Non-operative treatment of metacarpal fractures and patient-reported outcomes: a multicentre snapshot study.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
L E M de Haas, P A Jawahier, T C C Hendriks, D A Salentijn, B T van Hoorn, R H H Groenwold, N W L Schep, M van Heijl
{"title":"Non-operative treatment of metacarpal fractures and patient-reported outcomes: a multicentre snapshot study.","authors":"L E M de Haas, P A Jawahier, T C C Hendriks, D A Salentijn, B T van Hoorn, R H H Groenwold, N W L Schep, M van Heijl","doi":"10.1007/s00068-024-02659-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to investigate practice variation in non-operative treatment methods and immobilisation duration for metacarpal fractures, and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Conducted in 12 Dutch hospitals over three months in 2020, this study included adult patients with non-operatively treated solitary metacarpal fractures. Fractures were classified into intra-articular base, extra-articular base, shaft, neck, and intra-articular head fractures. The treatment methods (functional treatment allowing digit mobilisation or immobilisation) and immobilisation duration were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) at three months post-trauma.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 389 included patients, shaft fractures were most common (n = 150, 39%), with 93% immobilised, followed by fifth metacarpal neck fractures (n = 93, 24%), with 75% immobilised. Immobilisation rates for fifth metacarpal neck fractures varied between hospitals, ranging from 29% (95% CI 0.10-0.58) to 100% (95% CI 0.78-1.00). The median immobilisation duration for all fractures was 23 days (IQR: 20-28), and hospital setting was independently associated with this duration. Patients with metacarpal shaft fractures immobilised for less than 21 days had higher MHQ scores compared to those immobilised for 21 days or more (median (IQR) 83 (76-100) versus 71 (57-89), p = 0.026).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results showed practice variation in the treatment of metacarpal fractures, especially in the treatment of fifth MC neck fractures, with some hospitals following the Dutch guideline that advocates functional treatment while others did not. There are suggestions that prolonged immobilisation of metacarpal shaft fractures may lead to a worse MHQ score. These findings underscore the need for adherence to treatment protocols and emphasize functional treatment to potentially improve patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02659-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate practice variation in non-operative treatment methods and immobilisation duration for metacarpal fractures, and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes.

Methods: Conducted in 12 Dutch hospitals over three months in 2020, this study included adult patients with non-operatively treated solitary metacarpal fractures. Fractures were classified into intra-articular base, extra-articular base, shaft, neck, and intra-articular head fractures. The treatment methods (functional treatment allowing digit mobilisation or immobilisation) and immobilisation duration were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) at three months post-trauma.

Results: Of 389 included patients, shaft fractures were most common (n = 150, 39%), with 93% immobilised, followed by fifth metacarpal neck fractures (n = 93, 24%), with 75% immobilised. Immobilisation rates for fifth metacarpal neck fractures varied between hospitals, ranging from 29% (95% CI 0.10-0.58) to 100% (95% CI 0.78-1.00). The median immobilisation duration for all fractures was 23 days (IQR: 20-28), and hospital setting was independently associated with this duration. Patients with metacarpal shaft fractures immobilised for less than 21 days had higher MHQ scores compared to those immobilised for 21 days or more (median (IQR) 83 (76-100) versus 71 (57-89), p = 0.026).

Conclusions: The results showed practice variation in the treatment of metacarpal fractures, especially in the treatment of fifth MC neck fractures, with some hospitals following the Dutch guideline that advocates functional treatment while others did not. There are suggestions that prolonged immobilisation of metacarpal shaft fractures may lead to a worse MHQ score. These findings underscore the need for adherence to treatment protocols and emphasize functional treatment to potentially improve patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

掌骨骨折的非手术治疗和患者报告结果:一项多中心快照研究。
目的:本研究旨在调查掌骨骨折非手术治疗方法和固定时间的实践差异,并评估患者报告的结果:这项研究于 2020 年在 12 家荷兰医院进行,历时三个月,研究对象包括接受非手术治疗的单发掌骨骨折成年患者。骨折分为关节内基底、关节外基底、轴、颈和关节内头部骨折。评估了治疗方法(允许手指活动的功能性治疗或固定)和固定时间。使用密歇根手部结果问卷(MHQ)对创伤后三个月的患者报告结果进行评估:结果:在纳入的 389 名患者中,轴骨折最为常见(n = 150,39%),93%的患者接受了固定治疗,其次是第五掌骨颈骨折(n = 93,24%),75%的患者接受了固定治疗。第五掌骨颈骨折的固定率因医院而异,从29%(95% CI 0.10-0.58)到100%(95% CI 0.78-1.00)不等。所有骨折的中位固定时间为23天(IQR:20-28),医院环境与固定时间有独立关联。与固定时间在21天或以上的患者相比,固定时间在21天以下的掌骨骨折患者的MHQ评分更高(中位数(IQR)83(76-100)对71(57-89),P = 0.026):结果表明,在治疗掌骨骨折,尤其是治疗第五MC颈骨折方面存在实践差异,一些医院遵循了荷兰的指南,提倡功能性治疗,而另一些医院则没有这样做。有观点认为,长时间固定掌骨骨折可能会导致 MHQ 评分下降。这些发现强调了遵守治疗方案和强调功能性治疗的必要性,从而有可能改善患者的治疗效果和成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信