Objectives. To investigate the differences of open reduction and internal
fixation (ORIF) of complex AO Type C distal radius fractures between
two different models of a single implant type. Methods. A total of 136 patients who received either a 2.4 mm (n = 61)
or 3.5 mm (n = 75) distal radius locking compression plate (LCP
DR) using a volar approach were followed over two years. The main
outcome measurements included motion, grip strength, pain, and the
scores of Gartland and Werley, the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) and the
Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH). Differences
between the treatment groups were evaluated using regression analysis
and the likelihood ratio test with significance based on the Bonferroni
corrected p-value of <
0.003. Results. The groups were similar with respect to baseline and injury characteristics
as well as general surgical details. The risk of experiencing a
complication after ORIF with a LCP DR 2.4 mm was 18% (n = 11) compared
with 11% (n = 8) after receiving a LCP DR 3.5 mm (p = 0.45). Wrist
function was also similar between the cohorts based on the mean ranges
of movement (all p >
0.052) and grip strength measurements relative
to the contralateral healthy side (p = 0.583). In addition, DASH
and
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. 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.Objectives
Methods
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. A total of 17 DBM products were used as search terms in two available databases: Embase and PubMed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses statement. All articles that reported the clinical use of a DBM-product in trauma and orthopaedic related surgery were included.Objectives
Methods