header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

QUALITY OF LIFE CHANGES AFTER PELVIC AND ACETABULAR FRACTURE SURGERY



Abstract

Introduction: Pelvic and acetabular fracture patients surgically treated have low patient reported outcome compared to a reference population. Our aim was to study quality of life changes during the first 2 years following injury.

Methods: All 155 patients (110 male, 45 female, age 16–83) patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures surgically treated Sept 2004-April 2007 were prospectively followed at 6, 12 and 24 months with SF-36. There were 51 pelvic and 104 acetabular fractures. 124 patients answered the questionnaire (80%), and were compared to an age-and-gender matched reference population.

Results: Pelvic fracture patients mean scores for physical function (PF) at 6–12–24 months were 59–66–74, and for role physical (RP) 28–47–62. This was below 1 SD from normative PF (mean 91, SD 28) and RP (mean 86, SD 41) at 6 months but not at 12 and 24 months. Acetabular fracture patients mean scores for PF were 51–56–61 and for RP 19–32–45. This was lower than 1 SD from normative PF (mean 85, SD 25) and RP (mean 79, SD 43) both at 6 and 12 months but not at 24 months. SF-36 scores were lower than the reference population in all domains for both fracture groups at the three time points. However mean scores were within 1 SD from normative for the other 6 domains BP, GH, VT, SF, RE and MH at all time points for both fracture groups. Hence improvement in the physical domains PF and RP was reported during the first year in both groups and during the second year for acetabular fractures.

Discussion: and Conclusion: We found significant improvement in quality of life physical domains during the first year for both pelvic and acetabular fracture patients, and also during the second year for the latter group.

Correspondence should be addressed to: EFORT Central Office, Technoparkstrasse 1, CH – 8005 Zürich, Switzerland. Tel: +41 44 448 44 00; Email: office@efort.org

Author: Tomas Borg, Sweden

E-mail: tomas.borg@surgsci.uu.se