Introduction. Lack of standardization of outcome measurement has hampered an evidence-based approach to clinical practice and research. We report on the progress on establishing a minimal set of core domains for outcome measurement in distal radius fracture. Materials and methods. Participants included an expert panel of orthopaedic surgeons, outcome researchers, patients, physiotherapists, industry representatives involved in distal radius research and partners in regulatory affairs. Decisions were made by review of evidence and theory and establishing group consensus. Results. There was consensus that clinical research studies should include a proof of concept outcome that would directly assess the presumed direct benefit of the intervention. We identified a need for additional outcome measures for research including measures that provide more detail on pain and function; or that address supplemental concepts important to that study. Measures of fracture healing/alignment, grip strength, joint motion were recognized as commonly utilized secondary outcomes. Discussion and Conclusion. Our approach provides preliminary steps in establishing core domains that have content relevant to patient goals (i.e. pain and function) and the providers’ treatment goals (i.e. strength, range of motion, function). The panel recommendations provide flexibility in establishing customized data collection for specific indications; but offer some core consistency

Purpose. Evaluation of our experience on the treatment of comminuted, radial head fractures, and of the outcomes of pyrocarbon prosthetic replacement in such cases. Materials and Methods. We evaluated 47 cases of prosthetic replacement, performed from May 2003 to July 2008. There were 18 males and 29 females with an average follow-up of 48 months (12 to 60). The Hotchkiss classification was used to characterize the fractures. The indicators for the procedure were type III fractures in 27 cases, type IV fractures in 10 cases, comminuted radial head fractures (associated with disruption in medial collateral ligament) in 3 cases, Monteggia variant in 5 cases, and Essex Lopresti in 2 cases. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Mayo Elbow Performance Index and the Visual Analog Scales (VAS) of pain, joint motion, and stability. Results. The mean VAS score for elbow pain was 1 (0.5–2.1). Patients showed an average arch of motion from 6 degrees to 140, with 75 degrees of pronation, and 67 of supination. By the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, 42 patients had good to excellent results, 3 fair, and 2 poor. The complications that we have encountered were: implant dislocations (2 cases), elbow stiffness (1), implant dissociation (1), stem rupture (1), and transient PIN palsy (2 cases with complete recovery of nervous function at 5 and 8 weeks). There was no persistent instability, infection, synosthosis, severe degenerative changes, or impingement. Conclusion. The pyrocarbon implants are a good treatment option in complicated, radial head fractures, but the outcome depends on the severity of the initial fracture and the associated lesions. We have also encountered a tendency towards overestimating the prosthesis size, causing restriction of motion, impingement, overstuffing, or dislocation. For these results we are now using the non-modular prosthesis in our center, but further studies are required