID-19 guidelines
COVID-19
Distal radius fracture
Exit strategy
Nonoperative management
Reinstating elective orthopaedics services
Upper limb elective services
Journal
Bone & joint open
ISSN: 2633-1462
Titre abrégé: Bone Jt Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101770336
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2020
Oct 2020
Historique:
entrez:
20
11
2020
pubmed:
21
11
2020
medline:
21
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To assess the proportion of patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs) who were managed nonoperatively during the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with the British Orthopaedic Association BOAST COVID-19 guidelines, who would have otherwise been considered for an operative intervention. We retrospectively reviewed the radiographs and clinical notes of all patients with DRFs managed nonoperatively, following the publication of the BOAST COVID-19 guidelines on the management of urgent trauma between 26 March and 18 May 2020. Radiological parameters including radial height, radial inclination, intra-articular step-off, and volar tilt from post-reduction or post-application of cast radiographs were measured. The assumption was that if one radiological parameter exceeds the acceptable criteria, the patient would have been considered for an operative intervention in pre-COVID times. Overall, 92 patients formed the cohort of this study with a mean age of 66 years (21 to 96); 84% (n = 77) were female and 16% (n = 15) were male. In total, 54% (n = 50) of patients met at least one radiological indication for operative intervention with a mean age of 68 years (21 to 96). Of these, 42% (n = 21) were aged < 65 years and 58% (29) were aged ≥ 65 years. More than half of all DRFs managed nonoperatively during the COVID-19 pandemic had at least one radiological indication to be considered for operative management pre-COVID. We anticipate a proportion of these cases will require corrective surgery in the future, which increases the load on corrective upper limb elective services. This should be accounted for when planning an exit strategy and the restart of elective surgery services.Cite this article:
Identifiants
pubmed: 33215091
doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.110.BJO-2020-0126.R1
pii: BJO-1-612
pmc: PMC7659694
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
612-616Informations de copyright
© 2020 Author(s) et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
ICMJE COI statement: No conflict of interest to declare. No funding was received for this work.
Références
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Feb;93(2):145-50
pubmed: 21282750
J Hand Surg Am. 2004 Nov;29(6):1121-7
pubmed: 15576226
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986 Jun;68(5):647-59
pubmed: 3722221
J Hand Surg Br. 2003 Feb;28(1):50-3
pubmed: 12531669
Hand (N Y). 2018 Mar;13(2):194-201
pubmed: 28718308
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2020 Aug;30(6):1009-1015
pubmed: 32219543
J Hand Surg Br. 1988 Aug;13(3):291-3
pubmed: 3171296
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 8;14(1):e0210462
pubmed: 30620763
Hand Clin. 2005 Aug;21(3):279-88
pubmed: 16039439
Disabil Rehabil. 2020 May 1;:1-12
pubmed: 32356451
J Clin Epidemiol. 1999 Mar;52(3):243-9
pubmed: 10210242
J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2019 Jun;44(5):450-455
pubmed: 30991865
Hand Clin. 2010 Nov;26(4):549-57
pubmed: 20951904
Osteoporos Int. 2001;12(7):555-8
pubmed: 11527052
J Hand Surg Am. 1994 Mar;19(2):325-40
pubmed: 8201203
J Orthop Sci. 2014 Mar;19(2):292-297
pubmed: 24338051