BackgroundThe Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) is a commonly used instrument in upper extremity surgery and in research. However, to recognize a treatment effect expressed as a change in PRWE, it is important to be aware of the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and the minimum detectable change (MDC). The MCID of an outcome tool like the PRWE is defined as the smallest change in a score that is likely to be appreciated by a patient as an important change, while the MDC is defined as the smallest amount of change that can be detected by an outcome measure. A numerical change in score that is less than the MCID, even when statistically significant, does not represent a true clinically relevant change. To our knowledge, the MCID and MDC of the PRWE have not been determined in patients with distal radius fractures.Questions/PurposesWe asked: (1) What is the MCID of the PRWE score for patients with distal radius fractures? (2) What is the MDC of the PRWE?MethodsOur prospective cohort study included 102 patients with a distal radius fracture and a median age of 59 years (interquartile range [IQR], 48–66 years). All patients completed the PRWE questionnaire during each of two separate visits. At the second visit, patients were asked to indicate the degree of clinical change they appreciated since the previous visit. Accordingly, patients were categorized in two groups: (1) minimally improved or (2) no change. The groups were used to anchor the changes observed in the PRWE score to patients’ perspectives of what was clinically important. We determined the MCID using an anchor-based receiver operator characteristic method. In this context, the change in the PRWE score was considered a diagnostic test, and the anchor (minimally improved or no change as noted by the patients from visit to visit) was the gold standard. The optimal receiver operator characteristic cutoff point calculated with the Youden index reflected the value of the MCID.ResultsIn our study, the MCID of the PRWE was 11.5 points. The area under the curve was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.37–0.70) for the pain subscale and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.57−0.85) for the function subscale. We determined the MDC to be 11.0 points.ConclusionsWe determined the MCID of the PRWE score for patients with distal radius fractures using the anchor-based approach and verified that the MDC of the PRWE was sufficiently small to detect our MCID.Clinical RelevanceWe recommend using an improvement on the PRWE of more than 11.5 points as the smallest clinically relevant difference when evaluating the effects of treatments and when performing sample-size calculations on studies of distal radius fractures.

II.

This study describes a minimally invasive procedure for stabilization of the distal radioulnar joint, using a suture-button construct placed percutaneously in the direction of the distal oblique bundle in the distal interosseous membrane. In five cadaveric specimens, placement of the suture-button suspension system reduced dorsal displacement of the radius in an unstable distal radioulnar joint to baseline values, both in neutral position and in pronation and supination. These results indicate the possibility of minimally invasive treatment for distal radioulnar joint instability.

In corrective osteotomy of the radius, detailed preoperative planning is essential to optimising functional outcome. However, complex malunions are not completely addressed with conventional preoperative planning. Computer-assisted preoperative planning may optimise the results of corrective osteotomy of the radius. We analysed the pre- and postoperative radiological result of computer-assisted 3D planned corrective osteotomy in a series of patients with a malunited radius and assessed postoperative function. We included eight patients aged 13–64 who underwent a computer-assisted 3D planned corrective osteotomy of the radius for the treatment of a symptomatic radius malunion. We evaluated pre- and postoperative residual malpositioning on 3D reconstructions as expressed in six positioning parameters (three displacements along and three rotations about the axes of a 3D anatomical coordinate system) and assessed postoperative wrist range of motion. In this small case series, dorsopalmar tilt was significantly improved (p = 0.05). Ulnoradial shift, however, increased by the correction osteotomy (6 of 8 cases, 75 %). Postoperative 3D evaluation revealed improved positioning parameters for patients in axial rotational alignment (62.5 %), radial inclination (75 %), proximodistal shift (83 %) and volodorsal shift (88 %), although the cohort was not large enough to confirm this by statistical significance. All but one patient experienced improved range of motion (88 %). Computer-assisted 3D planning ameliorates alignment of radial malunions and improves functional results in patients with a symptomatic malunion of the radius. Further development is required to improve transfer of the planned position to the intra-operative bone.Level of evidence IV.

The aim of this study was to compare bridging external fixation with volar locked plating in patients with unstable distal radial fractures regarding functional outcome. A systematic search was performed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline and EMBASE. All randomized controlled trials that compared bridging external fixation directly with volar locked plating in patients with distal radial fractures were considered. Three reviewers extracted data independently from eligible studies using a data collection form. Studies in which the primary endpoint was measured on the disabilities of the arm shoulder and hand (DASH) score at 3, 6 and 12 months were included in the analysis. To this end, mean scores and standard deviations were extracted. The software package Revman 5 provided by the Cochrane Collaboration was used for data analysis. Three studies involving 174 patients were analyzed. Ninety patients were treated with an (augmented) bridging external fixator and 84 with a volar locking plate. Data were analyzed with the random effects model. The robustness of the results was explored using a sensitivity analysis. Patients treated with a volar locking plate showed significantly lower DASH scores at all times. A difference of 16 (p = 0.006), six (p = 0.008) and eight points (p = 0.06) was found at 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up, respectively. Patients treated with a volar locking plate showed significantly better functional outcome throughout the entire follow-up. However, this difference was only clinically relevant during the early postoperative period (3 months).

BackgroundAlthough only 39 % of patients with wrist trauma have sustained a fracture, the majority of patients is routinely referred for radiography. The purpose of this study was to derive and externally validate a clinical decision rule that selects patients with acute wrist trauma in the Emergency Department (ED) for radiography.MethodsThis multicenter prospective study consisted of three components: (1) derivation of a clinical prediction model for detecting wrist fractures in patients following wrist trauma; (2) external validation of this model; and (3) design of a clinical decision rule. The study was conducted in the EDs of five Dutch hospitals: one academic hospital (derivation cohort) and four regional hospitals (external validation cohort). We included all adult patients with acute wrist trauma. The main outcome was fracture of the wrist (distal radius, distal ulna or carpal bones) diagnosed on conventional X-rays.ResultsA total of 882 patients were analyzed; 487 in the derivation cohort and 395 in the validation cohort. We derived a clinical prediction model with eight variables: age; sex, swelling of the wrist; swelling of the anatomical snuffbox, visible deformation; distal radius tender to palpation; pain on radial deviation and painful axial compression of the thumb. The Area Under the Curve at external validation of this model was 0.81 (95 % CI: 0.77–0.85). The sensitivity and specificity of the Amsterdam Wrist Rules (AWR) in the external validation cohort were 98 % (95 % CI: 95–99 %) and 21 % (95 % CI: 15 %–28). The negative predictive value was 90 % (95 % CI: 81–99 %).ConclusionsThe Amsterdam Wrist Rules is a clinical prediction rule with a high sensitivity and negative predictive value for fractures of the wrist. Although external validation showed low specificity and 100 % sensitivity could not be achieved, the Amsterdam Wrist Rules can provide physicians in the Emergency Department with a useful screening tool to select patients with acute wrist trauma for radiography. The upcoming implementation study will further reveal the impact of the Amsterdam Wrist Rules on the anticipated reduction of X-rays requested, missed fractures, Emergency Department waiting times and health care costs.Trial registrationThis study was registered in the Dutch Trial Registry, reference number NTR2544 on October 1st, 2010.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0829-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

III.

BackgroundIn most hospitals, children with acute wrist trauma are routinely referred for radiography.ObjectiveTo develop and validate a clinical decision rule to decide whether radiography in children with wrist trauma is required.Materials and methodsWe 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.ResultsIncluded 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.ConclusionThe decision model may be a valuable tool to decide whether radiography in children after wrist trauma is required.