Aims. Assessment of bone mineral density (BMD) with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is a well-established clinical technique, but it is not available in the acute trauma setting. Thus, it cannot provide a preoperative estimation of BMD to help guide the technique of fracture fixation. Alternative methods that have been suggested for assessing BMD include: 1) cortical measures, such as cortical ratios and combined cortical scores; and 2) aluminium grading systems from preoperative digital radiographs. However, limited research has been performed in this area to validate the different methods. The aim of this study was to investigate the evaluation of BMD from digital radiographs by comparing various methods against DXA scanning. Methods. A total of 54 patients with distal radial fractures were included in the study. Each underwent posteroanterior (PA) and lateral radiographs of the injured wrist with an aluminium step wedge. Overall 27 patients underwent routine DXA scanning of the hip and lumbar spine, with 13 undergoing additional DXA scanning of the uninjured forearm. Analysis of radiographs was performed on ImageJ and Matlab with calculations of cortical measures, cortical indices, combined cortical scores, and aluminium equivalent grading. Results. Cortical measures showed varying correlations with the forearm DXA results (range: Pearson correlation coefficient (r) = 0.343 (p = 0.251) to r = 0.521 (p = 0.068)), with none showing statistically significant correlations. Aluminium equivalent grading showed statistically significant correlations with the forearm DXA of the corresponding region of interest (p < 0.017). Conclusion. Cortical measures, cortical indices, and combined cortical scores did not show a statistically significant correlation to forearm DXA measures. Aluminium-equivalent is an easily applicable method for estimation of BMD from digital radiographs in the preoperative setting. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):830–839

Aims

Loosening is a well-known complication in the fixation of fractures using devices such as locking plates or unilateral fixators. It is believed that high strains in the bone at the bone-screw interface can initiate loosening, which can result in infection, and further loosening. Here, we present a new theory of loosening of implants. The time-dependent response of bone subjected to loads results in interfacial deformations in the bone which accumulate with cyclical loading and thus accentuates loosening.

Objectives. The patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire are patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used for clinical and research purposes. Methodological high-quality clinimetric studies that determine the measurement properties of these PROMs when used in patients with a distal radial fracture are lacking. This study aimed to validate the PRWE and DASH in Dutch patients with a displaced distal radial fracture (DRF). Methods. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used for test-retest reliability, between PROMs completed twice with a two-week interval at six to eight months after DRF. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach’s α for the dimensions found in the factor analysis. The measurement error was expressed by the smallest detectable change (SDC). A semi-structured interview was conducted between eight and 12 weeks after DRF to assess the content validity. Results. A total of 119 patients (mean age 58 years (. sd. 15)), 74% female, completed PROMs at a mean time of six months (. sd. 1) post-fracture. One overall meaningful dimension was found for the PRWE and the DASH. Internal consistency was excellent for both PROMs (Cronbach’s α 0.96 (PRWE) and 0.97 (DASH)). Test-retest reliability was good for the PRWE (ICC 0.87) and excellent for the DASH (ICC 0.91). The SDC was 20 for the PRWE and 14 for the DASH. No floor or ceiling effects were found. The content validity was good for both questionnaires. Conclusion. The PRWE and DASH are valid and reliable PROMs in assessing function and disability in Dutch patients with a displaced DRF. However, due to the high SDC, the PRWE and DASH are less useful for individual patients with a distal radial fracture in clinical practice. Cite this article: Y. V. Kleinlugtenbelt, R. G. Krol, M. Bhandari, J. C. Goslings, R. W. Poolman, V. A. B. Scholtes. Are the patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) and the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire used in distal radial fractures truly valid and reliable? Bone Joint Res 2018;7:36–45. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.71.BJR-2017-0081.R1

Objectives

The goal of this study is to investigate the relation between indicators of osteoporosis (i.e., bone mineral density (BMD), and Cortical Index (CI)) and the complexity of a fracture of the proximal humerus as a result of a low-energy trauma.

Objectives

The aim of this systematic literature review was to assess the clinical level of evidence of commercially available demineralised bone matrix (DBM) products for their use in trauma and orthopaedic related surgery.

Objectives. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often used to evaluate the outcome of treatment in patients with distal radial fractures. Which PROM to select is often based on assessment of measurement properties, such as validity and reliability. Measurement properties are assessed in clinimetric studies, and results are often reviewed without considering the methodological quality of these studies. Our aim was to systematically review the methodological quality of clinimetric studies that evaluated measurement properties of PROMs used in patients with distal radial fractures, and to make recommendations for the selection of PROMs based on the level of evidence of each individual measurement property. Methods. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMbase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases to identify relevant clinimetric studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies on measurement properties, using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Level of evidence (strong / moderate / limited / lacking) for each measurement property per PROM was determined by combining the methodological quality and the results of the different clinimetric studies. Results. In all, 19 out of 1508 identified unique studies were included, in which 12 PROMs were rated. The Patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) and the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) were evaluated on most measurement properties. The evidence for the PRWE is moderate that its reliability, validity (content and hypothesis testing), and responsiveness are good. The evidence is limited that its internal consistency and cross-cultural validity are good, and its measurement error is acceptable. There is no evidence for its structural and criterion validity. The evidence for the DASH is moderate that its responsiveness is good. The evidence is limited that its reliability and the validity on hypothesis testing are good. There is no evidence for the other measurement properties. Conclusion. According to this systematic review, there is, at best, moderate evidence that the responsiveness of the PRWE and DASH are good, as are the reliability and validity of the PRWE. We recommend these PROMs in clinical studies in patients with distal radial fractures; however, more clinimetric studies of higher methodological quality are needed to adequately determine the other measurement properties. Cite this article: Dr Y. V. Kleinlugtenbelt. Are validated outcome measures used in distal radial fractures truly valid?: A critical assessment using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:153–161. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.54.2000462

Objectives

Current studies on the additional benefit of using computed tomography (CT) in order to evaluate the surgeons’ agreement on treatment plans for fracture are inconsistent. This inconsistency can be explained by a methodological phenomenon called ‘spectrum bias’, defined as the bias inherent when investigators choose a population lacking therapeutic uncertainty for evaluation. The aim of the study is to determine the influence of spectrum bias on the intra-observer agreement of treatment plans for fractures of the distal radius.