Aims

The primary aim of this study is to quantify and compare outcomes following a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius in elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) who are managed conservatively versus with surgical fixation (open reduction and internal fixation). Secondary aims are to assess and compare upper limb-specific function, health-related quality of life, wrist pain, complications, grip strength, range of motion, radiological parameters, healthcare resource use, and cost-effectiveness between the groups.

Aims

The aim of the Scaphoid Waist Internal Fixation for Fractures Trial (SWIFFT) was to determine the optimal treatment for adults with a bicortical undisplaced or minimally displaced fracture of the waist of the scaphoid, comparing early surgical fixation with initial cast immobilization, with immediate fixation being offered to patients with nonunion.

Aims

We hypothesized that the wide-awake local anaesthesia with no tourniquet (WALANT) technique is cost-effective, easy to use, safe, and reproducible, with a low learning curve towards mastery, having a high patient satisfaction rate. Furthermore, WALANT would be a suitable alternative for the austere and developing nation environments where lack of funds and resources are a common issue.

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of Kirschner wire (K-wire) fixation with locking-plate fixation for patients with a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius in the five years after injury. Patients and Methods. We report the five-year follow-up of a multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial. A total of 461 adults with a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius within 3 cm of the radiocarpal joint that required surgical fixation were recruited from 18 trauma centres in the United Kingdom. Patients were excluded if the surface of the wrist joint was so badly displaced it required open reduction. In all, 448 patients were randomized to receive either K-wire fixation or locking-plate fixation. In the K-wire group, there were 179 female and 38 male patients with a mean age of 59.1 years (19 to 89). In the locking-plate group, there were 194 female and 37 male patients with a mean age of 58.3 years (20 to 89). The primary outcome measure was the patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE). Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life using the EuroQol five-dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L) assessment, and further surgery related to the index fracture. Results. At 12 months, 402/448 participants (90%) recruited into the main study provided PRWE scores. At year two, 294 participants (66%) provided scores; at year five, 198 participants (44%) provided scores. There was no clinically relevant difference in the PRWE at any point during the five-year follow-up; at five years, the PRWE score was 8.3 (12.5) in the wire group and 11.3 (15.6) in the plate group (95% confidence interval -6.99 to 0.99; p = 0.139). Nor was there a clinically relevant difference in health-related quality of life. Only three participants had further surgery in the five years after their injury (one in the wire group and two in the plate group). Conclusion. This follow-up study continues to show no evidence of a difference in wrist pain, wrist function, or quality of life for patients treated with wires versus locking plates in the five years following a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:978–983

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. 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

Although the outcome of fractures of the distal radius is traditionally assessed using objective clinical variables such as grip strength and range of movement of the wrist, the extent to which they reflect function and outcomes of importance for the patient is uncertain. This may cause considerable inconsistencies in the assessment of outcome using current scoring systems. We prospectively studied 31 patients recovering from unstable fractures of the distal radius in order to investigate the association between objective variables and the level of post-traumatic disability of the wrist as measured by the patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) score. Multiple regression showed considerable differences in the extent to which limitations in specific objective clinical variables reflected the level of disability of the wrist. Grip strength was shown to be a significant predictor of the PRWE score (regression coefficient −1.09, 95% confidence interval −1.76 to −0.42, p < 0.01) and thus appears to be a sensitive indicator of return of function of the wrist. Forearm rotation and flexion and extension of the wrist were not significantly associated with the PRWE score. These observations should be taken into account during the evaluation of methods of treatment and in constructing future clinical outcome scoring systems