Aims. The underlying natural history of suspected scaphoid fractures (SSFs) is unclear and assumed poor. There is an urgent requirement to develop the literature around SSFs to quantify the actual prevalence of intervention following SSF. Defining the risk of intervention following SSF may influence the need for widespread surveillance and screening of SSF injuries, and could influence medicolegal actions around missed scaphoid fractures. Methods. Data on SSF were retrospectively gathered from virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) across a large Scottish Health Board over a four-year period, from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2021. The Bluespier Electronic Patient Record System identified any surgical procedure being undertaken in relation to a scaphoid injury over the same time period. Isolating patients who underwent surgical intervention for SSF was performed by cross-referencing the unique patient Community Health Index number for patients who underwent these scaphoid procedures with those seen at VFCs for SSF over this four-year period. Results. In total, 1,739 patients were identified as having had a SSF. Five patients (0.28%) underwent early open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). One patient (0.06%) developed a nonunion and underwent ORIF with bone grafting. All six patients undergoing surgery were male (p = 0.005). The overall rate of intervention following a SSF was 0.35%. The early intervention rate in those undergoing primary MRI was one (0.36%), compared with three in those without (0.27%) (p > 0.576). Conclusion. Surgical intervention was rare following a SSF and was not required in females. A primary MRI policy did not appear to be associated with any change in primary or secondary intervention. These data are the first and largest in recent literature to quantify the prevalence of surgical intervention following a SSF, and may be used to guide surveillance and screening pathways as well as define medicolegal risk involved in missing a true fracture in SSFs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):312–316

Aims. The aim of this study was to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference, from the payer perspective, in the cost of treatment of a distal radial fracture in an elderly patient, aged > 65 years, between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and closed reduction (CR). Materials and Methods. Data relating to the treatment of these injuries in the elderly between January 2007 and December 2015 were extracted using the Humana and Medicare Advantage Databases. The primary outcome of interest was the cost associated with treatment. Secondary analysis included the cost of common complications. Statistical analysis was performed using a non-parametric t-test and chi-squared test. Results. Our search yielded 8924 patients treated with ORIF and 5629 patients treated with CR. The mean cost of an uncomplicated ORIF was more than a CR ($7749 versus $2161). The mean additional cost of a complication in the ORIF group was greater than in the CR group ($1853 versus $1362). Conclusion. These findings show that there are greater payer fees associated with ORIF than CR in patients aged > 65 years with a distal radial fracture. CR may be a higher-value intervention in these patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:205–11

Aims

The aim of this study was to investigate whether intraoperative 3D fluoroscopic imaging outperforms dorsal tangential views in the detection of dorsal cortex screw penetration after volar plating of an intra-articular distal radial fracture, as identified on postoperative CT imaging.