Diagnostic accuracy of an artificial intelligence algorithm versus radiologists for fracture detection on cervical spine CT.

OBJECTIVES: To compare diagnostic accuracy of a deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) for cervical spine (C-spine) fracture detection on CT to attending radiologists and assess which undetected fractures were injuries in need of stabilising therapy (IST). METHODS: This single-centre, retrospective diagnostic accuracy study included consecutive patients (age ≥18 years; 2007-2014) screened for C-spine fractures with CT. To validate ground truth, one radiologist and three neurosurgeons independently examined scans positive for fracture. Negative scans were followed up until 2022 through patient files and two radiologists reviewed negative scans that were flagged positive by AI. The neurosurgeons determined which fractures were ISTs. Diagnostic accuracy of AI and attending radiologists (index tests) were compared using McNemar. RESULTS: Of the 2368 scans (median age, 48, interquartile range 30-65; 1441 men) analysed, 221 (9.3%) scans contained C-spine fractures with 133 IST. AI detected 158/221 scans with fractures (sensitivity 71.5%, 95% CI 65.5-77.4%) and 2118/2147 scans without fractures (specificity 98.6%, 95% CI 98.2-99.1). In comparison, attending radiologists detected 195/221 scans with fractures (sensitivity 88.2%, 95% CI 84.0-92.5%, p < 0.001) and 2130/2147 scans without fracture (specificity 99.2%, 95% CI 98.8-99.6, p = 0.07). Of the fractures undetected by AI 30/63 were ISTs versus 4/26 for radiologists. AI detected 22/26 fractures undetected by the radiologists, including 3/4 undetected ISTs. CONCLUSION: Compared to attending radiologists, the artificial intelligence has a lower sensitivity and a higher miss rate of fractures in need of stabilising therapy; however, it detected most fractures undetected by the radiologists, including fractures in need of stabilising therapy. Clinical relevance statement The artificial intelligence algorithm missed more cervical spine fractures on CT than attending radiologists, but detected 84.6% of fractures undetected by radiologists, including fractures in need of stabilising therapy. KEY POINTS: The impact of artificial intelligence for cervical spine fracture detection on CT on fracture management is unknown. The algorithm detected less fractures than attending radiologists, but detected most fractures undetected by the radiologists including almost all in need of stabilising therapy. The artificial intelligence algorithm shows potential as a concurrent reader.

The Kappa Paradox Explained.

Observer reliability studies for fracture classification systems evaluate agreement using Cohen's κ and absolute agreement as outcome measures. Cohen's κ is a chance-corrected measure of agreement and can range between 0 (no agreement) and 1 (perfect agreement). Absolute agreement is the percentage of times observers agree on the matter they have to rate. Some studies report a high-absolute agreement but a relatively low κ value, which is counterintuitive. This phenomenon is referred to as the Kappa Paradox. The objective of this article was to explain the statistical phenomenon of the Kappa Paradox and to help readers and researchers to recognize and prevent this phenomenon.

Arthroscopic Synovectomy of the Wrist in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) of the wrist can lead to loss of wrist function and progressive joint destruction if inadequately treated. Arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist may prove a valuable treatment for local inflammation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review evaluating functional outcomes and pain following arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist in RA patients. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis) guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for studies describing pain or functional outcomes following arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist in RA patients (CRD42021270846). Risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. Data collection included patient characteristics, pain scores, wrist function questionnaires, secondary surgery, and complications. RESULTS: Six noncomparative cohort studies were included, with a total of 153 arthroscopic synovectomies. Disease duration of RA ranged from 32 to 89 months, and radiographic progression was mild to moderate. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies scores ranged from 8 to 10 out of 16. Mean follow-up ranged from 21 to 95 months. Improvements were seen in pooled mean visual analog scale pain score (from 7.7 to 2.2, p < 0.05), pooled mean Modified Mayo Wrist Score (from 43.3 to 70.4, p < 0.05), and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (from 67.5 to 36.5, p < 0.05). Two complications occurred, and 5 patients required secondary surgery. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence suggesting that arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist improves wrist function and pain in patients with RA, with few complications. In centers with arthroscopic expertise, it can be considered as a treatment option.

The CAST study protocol: a cluster randomized trial assessing the effect of circumferential casting versus plaster splinting on fracture redisplacement in reduced distal radius fractures in adults.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus concerning the optimal casting technique for displaced distal radius fractures (DRFs) following closed reduction. This study evaluates whether a splint or a circumferential cast is most optimal to prevent fracture redisplacement in adult patients with a reduced DRF. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of both cast types will be calculated. METHODS/DESIGN: This multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial will compare initial immobilization with a circumferential below-elbow cast versus a below-elbow plaster splint in reduced DRFs. Randomization will take place on hospital-level (cluster, n = 10) with a cross-over point halfway the inclusion of the needed number of patients per hospital. Inclusion criteria comprise adult patients (≥ 18 years) with a primary displaced DRF which is treated conservatively after closed reduction. Multiple trauma patients (Injury Severity Score ≥ 16), concomitant ulnar fractures (except styloid process fractures) and patients with concomitant injury on the ipsilateral arm or inability to complete study forms will be excluded. Primary study outcome is fracture redisplacement of the initial reduced DRF. Secondary outcomes are patient-reported outcomes assessed with the Disability Arm Shoulder Hand score (DASH) and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score (PRWE), comfort of the cast, quality of life assessed with the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, analgesics use, cost-effectiveness and (serious) adverse events occurence. In total, 560 patients will be included and followed for 1 year. The estimated time required for inclusion will be 18 months. DISCUSSION: The CAST study will provide evidence whether the type of cast immobilization is of influence on fracture redisplacement in distal radius fractures. Extensive follow-up during one year concerning radiographic, functional and patient reported outcomes will give a broad view on DRF recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in the Dutch Trial Registry on January 14th 2020. Registration number: NL8311 .

Wound infection following implant removal of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella; a protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial investigating the (cost-)effectiveness of 2 g of prophylactic cefazolin compared to placebo (WIFI-2 trial).

BACKGROUND: Elective implant removal (IR) after fracture fixation is one of the most common procedures within (orthopedic) trauma surgery. The rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) in this procedure is quite high, especially below the level of the knee. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not routinely prescribed, even though it has proved to lower SSI rates in other (orthopedic) trauma surgical procedures. The primary objective is to study the effectiveness of a single intravenous dose of 2 g of cefazolin on SSIs after IR following fixation of foot, ankle and/or lower leg fractures. METHODS: This is a multicenter, double-blind placebo controlled trial with a superiority design, including adult patients undergoing elective implant removal after fixation of a fracture of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Exclusion criteria are: an active infection, current antibiotic treatment, or a medical condition contraindicating prophylaxis with cefazolin including allergy. Patients are randomized to receive a single preoperative intravenous dose of either 2 g of cefazolin or a placebo (NaCl). The primary analysis will be an intention-to-treat comparison of the proportion of patients with a SSI at 90 days after IR in both groups. DISCUSSION: If 2 g of prophylactic cefazolin proves to be both effective and cost-effective in preventing SSI, this would have implications for current guidelines. Combined with the high infection rate of IR which previous studies have shown, it would be sufficiently substantiated for guidelines to suggest protocolled use of prophylactic antibiotics in IR of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register (NTR): NL8284, registered on 9th of January 2020, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8284.

Factors associated with revision surgery for olecranon bursitis after bursectomy.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of our study was to identify the factors associated with revision surgery after bursal excision in patients with olecranon bursitis. The secondary aims were to describe the revision rate after bursectomy and to assess which factors are associated with flap surgery after bursectomy and describe the most common complications after bursectomy of the olecranon bursa. METHODS: We included 191 adult patients with olecranon bursitis who underwent olecranon bursa excision between January 2002 and October 2018. Patients who were pregnant, patients with incomplete records of the primary surgical procedure, and patients who underwent bursectomy during elbow arthroplasty were excluded. After manual chart review, we found that 22 patients had undergone revision surgery. Bivariate analysis was performed to assess the association between revision surgery and patient characteristics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics. Additionally, we collected data regarding postoperative complications and intraoperative variables such as the use of drains, vacuum assisted closure therapy, and flap surgery. RESULTS: The overall revision rate in our cohort was 11.5% (22 of 191 patients). Bivariate analysis showed that patients who underwent revision surgery were more frequently women (P = .004), more often had a history of ipsilateral (P = .020) or contralateral (P = .012) olecranon bursitis, and more often received a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (P = .001) or diabetes mellitus (P = .019). The most common complications were delayed wound healing (n = 8, 4.2%) and osteomyelitis (n = 8, 4.2%). Flap surgery was performed in 5 patients (2.6%). Bivariate analysis showed that patients with rheumatoid arthritis underwent flap surgery more frequently (P = .011). CONCLUSION: The revision rate after bursectomy for olecranon bursitis was 11.5% (22 of 191 patients). Patients with rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes mellitus, or a history of ipsilateral and contralateral olecranon bursitis and female patients underwent revision surgery after bursectomy for olecranon bursitis more frequently. In addition, patients with rheumatoid arthritis underwent flap surgery after bursectomy more frequently.

Operative vs. nonoperative treatment for Mason type 2 radial head fractures: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment of isolated displaced partial articular radial head fractures remains controversial. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the functional outcome of operative treatment with nonoperative treatment in adults with an isolated Mason type 2 radial head fractures. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients from 18 years of age with an isolated partial articular fracture of the radial head were randomly assigned to operative treatment by means of open reduction and screw fixation or nonoperative treatment with a pressure bandage. The primary outcome was function assessed with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Questionnaires and clinical follow-up was conducted at admission and at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 45 patients were randomized, 23 patients to open reduction and screw fixation and 22 patients to nonoperative treatment with a pressure bandage. At 3, 6, and 12 months, patients treated operatively had similar functional outcomes compared to patients treated nonoperatively (DASH score at 12 months: 0.0 [0.0-4.2] vs. 1.7 [0.0-8.5]; P = .076). CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperatively treated adults with an isolated Mason type 2 radial head fracture have similar functional results after 1 year compared with operatively treated patients. In addition, complication rates were low for both operative and nonoperative treatment.

Early mobilization versus plaster immobilization of simple elbow dislocations: a cost analysis of the FuncSiE multicenter randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. It was hypothesized that early mobilization would not lead to higher direct and indirect costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used data of a multicenter randomized clinical trial (FuncSiE trial). From August 25, 2009 until September 18, 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were recruited and randomized to early mobilization (immediate motion exercises; n = 48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilization (n = 52). Patients completed questionnaires on health-related quality of life [EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form-36 (SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS)], health care use, and work absence. Follow-up was 1 year. Primary outcome were the total costs at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in EQ-5D, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS between the two groups. Mean total costs per patient were €3624 in the early mobilization group versus €7072 in the plaster group (p = 0.094). Shorter work absenteeism in the early mobilization group (10 versus 18 days; p = 0.027) did not lead to significantly lower costs for loss of productivity (€1719 in the early mobilization group versus €4589; p = 0.120). CONCLUSION: From a clinical and a socio-economic point of view, early mobilization should be the treatment of choice for a simple elbow dislocation. Plaster immobilization has inferior results at almost double the cost.

The volume-outcome relationship for hip fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 2,023,469 patients.

Background and purpose - It has been hypothesized that hospitals and surgeons with high caseloads of hip fracture patients have better outcomes, but empirical studies have reported contradictory results. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the volume-outcome relationship among patients with hip fracture patients. Methods - A search of different databases was performed up to February 2018. Selection of relevant studies, data extraction, and critical appraisal of the methodological quality was performed by 2 independent reviewers. A random-effects meta-analysis using studies with comparative cut-offs was performed to estimate the effect of hospital and surgeon volume on outcome, defined as in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications. Results - 24 studies comprising 2,023,469 patients were included. Overall, the quality was reasonable. 11 studies reported better health outcomes in high-volume centers and 2 studies reported better health outcomes in low-volume centers. In the meta-analysis of 11 studies there was a statistically non-significant association between higher hospital volume and both lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-1.04) and fewer postoperative complications (aOR 0.87, CI 0.75-1.02). Four studies on surgeon volume were included in the meta-analysis and showed a minor association between higher surgeon volume and in-hospital mortality (aOR 0.92, CI 0.76-1.12). Interpretation - This systematic review and meta-analysis did not find an evident effect of hospital or surgeon volume on health outcomes. Future research without volume cut-offs is needed to examine whether a true volume-outcome relationship exists.

Implementation of the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules.

BACKGROUND: The Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules have been developed and validated to reduce wrist radiographs following wrist trauma in pediatric patients. However, the actual impact should be evaluated in an implementation study. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of implementation of the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules at the emergency department. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A before-and-after comparative prospective cohort study was conducted, including all consecutive patients aged 3 to 18 years presenting at the emergency department with acute wrist trauma. The primary outcome was the difference in the number of wrist radiographs before and after implementation. Secondary outcomes were the number of clinically relevant missed fractures of the distal forearm, the difference in length of stay at the emergency department and physician compliance with the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules. RESULTS: A total of 408 patients were included. The absolute reduction in radiographs was 19% compared to before implementation (chi-square test, P<0.001). Non-fracture patients who were discharged without a wrist radiograph had a 26-min shorter stay at the emergency department compared to patients who received a wrist radiograph (68 min vs. 94 min; Mann-Whitney U test, P=0.004). Eight fractures were missed following the recommendation of the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules. However, only four of them were clinically relevant. CONCLUSION: Implementing the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules resulted in a significant reduction in wrist radiographs and time spent at the emergency department. The Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules were able to correctly identify 98% of all clinically relevant distal forearm fractures.

Association Between Radiological and Patient-Reported Outcome in Adults With a Displaced Distal Radius Fracture: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association between alignment, as determined by plain radiographs, and patient-reported outcome in adults with a displaced distal radius fracture. We also determined which specific radiological parameters are associated with patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search to identify studies that evaluated the association between radiological and patient-reported outcome in adults with a displaced distal radius fracture and who had an average follow-up of at least 12 months. Radiological outcome was determined as acceptable or unacceptable reduction, defined by radiological parameters. Patient-reported outcome was assessed with the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, the Quick-Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, and the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation questionnaires. RESULTS: Sixteen articles were included, comprising 1,961 patients with a distal radius fracture. A significant mean difference of 4.15 points in patient-reported outcomes (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-8.04) was found in favor of an acceptable radiological reduction. Moreover, a significant mean difference of 5.38 points in patient-reported outcomes (95% CI, 1.69-9.07) was found in favor of an acceptable dorsal angulation, and 6.72 points (95% CI, 2.16-11.29) in favor of an acceptable ulnar variance. CONCLUSIONS: An unacceptable radiological reduction is significantly associated with worse patient-reported outcomes in adults with a displaced distal radius fracture. Dorsal angulation and ulnar variance are the most important radiological parameters. Despite the statistical significance, the mean difference of each association did not meet the threshold of the minimally clinically important difference and therefore were unlikely to be clinically important. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic IV.

Radiographic Anatomy of the Pediatric Lisfranc Joint.

BACKGROUND: Injuries to the Lisfranc joint in children and adolescents are rare. The incomplete ossification of the bones of the foot makes it difficult to detect injuries.The aim of this study was to determine age-specific radiographic measurements of the Lisfranc joint to provide guidance to the radiologist, emergency physicians, and surgeons to decrease misdiagnosis of Lisfranc injuries and improve detection. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all foot radiographs without traumatic injury made between August 2014 and February 2015 in all patients younger than 18. The attendance list of the Emergency Department and Outpatient Clinic of a level-1 trauma center were used. Using a non-weight-bearing anteroposterior-view of the foot the distance between the base of metatarsal 1 and metatarsal 2 (MT1-MT2) and the distance between the medial cuneiform (MC) and the base of metatarsal 2 (MC-MT2) were measured. Median normal values were calculated per age. RESULTS: A total of 352 patients between the age of 0 and 18 years were screened for eligibility. Excluded were 109 patients because of anatomic abnormality, a fracture, inadequate radiograph, pain at the base of the first metatarsal, second metatarsal or MC, persisting pain at the Outpatient Clinic checkup or no follow-up. Included in the analysis were 243 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The distance between the base of MT1-MT2 was constant below 3 mm. Measurements for both MT1-MT2 and MC-MT2 distance approached adult values at the age of 6. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Correction to: Functional outcome following a locked fracture-dislocation of the calcaneus.

The published online version contains a mistake in the author list for the name of the author "J. Carel Goslings" was incorrectly presented in the HTML version.

FDG-PET/CT for differentiating between aseptic and septic delayed union in the lower extremity.

BACKGROUND: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) has proven to have a high diagnostic accuracy for the detection of bone infections. In patients with delayed union it may be clinically important to differentiate between aseptic and septic delayed union. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and to assess the optimal diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET/CT in differentiating between aseptic and septic delayed union in the lower extremity. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent FDG-PET/CT scanning for suspicion of septic delayed union of the lower extremity. Diagnosis of aseptic delayed union or septic delayed union was made based on surgical deep cultures following PET/CT scanning and information on clinical follow-up. FDG-uptake values were measured at the fractured site by use of the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax). Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET/CT were calculated at various SUVmax cut-off points. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were included; 13 patients with aseptic delayed unions and 17 patients with septic delayed unions. Mean SUVmax in aseptic delayed union patients was 3.23 (SD ± 1.21). Mean SUVmax in septic delayed union patients was 4.77 (SD ± 1.87). A cut-off SUVmax set at 4.0 showed sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET/CT were 65, 77 and 70% to differentiate between aseptic and septic delayed union, respectively. CONCLUSION: Using a semi-quantitative measure (SUVmax) for interpretation of FDG-PET/CT imaging seems to be a promising tool for the discrimination between aseptic and septic delayed union.

Normative data for the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation questionnaire.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. INTRODUCTION: The Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) questionnaire is used to evaluate functional outcomes after treatment of wrist and hand injuries and nontraumatic conditions. Since patients commonly present with an injury, it is impossible to assess preinjury physical functioning. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the population-based normative data. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The aim of this study was to determine the normative data for the PRWE questionnaire. Secondary, we aimed to determine if there were factors influencing these normative data. METHODS: Visitors and employees of 4 hospitals were requested to participate. Excluded were all participants who were scheduled for surgery or were in treatment or after treatment for an injury of the wrist or hand within 1 year after trauma. All participants were asked to complete the PRWE questionnaire and were asked for their age, sex, history of wrist or hand fracture or surgery, daily activities, and the type of employment. The socioeconomic status was determined based on the zip code. RESULTS: The median PRWE score was 0 (interquartile range: 0-8.5) and the mean score 7.7 (standard deviation: 15.0). Women had significantly higher scores compared to men, and younger individuals had significantly lower scores. Participants with a history of wrist or hand fracture or surgery, and participants who were unfit for work had significantly higher scores. Socioeconomic status was not correlated with the PRWE score. DISCUSSION: The purpose was to provide an representative overview of the normative data for the normal population. We did not want to present the data of an unnatural healthy population, which is not representative of the normal population. Deleting patients with chronic wrist or hand complaints, would have resulted in normative values which are not representable for the normal, average population. CONCLUSION: Low scores are observed for the PRWE in the general population. These scores are age and sex dependent and are higher in individuals with a history of wrist or hand fracture or surgery or who are unfit for work.

External validation of clinical decision rules for children with wrist trauma.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision rules help to avoid potentially unnecessary radiographs of the wrist, reduce waiting times and save costs. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to provide an overview of all existing non-validated clinical decision rules for wrist trauma in children and to externally validate these rules in a different cohort of patients. Secondarily, we aimed to compare the performance of these rules with the validated Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included all studies that proposed a clinical prediction or decision rule in children presenting at the emergency department with acute wrist trauma. We performed external validation within a cohort of 379 children. We also calculated the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of each decision rule. RESULTS: We included three clinical decision rules. The sensitivity and specificity of all clinical decision rules after external validation were between 94% and 99%, and 11% and 26%, respectively. After external validation 7% to 17% less radiographs would be ordered and 1.4% to 5.7% of all fractures would be missed. Compared to the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules only one of the three other rules had a higher sensitivity; however both the specificity and the reduction in requested radiographs were lower in the other three rules. CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of the three non-validated clinical decision rules is high. However the specificity and the reduction in number of requested radiographs are low. In contrast, the validated Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules has an acceptable sensitivity and the greatest reduction in radiographs, at 22%, without missing any clinically relevant fractures.

Early mobilisation versus plaster immobilisation of simple elbow dislocations: results of the FuncSiE multicentre randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To compare outcome of early mobilisation and plaster immobilisation in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. We hypothesised that early mobilisation would result in earlier functional recovery. METHODS: From August 2009 to September 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were enrolled in this multicentre randomised controlled trial. Patients were randomised to early mobilisation (n=48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilisation (n=52). Primary outcome measure was the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH) score. Secondary outcomes were the Oxford Elbow Score, Mayo Elbow Performance Index, pain, range of motion, complications and activity resumption. Patients were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: Quick-DASH scores at 1 year were 4.0 (95% CI 0.9 to 7.1) points in the early mobilisation group versus 4.2 (95% CI 1.2 to 7.2) in the plaster immobilisation group. At 6 weeks, early mobilised patients reported less disability (Quick-DASH 12 (95% CI 9 to 15) points vs 19 (95% CI 16 to 22); p<0.05) and had a larger arc of flexion and extension (121° (95% CI 115° to 127°) vs 102° (95% CI 96° to 108°); p<0.05). Patients returned to work sooner after early mobilisation (10 vs 18 days; p=0.020). Complications occurred in 12 patients; this was unrelated to treatment. No recurrent dislocations occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Early active mobilisation is a safe and effective treatment for simple elbow dislocations. Patients recovered faster and returned to work earlier without increasing the complication rate. No evidence was found supporting treatment benefit at 1 year. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR 2025.

Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS).

Background and purpose - The lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) is a well-known and validated instrument for measurement of lower extremity function. The LEFS was developed in a group of patients with various musculoskeletal disorders, and no reference data for the healthy population are available. Here we provide normative data for the LEFS. Methods - Healthy visitors and staff at 4 hospitals were requested to participate. A minimum of 250 volunteers had to be included at each hospital. Participants were excluded if they had undergone lower extremity surgery within 1 year of filling out the questionnaire, or were scheduled for lower extremity surgery. Normative values for the LEFS for the population as a whole were calculated. Furthermore, the influence of sex, age, type of employment, socioeconomic status, and history of lower extremity surgery on the LEFS were investigated. Results - 1,014 individuals fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The median score for the LEFS for the whole population was 77 (out of a maximum of 80). Men and women had similar median scores (78 and 76, respectively), and younger individuals had better scores. Participants who were unfit for work had worse scores. There were no statistically significant correlations between socioeconomic status and type of employment on the one hand and LEFS score on the other. A history of lower extremity surgery was associated with a lower LEFS score. Interpretation - High scores were observed for the LEFS throughout the whole population, although they did decrease with age. Men had a slightly higher score than women. There was no statistically significant correlation between socioeconomic status and LEFS score, but people who were unfit for work had a significantly worse LEFS score.

Internal plate fixation versus plaster in displaced complete articular distal radius fractures, a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Of all distal radius fractures, 25 % are complete articular fractures (AO/OTA type C fractures). Two thirds of those fractures are displaced and require reduction. According to several International Guidelines, adequately reduced intra-articular distal radius fractures are best treated non-operatively with plaster immobilisation, while surgical fixation is suggested only when the articular step exceeds 2 mm after reduction. However, these recommendations are based on studies that did not differentiate between intra- and extra-articular distal radius fractures. Thus, no clear consensus about the best treatment for patients with displaced intra-articular distal radius fractures can be reached. Despite the lack of evidence, an increase in internal fixation of intra-articular distal radius fractures has been observed over the last decade. The aim of this study is to determine the difference in functional outcome following open reduction and plate fixation compared with non-operative treatment with closed reduction and plaster immobilisation in patients with a displaced intra articular distal radius fracture. METHODS/DESIGN: This multicentre randomised controlled trial will randomise between open reduction and internal plate fixation (intervention group) and closed reduction and plaster immobilisation (control group). All consecutive adult patients from 18 to 65 years with a displaced intra-articular distal radius fracture (AO/OTA type C), which has been adequately reduced at the Emergency Department according to the Dutch National Guidelines, are eligible for inclusion in this study. The primary outcome is function and pain of the wrist assessed with the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score (PRWE). Secondary outcomes are the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (DASH), pain, quality of life (SF-36), range of motion, grip strength, radiological parameters, complications, crossovers and cost-effectiveness of both treatments. A total of 90 patients will be included in this study. DISCUSSION: Although displaced intra-articular distal radius fractures are common, there is still no evidence on the optimal treatment for these fractures in patients aged 18 to 65 years. Therefore we aim to determine the difference in functional outcome between open reduction and plate fixation and closed reduction and plaster immobilisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02651779 ) on January 4(th) 2016.

A clinical decision rule for the use of plain radiography in children after acute wrist injury: development and external validation of the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules.

BACKGROUND: In most hospitals, children with acute wrist trauma are routinely referred for radiography. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a clinical decision rule to decide whether radiography in children with wrist trauma is required. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively developed and validated a clinical decision rule in two study populations. All children who presented in the emergency department of four hospitals with pain following wrist trauma were included and evaluated for 18 clinical variables. The outcome was a wrist fracture diagnosed by plain radiography. RESULTS: Included in the study were 787 children. The prediction model consisted of six variables: age, swelling of the distal radius, visible deformation, distal radius tender to palpation, anatomical snuffbox tender to palpation, and painful or abnormal supination. The model showed an area under the receiver operator characteristics curve of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76-0.83). The sensitivity and specificity were 95.9% and 37.3%, respectively. The use of this model would have resulted in a 22% absolute reduction of radiographic examinations. In a validation study, 7/170 fractures (4.1%, 95% CI: 1.7-8.3%) would have been missed using the decision model. CONCLUSION: The decision model may be a valuable tool to decide whether radiography in children after wrist trauma is required.