BackgroundScaphoid fractures account for 90% of carpal fractures and occur predominantly in young men. Immediate surgical fixation of this fracture has increased, in spite of insufficient evidence of improved outcomes over non-surgical management. We compared the clinical effectiveness of surgical fixation with cast immobilization and early fixation of those that fail to unite, for ≤2 mm displaced scaphoid waist fractures in adults.
MethodsThis pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, two-arm randomised clinical trial included adults who presented to orthopaedic departments of 31 hospitals in England and Wales with a clear, bicortical fracture of the scaphoid waist on radiographs. Participants were randomly assigned to early surgical fixation or below-elbow cast immobilization followed by immediate fixation of confirmed non-union. The primary outcome was the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) total score at 52 weeks post-randomisation. Registration ISRCTN67901257.
FindingsOf 439 randomised patients (mean age 33 years, 363 [83%] men), 408 (93%) were included in the primary analyses. There was no difference in PRWE score at 52 weeks (adjusted mean difference -2•1 points, 95% CI -5•8 to 1•6, p=0•27). There were no differences at 52 weeks for the PRWE pain or function subscales. More participants in the surgery group experienced a surgery-related potentially serious complication than in the cast group (n=31, 14% vs n=3, 1%), but fewer had cast-related complications (n=5, 2% vs n=40, 18%). The number experiencing a medical complication (n=4, 2% vs n=5, 2%) was similar in the two groups."
InterpretationAdult patients with ≤2 mm displaced scaphoid waist fracture should have initial cast immobilization and suspected non-unions confirmed and immediately fixed. This will help avoid risks of surgery and mostly limit its use to fixing non-union.
Given the low survivorship of this frail group of patients the main objectives are achieving early mobilisation whilst maintaining good fracture position. In our experience, tibiotalocalcaneal nailing is a very useful and successful way of treating fragility fractures of the ankle because it has a low risk of complications and restores function with impressive patient satisfaction. The potential benefits of this technique, we believe, outweigh the disability ensued from subtalar joint fusion.
Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools for assessing outcomes following injuries to the hand and wrist. Many commonly used PROMs have no evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness in a hand and wrist trauma population. This systematic review examines the PROMs used in the assessment of hand and wrist trauma patients, and the evidence for reliability, validity, and responsiveness of each measure in this population. Methods: a systematic review of Pubmed, Medline, and CInaHL searching for randomized controlled trials of patients with traumatic injuries to the hand and wrist was carried out to identify the PROMs. For each identified PROM, evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness was identified using a further systematic review of the Pubmed, Medline, CInaHL, and reverse citation trail audit procedure. Results: The PROM used most often was the disabilities of the arm, Shoulder and Hand (daSH) questionnaire; the PatientRated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), Gartland and Werley score, Michigan Hand Outcomes score, Mayo Wrist Score, and Short Form 36 were also commonly used. Only the daSH and PRWE have evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness in patients with traumatic injuries to the hand and wrist; other measures either have incomplete evidence or evidence gathered in a nontraumatic population. Conclusions: The daSH and PRWE both have evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness in a hand and wrist trauma population. Other PROMs used to assess hand and wrist trauma patients do not. This should be considered when selecting a PROM for patients with traumatic hand and wrist pathology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.