Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 1 | Pages 16 - 18
1 Jan 2024
Metcalfe D Perry DC

Displaced fractures of the distal radius in children are usually reduced under sedation or general anaesthesia to restore anatomical alignment before the limb is immobilized. However, there is growing evidence of the ability of the distal radius to remodel rapidly, raising doubts over the benefit to these children of restoring alignment. There is now clinical equipoise concerning whether or not young children with displaced distal radial fractures benefit from reduction, as they have the greatest ability to remodel. The Children’s Radius Acute Fracture Fixation Trial (CRAFFT), funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research, aims to definitively answer this question and determine how best to manage severely displaced distal radial fractures in children aged up to ten years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(1):16–18


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 3 | Pages 298 - 300
1 Mar 2016
Fullilove S Gozzard C

The results of the DRAFFT (distal radius acute fracture fixation trial) study, which compared volar plating with Kirschner (K-) wire fixation for dorsally displaced fractures of the distal radius, were published in August 2014. The use of K-wires to treat these fractures is now increasing, with a concomitant decline in the use of volar locking plates. We provide a critical appraisal of the DRAFFT study and question whether surgeons have been unduly influenced by its headline conclusions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:298–300


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1456 - 1457
1 Nov 2015
Gandhi R Perruccio AV Kakar S Haddad FS

Recently, several high impact randomised controlled trials have been published suggesting no greater benefit from orthopaedic surgery over conservative treatment, or limited surgical intervention. These studies can have profound effects on clinical practice, leading to the abandonment of previously widely-used operations.

How do surgeons who believe these operations are beneficial over conservative treatment rationalise these findings, and justify their use with hospital administrators and health care funders who require evidence for the value and efficacy of surgical treatment?

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1456–7.