Treatment of Reducible Unstable Fractures of the Distal Radius

J. Neto, J. C. Belloti, J. D. Dos Santos, V. Y. de Moraes, Flávio Galopa, C. Fernandes
{"title":"Treatment of Reducible Unstable Fractures of the Distal Radius","authors":"J. Neto, J. C. Belloti, J. D. Dos Santos, V. Y. de Moraes, Flávio Galopa, C. Fernandes","doi":"10.1177/1558944716660555BS","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: In the treatment of unstable fractures of the distal radius, there is no conclusive evidence about the greater effectiveness of the reduction and fixation methods: bloodless external fixation (BEF) or open locked volar plate (LVP). The goal is to determine which of the two methods is most effective. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. The primary endpoint was the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and measurement of pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]). The final assessment was given at 12 months postoperatively. Results: In the final evaluation, there was no difference between groups in assessments of the DASH questionnaire (3.71 for the LVP group and 2.72 for the BEF group, P = .58), and pain by VAS (0.84 for the LVP group and 0.53 for the BEF group, P = .39). Treatment with LVP was more effective than one with BEF in early evaluation with 8 weeks to DASH questionnaire (21.82 for the LVP group and 39.88 for the BEF group, P = .0012). In the group treated with LVP, there were 11.7% of complications, and in the group treated with external fixator, 26.3%. There were 3 treatment failures in the group treated with LVP and none in the other group. Conclusions: There were no assessed differences between groups in the final evaluations of the DASH questionnaire and the pain by VAS. In the early 8-week assessment, there was a positive difference to the LVP method.","PeriodicalId":76630,"journal":{"name":"The Hand","volume":"11 1","pages":"45S - 45S"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1558944716660555BS","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Hand","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1558944716660555BS","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: In the treatment of unstable fractures of the distal radius, there is no conclusive evidence about the greater effectiveness of the reduction and fixation methods: bloodless external fixation (BEF) or open locked volar plate (LVP). The goal is to determine which of the two methods is most effective. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. The primary endpoint was the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and measurement of pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]). The final assessment was given at 12 months postoperatively. Results: In the final evaluation, there was no difference between groups in assessments of the DASH questionnaire (3.71 for the LVP group and 2.72 for the BEF group, P = .58), and pain by VAS (0.84 for the LVP group and 0.53 for the BEF group, P = .39). Treatment with LVP was more effective than one with BEF in early evaluation with 8 weeks to DASH questionnaire (21.82 for the LVP group and 39.88 for the BEF group, P = .0012). In the group treated with LVP, there were 11.7% of complications, and in the group treated with external fixator, 26.3%. There were 3 treatment failures in the group treated with LVP and none in the other group. Conclusions: There were no assessed differences between groups in the final evaluations of the DASH questionnaire and the pain by VAS. In the early 8-week assessment, there was a positive difference to the LVP method.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
桡骨远端可复位不稳定骨折的治疗
目的:在桡骨远端不稳定骨折的治疗中,无血外固定(BEF)和开放锁定掌侧钢板(LVP)哪一种复位和固定方法更有效尚无确切证据。目标是确定两种方法中哪一种最有效。方法:80例患者入组随机临床试验。主要终点是手臂、肩膀和手的残疾(DASH)问卷和疼痛测量(视觉模拟量表[VAS])。术后12个月进行最终评估。结果:在最终评估中,两组患者DASH问卷评分(LVP组为3.71分,BEF组为2.72分,P = 0.58)和VAS疼痛评分(LVP组为0.84分,BEF组为0.53分,P = 0.39)无差异。在早期8周DASH问卷评估中,LVP治疗的有效性高于BEF治疗(LVP组为21.82,BEF组为39.88,P = 0.0012)。LVP组并发症发生率为11.7%,外固定架组为26.3%。LVP组治疗失败3例,LVP组治疗失败1例。结论:两组患者在DASH问卷最终评分和VAS疼痛评分方面无明显差异。在早期8周的评估中,与LVP方法有正差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Monteggia Fracture Outcomes: Acute to Chronic. Outcomes in Ballistic Injuries to the Hand: Fractures and Nerve/Tendon Damage as Predictors of Poor Outcomes. Predictors of Digital Amputation in Diabetic Patients With Surgically Treated Finger Infections. The Prevalence of Depression and PTSD in Adults With Surgically Managed Traumatic Upper-Extremity Amputations. Postoperative Functional Analysis of Double Crush Versus Single Peripheral Nerve Decompression: A Retrospective Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1