Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 8 | Pages 612 - 620
21 Aug 2023
Martin J Johnson NA Shepherd J Dias J

Aims. There is ambiguity surrounding the degree of scaphoid union required to safely allow mobilization following scaphoid waist fracture. Premature mobilization could lead to refracture, but late mobilization may cause stiffness and delay return to normal function. This study aims to explore the risk of refracture at different stages of scaphoid waist fracture union in three common fracture patterns, using a novel finite element method. Methods. The most common anatomical variant of the scaphoid was modelled from a CT scan of a healthy hand and wrist using 3D Slicer freeware. This model was uploaded into COMSOL Multiphysics software to enable the application of physiological enhancements. Three common waist fracture patterns were produced following the Russe classification. Each fracture had differing stages of healing, ranging from 10% to 90% partial union, with increments of 10% union assessed. A physiological force of 100 N acting on the distal pole was applied, with the risk of refracture assessed using the Von Mises stress. Results. Overall, 90% to 30% fracture unions demonstrated a small, gradual increase in the Von Mises stress of all fracture patterns (16.0 MPa to 240.5 MPa). All fracture patterns showed a greater increase in Von Mises stress from 30% to 10% partial union (680.8 MPa to 6,288.6 MPa). Conclusion. Previous studies have suggested 25%, 50%, and 75% partial union as sufficient for resuming hand and wrist mobilization. This study shows that 30% union is sufficient to return to normal hand and wrist function in all three fracture patterns. Both 50% and 75% union are unnecessary and increase the risk of post-fracture stiffness. This study has also demonstrated the feasibility of finite element analysis (FEA) in scaphoid waist fracture research. FEA is a sustainable method which does not require the use of finite scaphoid cadavers, hence increasing accessibility into future scaphoid waist fracture-related research. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(8):612–620


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 8 | Pages 641 - 647
1 Aug 2022
Leighton PA Brealey SD Dias JJ

Aims. To explore individuals’ experience of a scaphoid waist fracture and its subsequent treatment. Methods. A purposive sample was created, consisting of 49 participants in the Scaphoid Waist Internal Fixation for Fractures Trial of initial surgery compared with plaster cast treatment for fractures of the scaphoid waist. The majority of participants were male (35/49) and more younger participants (28/49 aged under 30 years) were included. Participants were interviewed six weeks or 52 weeks post-recruitment to the trial, or at both timepoints. Interviews were semistructured and analyzed inductively to generate cross-cutting themes that typify experience of the injury and views upon the treatment options. Results. Data show that individual circumstances might exaggerate or mitigate the limitations associated with a scaphoid fracture, and that an individual’s sense of recovery is subjective and more closely aligned with perceived functional abilities than it is with bone union. Misconceptions that surgery promises a speedier and more secure form of recovery means that some individuals, whose circumstances prescribe a need for quick return to function, express a preference for this treatment modality. Clinical consultations need to negotiate the imperfect relationship between bone union, normal function, and an individual’s sense of recovery. Enhancing patients’ perceptions of regaining function, with removable splints and encouraging home exercise, will support satisfaction with care and discourage premature risk-taking. Conclusion. Clinical decision-making in the management of scaphoid fractures should recognize that personal circumstances will influence how functional limitations are experienced. It should also recognize that function overrides a concern for bone union, and that the consequences of fractures are poorly understood. Where possible, clinicians should reinforce in individuals a sense that they are making progress in their recovery. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(8):641–647