Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol ; 34(3): 1363-1371, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38159217

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of a novel approach involving permissive weight bearing (PWB) in surgically treated trauma patients with peri- and intra-articular fractures of the lower extremities. METHODS: Prospective comparative multicenter cohort study in one level 1 trauma center and five level 2 trauma centers. Surgically treated trauma patients with peri- and intra-articular fractures of the lower extremities were included. Permissive weight bearing (PWB) in comparison to restricted weight bearing (RWB) was assessed over a 26-week post-surgery follow-up period. Patients' self-perceived outcome levels regarding activities of daily living (ADL), quality of life (QoL), pain and weight bearing compliance were used. RESULTS: This study included 106 trauma patients (N = 53 in both the PWB and RWB groups). Significantly better ADL and QoL were found in the PWB group compared to the RWB group at 2-, 6-, 12- and 26-weeks post-surgery. There were no significant differences in postoperative complication rates between the PWB and RWB groups. CONCLUSION: PWB is effective and is associated with a significantly reduced time to full weight bearing, and a significantly better outcome regarding ADL and QoL compared to patients who followed RWB regimen. Moreover, no significant differences in complication rates were found between the PWB and RWB groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II. REGISTRATION: This study is registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NTR6077). Date of registration: 01-09-2016.


Subject(s)
Intra-Articular Fractures , Humans , Activities of Daily Living , Cohort Studies , Intra-Articular Fractures/surgery , Lower Extremity/surgery , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Weight-Bearing
2.
J Orthop Trauma ; 33 Suppl 8: S27-S32, 2019 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31688524

ABSTRACT

Femoral neck fractures in children are rare injuries resulting from high-energy trauma. Different methods of treatment, lack of standard management protocols, and the high risk of complications make this injury one of the biggest challenges that an orthopaedic surgeon can face. This review focuses on the general aspects of the pediatric femoral neck fracture management as well as its complications and possible solutions.


Subject(s)
Femoral Neck Fractures/diagnostic imaging , Femoral Neck Fractures/surgery , Fracture Fixation, Internal/methods , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Range of Motion, Articular/physiology , Adolescent , Bone Plates , Bone Screws , Child , Coxa Vara/etiology , Coxa Vara/physiopathology , Female , Fracture Fixation, Internal/instrumentation , Fracture Healing/physiology , Humans , Injury Severity Score , Leg Length Inequality/etiology , Leg Length Inequality/physiopathology , Male , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/physiopathology , Prognosis , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods
3.
BMC Surg ; 18(1): 8, 2018 Feb 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29391063

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The standard aftercare treatment in surgically treated trauma patients with fractures around or in a joint, known as (peri)- or intra-articular fractures of the lower extremities, is either non-weight bearing or partial weight bearing. We have developed an early permissive weight bearing post-surgery rehabilitation protocol in surgically treated patients with fractures of the lower extremities. In this proposal we want to compare our early permissive weight bearing protocol to the existing current non-weight bearing guidelines in a prospective comparative cohort study. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a prospective multicenter comparative cohort study in which two rehabilitation aftercare treatments will be contrasted, i.e. permissive weight bearing and non-weight bearing according to the AO-guideline. The study population consists of patients with a surgically treated fracture of the pelvis/acetabulum or a surgically treated (peri)- or intra-articular fracture of the lower extremities. The inclusion period is 12 months. The duration of follow up is 6 months, with measurements taken at baseline, 2,6,12 and 26 weeks post-surgery. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: ADL with Lower Extremity Functional Scale. Outcome variables for compliance, as measured with an insole pressure measurement system, encompass peak load and step duration. DISCUSSION: This study will investigate the (cost-) effectiveness of a permissive weight bearing aftercare protocol. The results will provide evidence whether a permissive weight bearing protocol is more effective than the current non-weight bearing protocol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered in the Dutch Trial Register ( NTR6077 ). Date of registration: 01-09-2016.


Subject(s)
Fractures, Bone/surgery , Intra-Articular Fractures/surgery , Adult , Female , Humans , Lower Extremity , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Weight-Bearing
4.
BMC Surg ; 15: 12, 2015 Feb 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25972101

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands about 18,000 procedures with implant removal are performed annually following open or closed reduction and fixation of fractures, of which 30-80% concern the foot, ankle and lower leg region. For clean surgical procedures, the rate of postoperative wound infections (POWI) should be less than ~2%. However, rates of 10-12% following implant removal have been reported, specifically after foot, ankle and lower leg fractures. Currently, surgeons individually decide if antibiotics prophylaxis is given, since no guideline exists. This leads to undesirable practice variation. The aim of the study is to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of a single intravenous gift of Cefazolin prior to implant removal following surgical fixation of foot, ankle and/or lower leg fractures. METHODS: This is a double-blind randomized controlled trial in patients scheduled for implant removal following a foot, ankle or lower leg fracture. Primary outcome is a POWI within 30 days after implant removal. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, functional outcome and costs at 30 days and 6 months after implant removal. With 2 x 250 patients a decrease in POWI rate from 10% to 3.3% (expected rate in clean-contaminated elective orthopaedic trauma procedures) can be detected (Power = 80%, 2-sided alpha = 5%, including 15% lost to follow up). DISCUSSION: If administration of prophylactic antibiotics prior to implant removal reduces the infectious complication rate, this will offer a strong argument to adopt this as standard practice of care. This will consequently lead to less physical and social disabilities and health care use. A preliminary, conservative estimation suggests yearly cost savings in the Netherlands of € 3.5 million per year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02225821 ) and the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR4393 ) and was granted permission by the Medical Ethical Review Committee of the Academic Medical Centre on October 7 2014.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Cefazolin/therapeutic use , Device Removal , Fracture Fixation, Internal/instrumentation , Preoperative Care/methods , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical Protocols , Double-Blind Method , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Foot/surgery , Humans , Injections, Intravenous , Leg/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
5.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 15: 90, 2014 Mar 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24642190

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the distal radius are common and account for an estimated 17% of all fractures diagnosed. Two-thirds of these fractures are displaced and require reduction. Although distal radius fractures, especially extra-articular fractures, are considered to be relatively harmless, inadequate treatment may result in impaired function of the wrist. Initial treatment according to Dutch guidelines consists of closed reduction and plaster immobilisation. If fracture redisplacement occurs, surgical treatment is recommended. Recently, the use of volar locking plates has become more popular. The aim of this study is to compare the functional outcome following surgical reduction and fixation with a volar locking plate with the functional outcome following closed reduction and plaster immobilisation in patients with displaced extra-articular distal radius fractures. DESIGN: This single blinded randomised controlled trial will randomise between open reduction and internal fixation with a volar locking plate (intervention group) and closed reduction followed by plaster immobilisation (control group). The study population will consist of all consecutive adult patients who are diagnosed with a displaced extra-articular distal radius fracture, which has been adequately reduced at the Emergency Department. The primary outcome (functional outcome) will be assessed by means of the Disability Arm Shoulder Hand Score (DASH). Secondary outcomes comprise the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score (PRWE), quality of life, pain, range of motion, radiological parameters, complications and cross-overs. Since the treatment allocated involves a surgical procedure, randomisation status will not be blinded. However, the researcher assessing the outcome at one year will be unaware of the treatment allocation. In total, 90 patients will be included and this trial will require an estimated time of two years to complete and will be conducted in the Academic Medical Centre Amsterdam and its partners of the regional trauma care network. DICUSSION: Ideally, patients would be randomised before any kind of treatment has been commenced. However, we deem it not patient-friendly to approach possible participants before adequate reduction has been obtained. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR3113) and was granted permission by the Medical Ethical Review Committee of the Academic Medical Centre on 01-10-2012.


Subject(s)
Fracture Fixation, Internal/methods , Immobilization/methods , Radius Fractures/therapy , Research Design , Biomechanical Phenomena , Bone Plates , Casts, Surgical , Clinical Protocols , Disability Evaluation , Fracture Fixation, Internal/instrumentation , Fracture Healing , Hand Strength , Humans , Immobilization/adverse effects , Netherlands , Pain Measurement , Quality of Life , Radius Fractures/diagnosis , Radius Fractures/physiopathology , Radius Fractures/surgery , Range of Motion, Articular , Recovery of Function , Single-Blind Method , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
6.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 15: 39, 2014 Feb 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24517194

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the humeral shaft are associated with a profound temporary (and in the elderly sometimes even permanent) impairment of independence and quality of life. These fractures can be treated operatively or non-operatively, but the optimal tailored treatment is an unresolved problem. As no high-quality comparative randomized or observational studies are available, a recent Cochrane review concluded there is no evidence of sufficient scientific quality available to inform the decision to operate or not. Since randomized controlled trials for this injury have shown feasibility issues, this study is designed to provide the best achievable evidence to answer this unresolved problem. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate functional recovery after operative versus non-operative treatment in adult patients who sustained a humeral shaft fracture. Secondary aims include the effect of treatment on pain, complications, generic health-related quality of life, time to resumption of activities of daily living and work, and cost-effectiveness. The main hypothesis is that operative treatment will result in faster recovery. METHODS/DESIGN: The design of the study will be a multicenter prospective observational study of 400 patients who have sustained a humeral shaft fracture, AO type 12A or 12B. Treatment decision (i.e., operative or non-operative) will be left to the discretion of the treating surgeon. Critical elements of treatment will be registered and outcome will be monitored at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. Secondary outcome measures are the Constant score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow and shoulder joint at both sides, radiographic healing, rate of complications and (secondary) interventions, health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36 and EuroQol-5D), time to resumption of ADL/work, and cost-effectiveness. Data will be analyzed using univariate and multivariable analyses (including mixed effects regression analysis). The cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed from a societal perspective. DISCUSSION: Successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of operative versus non-operative treatment of patients with a humeral shaft fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR3617).


Subject(s)
Fracture Fixation/methods , Fracture Healing , Humeral Fractures/therapy , Research Design , Activities of Daily Living , Clinical Protocols , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Disability Evaluation , Fracture Fixation/economics , Health Care Costs , Humans , Humeral Fractures/diagnosis , Humeral Fractures/economics , Humeral Fractures/physiopathology , Humeral Fractures/surgery , Netherlands , Pain Measurement , Prospective Studies , Recovery of Function , Return to Work , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
7.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 12: 130, 2011 Jun 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21658252

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Elbow dislocations can be classified as simple or complex. Simple dislocations are characterized by the absence of fractures, while complex dislocations are associated with fractures of the radial head, olecranon, or coronoid process. The majority of patients with these complex dislocations are treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), or arthroplasty in case of a non-reconstructable radial head fracture. If the elbow joint remains unstable after fracture fixation, a hinged elbow fixator can be applied. The fixator provides stability to the elbow joint, and allows for early mobilization. The latter may be important for preventing stiffness of the joint. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of early mobilization with a hinged external elbow fixator on clinical outcome in patients with complex elbow dislocations with residual instability following fracture fixation. METHODS/DESIGN: The design of the study will be a multicenter prospective cohort study of 30 patients who have sustained a complex elbow dislocation and are treated with a hinged elbow fixator following fracture fixation because of residual instability. Early active motion exercises within the limits of pain will be started immediately after surgery under supervision of a physical therapist. Outcome will be evaluated at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome is the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. The secondary outcome measures are the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, Oxford Elbow Score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow joint at both sides, radiographic healing of the fractures and formation of periarticular ossifications, rate of secondary interventions and complications, and health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36). DISCUSSION: The outcome of this study will yield quantitative data on the functional outcome in patients with a complex elbow dislocation and who are treated with ORIF and additional stabilization with a hinged elbow fixator. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR1996).


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty , Elbow Joint/surgery , External Fixators , Fracture Fixation/instrumentation , Fractures, Bone/surgery , Joint Dislocations/surgery , Joint Instability/surgery , Research Design , Disability Evaluation , Elbow Joint/diagnostic imaging , Elbow Joint/physiopathology , Fractures, Bone/complications , Fractures, Bone/diagnosis , Fractures, Bone/physiopathology , Humans , Joint Dislocations/complications , Joint Dislocations/diagnosis , Joint Dislocations/physiopathology , Joint Instability/complications , Joint Instability/diagnosis , Joint Instability/physiopathology , Netherlands , Pain Measurement , Physical Therapy Modalities , Prospective Studies , Prosthesis Design , Quality of Life , Radiography , Range of Motion, Articular , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
8.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 11: 263, 2010 Nov 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21073734

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Elbow dislocations can be classified as simple or complex. Simple dislocations are characterized by the absence of fractures, while complex dislocations are associated with fractures. After reduction of a simple dislocation, treatment options include immobilization in a static plaster for different periods of time or so-called functional treatment. Functional treatment is characterized by early active motion within the limits of pain with or without the use of a sling or hinged brace. Theoretically, functional treatment should prevent stiffness without introducing increased joint instability. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to compare early functional treatment versus plaster immobilization following simple dislocations of the elbow. METHODS/DESIGN: The design of the study will be a multicenter randomized controlled trial of 100 patients who have sustained a simple elbow dislocation. After reduction of the dislocation, patients are randomized between a pressure bandage for 5-7 days and early functional treatment or a plaster in 90 degrees flexion, neutral position for pro-supination for a period of three weeks. In the functional group, treatment is started with early active motion within the limits of pain. Function, pain, and radiographic recovery will be evaluated at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. The secondary outcome measures are the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, Oxford elbow score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow joint at both sides, rate of secondary interventions and complication rates in both groups (secondary dislocation, instability, relaxation), health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36 and EuroQol-5D), radiographic appearance of the elbow joint (degenerative changes and heterotopic ossifications), costs, and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of a functional treatment for the management of simple elbow dislocations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR2025).


Subject(s)
Casts, Surgical , Disability Evaluation , Elbow Injuries , Joint Dislocations/therapy , Physical Therapy Modalities , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Braces , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Elbow Joint/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...