...
首页> 外文期刊>Electronic Physician >Comparing the effect of volar plate fixators and external fixators on outcome of patients with intra-articular distal radius fractures: A clinical trial
【24h】

Comparing the effect of volar plate fixators and external fixators on outcome of patients with intra-articular distal radius fractures: A clinical trial

机译:掌侧钢板固定器和外固定器对关节内distal骨远端骨折患者预后的比较:一项临床试验

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are much more prone to malunion than unstable extra-articular fractures. There is no clear consensus concerning what the proper treatment should be, and the best approach to use for displaced DRFs remains challenging. Objective: To compare the effect of two different therapeutic surgical methods, i.e., volar plate fixators and external fixators, on outcomes of patients with intra-articular distal radius fractures. Methods: From May 2010 to November 2014, 76 subjects who had experienced intra-articular fractures of the distal radius were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized, controlled trial in Imam Ali Hospital in Bojnourd, Iran. The patients were divided into two groups, i.e., 1) patients who were treated with internal fixation using the volar plate (group A) and 2) patients who were treated with external fixators (group B). The primary outcome was a composite measure of the patient’s quality of life using three different scores, i.e., 1) the MAYO score, 2) Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH (score, and 3) the Short Form (36) (SF-36) Health Survey score. Results: A total of 76 patients were allocated randomly to groups A and B. The mean ages for external fixator cases and volar plate cases were 51.7 and 46.3, respectively. No significant age distribution was seen between the two groups (p=0.348). Gender distribution between the two groups was not significantly different (p=0.022). Grip power was significantly different between the two groups, but no significant differences were detected in range of motion (p=0.008, p=0.367, respectively). The MAYO score was significantly higher in the open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) group, and, according to the SF-36 test, the ORIF group also a higher level of general mental and physical health, social functioning, and personal physical functioning than the other group. However, postoperatively, the mental discomfort and physical discomfort were more prevalent in the external fixator group. The DASH score was not significantly different between the two groups (p=0.124). Conclusions: ORIF and its subtitle, volar plate fixation, is a more preferred surgical procedure than the external fixator for the treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures. This conclusion is important when one considers cost-effectiveness and an earlier return to work. Trial registration: The trial is registered at the Thai Clinical Trial Registry (clinicaltrials.in.th) with the TCR identification number TCTR20150609002 Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
机译:背景:远侧radius骨骨折(DRF)比不稳定的关节外骨折更容易畸形。关于应采取何种适当的治疗方法尚无明确的共识,而采用替代DRF的最佳方法仍具有挑战性。目的:比较两种不同的治疗性手术方法,即掌侧钢板固定器和外固定器,对关节内distal骨远端骨折患者的疗效。方法:从2010年5月至2014年11月,在伊朗博伊努德的伊玛目阿里医院对76名经历了radius骨远端关节内骨折的受试者进行了这项双盲,随机,对照试验。将患者分为两组,即1)使用掌侧钢板进行内固定治疗的患者(A组)和2)使用外固定架进行治疗的患者(B组)。主要结果是使用三个不同的分数对患者的生活质量进行综合测量,即1)MAYO分数,2)手臂,肩膀和手部残疾(DASH(得分,而3)简写形式(36) )(SF-36)健康调查得分。结果:总共将76例患者随机分为A组和B组,外固定架病例和掌侧钢板病例的平均年龄分别为51.7和46.3,未见明显的年龄分布两组之间的差异(p = 0.348)。两组之间的性别分布无显着差异(p = 0.022);两组之间的握力有显着差异,但运动范围没有发现显着差异(p = 0.008)。 ,分别为p = 0.367)。在开放复位和内固定(ORIF)组中,MAYO得分显着更高;根据SF-36测试,ORIF组的总体心理和身体健康水平也较高,社会功能和个人身体功能i ng比另一组人高。但是,术后,外固定架组的精神不适和身体不适更为普遍。两组之间的DASH评分无显着差异(p = 0.124)。结论:ORIF及其副标题为掌侧钢板固定术是治疗关节内distal骨远端骨折比外固定架更可取的手术方法。当考虑成本效益和早日恢复工作时,这一结论很重要。试验注册:该试验在泰国临床试验注册中心(clinicaltrials.in.th)进行了注册,其TCR识别码为TCTR20150609002。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号