41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Study protocol: non-displaced distal radial fractures in adult patients: three weeks vs. five weeks of cast immobilization: a randomized trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Up to 30% of patients suffer from long-term functional restrictions following conservative treatment of distal radius fractures. Whether duration of cast immobilisation influences functional outcome remains unclear.

          Methods/Design

          The aim of the study is to evaluate whether the duration of immobilization of non or minimally displaced distal radial fractures can be safely reduced. We will compare three weeks of plaster cast immobilization with five weeks of plaster cast immobilization in adult patient with non or minimally displaced distal radial fractures.

          Study design: a prospective randomized clinical trial.

          Study population: adult (>18 years) (independent in activities of daily living) patients with a non/minimal displaced distal radius fracture (dorsal angulation <15°, volar tilt <20°, radial inclination >15°, ulnar positive variance <5 mm and an articular step off <2 mm).

          Intervention: three weeks of plaster cast immobilization versus five weeks of plaster cast immobilization.

          Main study parameters: primary outcome parameters: Patient related wrist evaluation (PRWE) Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QUICKDASH) score after a one year follow-up, and secondary parameters: range of motion, pain level (VAS) and complications.

          Discussion

          The expectation of this study is that shorter duration of plaster cast immobilisation is beneficial for the patient with a distal radius fracture. This risk of specific complications is low and generally similar in both treatment options. Moreover, the burden of the study is not much higher compared to standard treatment. Follow-up is standardized according to current trauma guidelines. Literature indicates that both treatment options from the study are accepted for displaced distal radius fractures. No clear advantage for one treatment options is found at present in the literature, although there is no level I evidence present. This trial will provide level-1 evidence for the comparison of consolidation and functional outcome between two treatment options for non-displaced distal radial fractures. The gathered data may support the development of a clinical guideline for conservative treatment of distal radial fractures.

          Trial registration

          Netherlands National Trial Register NTR3552.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.

          (2015)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Patient rating of wrist pain and disability: a reliable and valid measurement tool.

            The goal of this study was to develop a reliable and valid tool for quantifying patient-rated wrist pain and disability. Survey, tool development, reliability, and validity study. Upper extremity unit. One hundred members of the International Wrist Investigators were surveyed by mail to assist in development of the scale. Patients with distal radius (n = 64) or scaphoid (n = 35) fractures were enrolled in a reliability study, and 101 patients with distal radius fractures were enrolled in a validity study. Information from the expert survey, biomechanical literature, and patient interviews was used as a basis for item generation and definition of structural limitations for a scale that would be practical in the clinic. Patients with distal radius or scaphoid fractures completed the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) on two occasions to determine test-retest reliability. Patients with distal radius fractures (n = 101) completed the PRWE and the SF-36 and were tested with traditional impairment measures at baseline and at two, three, and six months after fracture to determine construct and criterion validity. Reliability coefficients (ICCs) and validity correlations (Pearson product moment correlations). Patient opinions on pain and on ability to do activities of daily living and work were thought to be the most important dimensions to include in subjective outcome tools. Brevity and simplicity were seen as essential in the clinic environment. A fifteen-item questionnaire (the PRWE) was designed to measure wrist pain and disability. Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICCs > 0.90). Validity assessment demonstrated that the instrument detected significant differences over time (p < 0.01) and was appropriately correlated with alternate forms of assessing parameters of pain and disability. The PRWE provides a brief, reliable, and valid measure of patient-rated pain and disability.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Outcome evaluation measures for wrist and hand: which one to choose?

              The aim of this study was to critically analyse the various outcome measures available for assessing wrist and hand function. To this end, an extensive literature search was performed on Medline, PubMed and the Science Citation Index, focusing on terms associated with the method of development of the outcome measures item generation, item reduction, validity, reliability, internal consistency and their strengths and weaknesses. The most commonly used outcome measures described in literature were the DASH score (disability of shoulder, arm and hand questionnaire), the PRWE score (patient-rated wrist evaluation questionnaire), the Brigham and Women's carpal tunnel questionnaire and the Gartland and Werley score. Our study provides very useful evidence to suggest that the PRWE score is the most responsive instrument for evaluating the outcome in patients with distal radius fractures, while the DASH score is the best instrument for evaluating patients with disorders involving multiple joints of the upper limb. The Brigham and Women's score is a disease-specific outcome instrument for carpal tunnel syndrome; it has been validated and demonstrated to show good responsiveness and reliability in evaluating outcome in patients with carpal tunnel release. The Gartland and Werley score, although the most commonly described instrument in the literature for evaluating outcome after wrist surgery, has not been validated so to date.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
                BioMed Central
                1471-2474
                2014
                20 January 2014
                : 15
                : 24
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery, Spaarne Hospital, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Trauma Unit Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Article
                1471-2474-15-24
                10.1186/1471-2474-15-24
                3923744
                24443982
                447a2019-930c-4382-aad2-7f3e11959e1b
                Copyright © 2014 Bentohami et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 13 February 2013
                : 17 December 2013
                Categories
                Study Protocol

                Orthopedics
                Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article