Dataset Information

In adults, early mobilization may be beneficial for distal radius fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

It remains debatable if early mobilization (EM) yields a better clinical outcome than the late mobilization (LM) in adults with an acute and displaced distal radial fracture (DRF) of open reduction internal fixation (ORIF). Therefore, we aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing clinical results with the safety of EM with LM following ORIF.

Methods

Databases such as Medline, Cochrane Central Register, and Embase were searched from Jan 1, 2000, to July 31, 2021, and RCTs comparing EM with LM for DRF with ORIF were included in the analysis. The primary outcome of study included disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score at different follow-up times. Wherever the secondary outcomes included patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE), grip strength (GS), visual analog scale (VAS), wrist range of motion (WROM), and associated complications, the two independent reviewers did data extraction for the analysis. Effect sizes of outcome for each group were pooled using random-effects models; thereafter, the results were represented in the forest plots.

Results

Nine RCTs with 293 EM and 303 LM participants were identified and included in the study. Our analysis showed that the DASH score of the EM group was significantly better than LM group at the six weeks postoperatively (- 10.15; 95% CI - 15.74 to - 4.57, P < 0.01). Besides, the EM group also had better outcomes in PRWE, GS and WROM at 6 weeks. However, EM showed potential higher rate for implant loosening and/or fracture re-displacement complication (3.00; 95% CI 1.02-8.83, P = 0.05).

Conclusion

Functionally, at earlier stages, EM for patients with DRF of ORIF may have a beneficial effect than LM. The mean differences in the DASH score at 6 weeks surpassed the minimal clinically important difference; however, the potentially higher risk of implant loosening and/or fracture re-displacement cannot be ignored. Due to the lack of definitive evidence, multicenter and large sample RCTs are required for determining the optimal rehabilitation protocol for DRF with ORIF. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021240214 2021/2/28.

SUBMITTER: Deng Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8611847 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeDistal radius fracture open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) represents a considerable cost burden to the health care system. We aimed to elucidate demographic-, injury-, and treatment-specific factors influencing surgical encounter costs for distal radius ORIF.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed adult patients treated with isolated distal radius ORIF between November 2014 and October 2016 at a single tertiary academic medical center. Using our institution's information technology value tools-which allow for comprehensive payment and cost data collection and analysis on an item-level basis-we determined relative costs (RC) for each factor potentially influencing total direct costs (TDC) for distal radius ORIF using univariate and multivariable gamma regression analyses.ResultsOf the included 108 patients, implants and facility utilization costs were responsible for 48.3% and 37.9% of TDC, respectively. Factors associated with increased TDC include plate manufacturer (RC 1.52 for the most vs least expensive manufacturer), number of screws (RC 1.03 per screw) and distal radius plates used (RC 1.67 per additional plate), surgery setting (RC 1.32 for main hospital vs ambulatory surgery center), treating service (RC 1.40 for trauma vs hand surgeons), and surgical time (RC 1.04 for every 10 min of additional surgical time). Open fracture was associated with increased costs (RC 1.55 vs closed fracture), whereas other estimates of fracture severity were nonsignificant. In the multivariable model controlling for injury-specific factors, variables including implant manufacturer, and number of distal radius plates and screws used, remained as significant drivers of TDC.ConclusionsSubstantial variations in surgical direct costs for distal radius ORIF exist, and implant choice is the predominant driver. Cost reductions may be expected through judicious use of additional plates and screws, if hospital systems use bargaining power to reduce implant costs, and by efficiently completing surgeries.Clinical relevanceThis study identifies modifiable factors that may lead to cost reduction for distal radius ORIF.

Project description:BackgroundDistal radius and ankle fractures are one of the most common operatively treated fractures. To date, there is no consensus concerning the need for a standard postoperative radiograph. This leads to undesirable practice variations. A standardized radiograph in the department of radiology would theoretically be more reproducible and operator independent than an intraoperatively obtained fluoroscopic image. However, if adequate intraoperative radiographs have been obtained, it is questionable if these postoperative radiographs are necessary and will lead to changes in the treatment strategy. If standard postoperative radiographs are no longer required, this would lead to a reduction in radiation exposure and health care costs. The hypothesis is that routine standardized postoperative radiographs do not influence the quality of care for patients operated on for either a distal radius or an ankle fracture if adequate intraoperative standardized radiographs have been obtained.ObjectiveThe primary aim of this study is to evaluate if there is a need for routine postoperative radiographs after an osteosynthesis of a distal radius or ankle fracture.MethodsIn a prospective, randomized controlled, open label trial based on a noninferiority design, we will enroll 332 patients. Patients will be randomized either in the control or the intervention group. The control group will be treated according to our current, standard protocol in which all patients receive a standard anterior-posterior and lateral radiograph on the first postoperative day. Patients randomized to the intervention group will be treated without a standard postoperative radiograph. All patients (N=332) will have a routine clinical and radiographic control after 6 weeks in the outpatient clinic. Primary outcome is a change in treatment plan, defined as either additional imaging or a reoperation based on the postoperative imaging. Secondary outcome measures include a 36-Item Short Form Survey, Patient-Rated Wrist Hand Evaluation, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score, Visual Analogue Scale, and the range of motion. Those questionnaires will be filled out at the 6-week outpatient control.ResultsThe trial was started in August 2016, and 104 patients have been enrolled up to this point.ConclusionsOur findings will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and may lead to a strong reduction in radiation exposure and health care costs. A preliminary, conservative estimation suggests a yearly cost saving of CHF 1.3 million in Switzerland.

Project description:BackgroundOpen reduction and plate fixation are the preferred treatment options for most distal humerus fractures in adults. However, it is often challenging for orthopedic surgeons because of the complex anatomy and the difficulty in achieving stable fixation. This multicenter study aimed to analyze the complication types and rates of patients with distal humerus fractures treated with open reduction and plate fixation, and compare the results with those found in the literature. In addition, we describe the clinical outcomes.MethodsThis retrospective multicenter study was conducted between September 2001 and March 2021 and included data from four hospitals. In total, 349 elbows underwent surgical treatment at these hospitals during the study period. Patients > 17 years of age who were treated by plate fixation were included, and patients who were treated by other fixation methods were excluded. A total of 170 patients were included in the study. The following types of complications were investigated: (1) nerve related; (2) fixation and instrument related; (3) osteosynthesis related; (4) infection; and (5) others.ResultsThe following complications were found: (1) 26 (15.3%) cases of postoperative ulnar nerve symptoms; 4 (2.4%) of postoperative radial nerve symptoms; (2) one (0.6%) case of screw joint penetration and screw loosening; and eight (4.7%) cases of hardware removal due to instrument skin irritation; (3) seven (4.1%) cases of nonunion; (4) two (1.2%) and four (2.2%) cases of superficial and deep infection, respectively, and seven (3.9%) cases of wound complication; and (5) 37 (21.8%) cases of heterotrophic ossification, 79 (46.5%) cases of elbow stiffness (did not achieve functional range of motion [ROM]), and 41 (24.1%) cases of osteoarthritis over Broberg and Morrey Grade I. Paradoxically, the postoperative ulnar nerve symptoms were more frequent in the prophylactic ulnar nerve anterior transposition group. However, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.086). The mean ROM was 123.5° flexion to 9.5° extension. The average Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score was 14.5 ± 15.6.ConclusionsOpen reduction and plate fixation for distal humeral fractures is a reasonable treatment option with acceptable complication rates and favorable clinical outcomes. Surgeons must be vigilant about ulnar nerve complications. Level of Evidence Therapeutic Level III.

Project description: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.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.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.This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02651779 ) on January 4(th) 2016.