Dataset Information

The Effect of Socioeconomic Factors on Outcomes of Distal Radius Fractures: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Socioeconomic factors are known to affect outcomes for both medical and surgical conditions. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the current evidence regarding the effect of socioeconomic factors such as income, geographic location, educational level, and occupation on clinical outcomes after distal radius fractures. METHODS:A systematic search strategy was performed to identify studies commenting on the effect of socioeconomic factors on clinical outcomes following open or closed distal radius fracture repair. Abstract and full-text screening was performed by 2 independent reviewers, and articles were evaluated by Structured Effectiveness Quality Evaluation Scale (SEQES). Treatment outcomes of interest included, but were not limited to, pain, function, range of motion, and grip strength. RESULTS:There were 1745 studies that met our inclusion and exclusion criteria for abstract screening. Of these, 48 studies met our inclusion criteria for full-text screening and 20 studies met our criteria for quality analysis with the SEQES score. There were 3 studies of high quality, 16 of moderate quality, and 1 of low quality. Meta-analyses were not possible due to the variability in outcomes of interest across papers. CONCLUSIONS:Patient factors indicative of socioeconomic status are relevant predictors of functional outcome after distal radius fractures. There is currently limited evidence in this area of research, and further examination should be considered to improve outcomes from a patient and system standpoint.

SUBMITTER: Truong JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6109905 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Effect of Socioeconomic Factors on Outcomes of Distal Radius Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Truong Jessica L JL Doherty Chris C Suh Nina N

Hand (New York, N.Y.) 20171011 5

<h4>Background</h4>Socioeconomic factors are known to affect outcomes for both medical and surgical conditions. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the current evidence regarding the effect of socioeconomic factors such as income, geographic location, educational level, and occupation on clinical outcomes after distal radius fractures.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search strategy was performed to identify studies commenting on the effect of socioeconomic factors on clinical outcom ...[more]

PMID: 29020814

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose In this literature review, functional outcomes such as Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and the visual analog scale (VAS) of pain along with clinical outcomes such as range of movement and grip strength of treated distal radius fractures (DRF) accompanied with ulnar styloid fractures (USF) will be compared with those with isolated DRF. Materials and Methods We analyzed articles from MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL that met our predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statements. This resulted in the identification of 464 articles with 18 potentially eligible studies of which 6 were included at the full-text screening stage. The primary outcomes were wrist pain, range of motion, functional outcome and satisfaction, such as VAS, and the DASH questionnaire along with radiological assessment and incidence of complications. Results These studies involved 796 participants with DRF and 806 wrists with DRF; 444 (55%) of DRF had an associated USF. Three studies did not report any statistically significant difference in DASH scores between the DRF patients with or without USF. Two studies reported worse DASH scores in the group with associated USF. Wrist pain was reported to be statistically significantly worse in patients with associated USF in two studies. Grip strength did not exhibit a statistically significant difference in any groups in four studies. On assessing the range of motion of the wrist and forearm, only one study reported a statistically significant difference in flexion at 2 years follow-up, with less flexion in patients with USF. Conclusion This review suggests that there is no significant correlation between a USF and the functional and clinical outcomes of DRF treatment, albeit wrist pain and less flexion were reported in some studies to be associated with USF. There is a need for more robust evidence from large randomized controlled trials to specifically look at the effects of fixation versus nonfixation of USF on DRF, or large prospective cohort studies assessing DRF with and without USF, with a minimum of 12 months follow-up. Level of Evidence Level II-therapeutic.

Project description:PurposeWe evaluated the literature on complications associated with different positions used for immobilizing the upper extremity during conservative treatment of distal radius fractures (DRF).MethodsA search of PubMed, Embase, and Medline was conducted to identify original research on the effects that upper extremity positioning during the treatment of DRFs has on complication rates. Treatment groups were categorized by wrist positioning in flexion, extension, or neutral, as well as forearm positioning in pronation, supination, or neutral. The primary endpoints examined included the loss of reduction, recasting/refabricating an orthosis, and functional limitations.ResultsA total of 1,655 articles were identified through an initial database search. Ultimately, 8 studies, with 786 total patients, met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. A qualitative analysis determined that immobilizing DRFs with the wrist in extension results in better functional and radiographic outcomes with lower rates of complications, such as pain, recasting, and the need for operation. The 2 studies that compared forearm pronation versus supination revealed contradictory results regarding which position was associated with superior outcomes. A meta-analysis comparing the various wrist and forearm positions failed to demonstrate statistically significant differences in the rates of loss of reduction or recasting/refabricating an orthosis between the groups. This analysis was limited by considerable heterogeneity in the data from the different studies.ConclusionsDespite the high incidence of DRFs, there is limited research on the optimal position of immobilization for conservative treatment of them. Available evidence suggests that the wrist should be immobilized in extension, as these patients had improved functional and radiographic outcomes. No conclusion can be drawn from the existing literature on ideal forearm position during immobilization. This review also suggests better data reporting practices for studies researching DRFs, so that future meta-analyses can be more comprehensive.Type of study/level of evidenceTherapeutic II.

Project description:ImportanceNo consensus has been reached to date regarding the optimal treatment for distal radius fractures. The international rate of operative treatment has been increasing, despite higher costs and limited functional outcome evidence to support this shift.ObjectivesTo compare functional, clinical, and radiologic outcomes after operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures in adults.Data sourcesThe PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases were searched from inception to June 15, 2019, for studies comparing operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting on the following: acute distal radius fracture with operative treatment (internal or external fixation) vs nonoperative treatment (cast immobilization, splinting, or bracing); patients 18 years or older; and functional outcome. Studies in a language other than English or reporting treatment for refracture were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effects models and presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed in September 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measures included medium-term functional outcome measured with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) and the overall complication rate after operative and nonoperative treatment.ResultsA total of 23 unique studies were included, consisting of 8 RCTs and 15 observational studies, that described 2254 unique patients. Among the studies that presented sex data, 1769 patients were women [80.6%]. Overall weighted mean age was 67 [range, 22-90] years). The RCTs included 656 patients (29.1%); observational studies, 1598 patients (70.9%). The overall pooled effect estimates the showed a significant improvement in medium-term (≤1 year) DASH score after operative treatment compared with nonoperative treatment (MD, -5.22 [95% CI, -8.87 to -1.57]; P = .005; I2 = 84%). No difference in complication rate was observed (RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69-1.55]; P = .87; I2 = 62%). A significant improvement in grip strength was noted after operative treatment, measured in kilograms (MD, 2.73 [95% CI, 0.15-5.32]; P = .04; I2 = 79%) and as a percentage of the unaffected side (MD, 8.21 [95% CI, 2.26-14.15]; P = .007; I2 = 76%). No improvement in medium-term DASH score was found in the subgroup of studies that only included patients 60 years or older (MD, -0.98 [95% CI, -3.52 to 1.57]; P = .45; I2 = 34%]), compared with a larger improvement in medium-term DASH score after operative treatment in the other studies that included patients 18 years or older (MD, -7.50 [95% CI, -12.40 to -2.60]; P = .003; I2 = 77%); the difference between these subgroups was statically significant (test for subgroup differences, P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceThis meta-analysis suggests that operative treatment of distal radius fractures improves the medium-term DASH score and grip strength compared with nonoperative treatment in adults, with no difference in overall complication rate. The findings suggest that operative treatment might be more effective and have a greater effect on the health and well-being of younger, nonelderly patients.

Project description:IntroductionThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether volar locking plate (VLP) fixation leads to better clinical and radiological outcomes than those of closed reduction and cast immobilization for the treatment of distal radius fractures (DRFs).Materials and methodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to January 2022. Inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies comparing VLP fixation with cast immobilization for DRFs. Investigated parameters were Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation questionnaire, Disabilities of the Harm, Shoulder, and Hand score (DASH), range of motion (ROM), grip strength, quality of life (QoL), radiological outcome, and complication and reoperation rate, both at short- and mid-/long-term follow-up. Assessment of risk of bias and quality of evidence was performed with Downs and Black's 'Checklist for Measuring Quality'.ResultsA total of 12 RCTs (1368 patients) were included. No difference was found for ROM, grip strength, QoL, and reoperation, while the DASH at 3 months was statistically better in the VLP group (P < 0.05). No clinical differences were confirmed at longer follow-up. From a radiological perspective, only radial inclination (4°) and ulnar variance (mean difference 1.1 mm) at >3 months reached statistical significance in favor of the VLP group (both P < 0.05). Fewer complications were found in the VLP group (P < 0.05), but they did not result in different reintervention rates.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis showed that the surgical approach leads to a better clinical outcome in the first months, better fracture alignment, and lower complication rate. However, no differences in the clinical outcomes have been confirmed after 3 months. Overall, these findings suggest operative treatment for people with higher functional demand requiring a faster recovery, while they support the benefit of a more conservative approach in less demanding patients.

Project description:Open fractures are often classified according to a system described by Gustilo and Anderson. However, this system was applied to open long bone fractures, which may not predict the incidence of infection in open metaphyseal fractures of the upper extremity. Other studies have found that wound contamination and systemic illness were the best predictors of infections in open hand fractures. Our study assessed infection in open distal radius fractures and identifies factors that are associated with these infections. We hypothesize that contamination, rather than absolute wound size, is the best predictor of infection associated with open distal radius fractures. A review by CPT code yielded 42 patients with open distal radius fractures between 1997 and 2002 treated at a level one trauma center. Medical records and radiographic follow-up were reviewed to assess the time to irrigation and debridement, the number of debridements in initial treatment period, the method of operative stabilization, the Gustilo and Anderson type of fracture, the Swanson type of fracture, and description of wound contamination. Forty-two patients were followed up for an average of 15 months (range 4 to 68 months). Twenty-four fractures were classified as Gustilo and Anderson type I, ten were type II, and eight were type III, 30 were Swanson type I, and 12 were Swanson type II. Five of the 42 fractures were considered contaminated. Two were exposed to fecal contamination. The others were contaminated with tar, dirt/grass, and gravel, respectively. Three of 42 (7%) fractures developed infections. All three infected cases received a single irrigation and debridement. Two of five contaminated fractures (40%) developed a polymicrobial infection. Both were exposed to fecal contamination and, therefore, considered Swanson type II fractures. They were classified as Gustilo and Anderson type II and IIIB based solely upon the size of the wound. Both required multiple debridements and eventually wrist fusions. The third infection occurred in a Gustilo and Anderson type II and Swanson type I open fracture treated with one debridement and plate fixation. Hardware removal, debridement, and antibiotics resolved the infection. Three contaminated fractures that healed uneventfully received two debridements. Statistical analysis revealed a correlation with infection and contamination (p = 0.0331). The number of initial debridements played a role in infection, but was not statistically significant. No relationship between infection and time to initial irrigation and debridement, method of fixation, Gustilo and Anderson type, or Swanson type was found. We propose that open distal radius fractures behave differently than open long bone fractures. Infection developed in 7% of the distal radius fractures in our study and was significantly associated with wound contamination. We recommend that contamination be included as factor for prognosis in open distal radius fractures. Contaminated fractures should be treated with multiple debridements as part of the initial plan not based upon subsequent development of an infection.

Dataset Information

The Effect of Socioeconomic Factors on Outcomes of Distal Radius Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Publications

The Effect of Socioeconomic Factors on Outcomes of Distal Radius Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets