header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_11 | Pages 7 - 7
1 Feb 2013
Singhota J Clement N Hillman S Porter D Robb J
Full Access

Aim

In previous small series, some authors have suggested a difference between re-fractures through immature callus and remodelled bone. We aimed to determine whether different fracture patterns occur in early and late re-fractures of paediatric forearm bones.

Methods

Notes and radiographs of 77 forearm re-fractures from children aged 2–14 years were retrieved from our institution's radiographic database. Children treated surgically at initial presentation and re-fractures beyond one year were excluded. A control group of 100 forearm fractures without complication was used for comparison. Statistical analysis used chi-square and unpaired t-tests and statistically significant results were based on a two-tailed p-value <0.05


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 87-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 70 - 70
1 Mar 2005
Johnston W Hazlewood M Hillman S van der Linden M Richardson A Robb J
Full Access

Introduction: Transmalleolar axis (TMA) measurements are frequently used as a means of determining tibial torsion.

Material & Methods: The agreement between the prone, Edinburgh footprint and Dundee jig methods of measuring the TMA, and the repeatability of each method were investigated. The left and right limbs of 12 normal subjects (3 male, 9 female age range 21–61 years, mean age 38) were measured using the following three methods. The measurements were repeated for 6 subjects between 5 and 10 days later. All measurements were undertaken by the same assessors. The mean TMA values and repeatability of each method, and the agreement between the measures was as follows:

Results: Negative is external.

Discussion: Clinical methods will always include measurement errors, and a true TMA value may only be obtained from radiological or ultrasound methods. The position of the foot when marking the line for the prone method was very critical. The jig method produced lower values than those found previously. The Edinburgh footprint method proved the most repeatable of all three methods. There was poor agreement between the methods suggesting they should not be used interchangeably.