External fixators in austere environments under surge capacity conditions: A systematic review

IF 1.4 3区医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL

Clinical Biomechanics Pub Date : 2025-03-21 DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106500

David Bull , Mark Sykes , Mehdi Saeidi , Anthony Bull

{"title":"External fixators in austere environments under surge capacity conditions: A systematic review","authors":"David Bull , Mark Sykes , Mehdi Saeidi , Anthony Bull","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>High-energy trauma causing open fractures can take place in low-resource settings (“austere” environment) and mainly affects the lower limbs. In these environments, external fixators often provide definitive surgical treatment. This systematic review identifies those external fixators for use on lower limbs as a definitive treatment that are most clinically effective in the austere environment.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Multiple databases were searched to identify studies investigating outcomes of external fixators used in austere environments. Case reports were excluded. Hand searching and expert input identified additional references.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>33 publications met the inclusion criteria. These were used worldwide. Commercially available fixators were used in 18 publications, and non-commercial ones including Balkan-designed devices in 6. The remaining non-commercial devices had 1 or 2 publications each. Union rates, where reported, varied from 47 to 100 % with no discernible difference between devices or location of use. Clinical complications varied from infection (0–79 %) through to nonunion and delayed union (0–22 %), loosening (0–36 %), osteomyelitis (0–19 %), construct stability (27–100 %), and amputation (0–50 %).</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>The variability in union and complication rates highlights the variability in severity of injuries, type of austere environment, and variability in fixator device efficacy. The non-commercial or “one-off” devices show promise, with comparable or better outcomes to the commercial devices, whereas others did not work well, with poor outcomes. The need for surge capacity availability in these austere environments would enable locally manufactured devices to be quickly made which are fit for purpose, yet regulation and quality control of these remains a challenge in their rollout.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50992,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biomechanics","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 106500"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268003325000737","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

High-energy trauma causing open fractures can take place in low-resource settings (“austere” environment) and mainly affects the lower limbs. In these environments, external fixators often provide definitive surgical treatment. This systematic review identifies those external fixators for use on lower limbs as a definitive treatment that are most clinically effective in the austere environment.

Methods

Multiple databases were searched to identify studies investigating outcomes of external fixators used in austere environments. Case reports were excluded. Hand searching and expert input identified additional references.

Findings

33 publications met the inclusion criteria. These were used worldwide. Commercially available fixators were used in 18 publications, and non-commercial ones including Balkan-designed devices in 6. The remaining non-commercial devices had 1 or 2 publications each. Union rates, where reported, varied from 47 to 100 % with no discernible difference between devices or location of use. Clinical complications varied from infection (0–79 %) through to nonunion and delayed union (0–22 %), loosening (0–36 %), osteomyelitis (0–19 %), construct stability (27–100 %), and amputation (0–50 %).

Interpretation

The variability in union and complication rates highlights the variability in severity of injuries, type of austere environment, and variability in fixator device efficacy. The non-commercial or “one-off” devices show promise, with comparable or better outcomes to the commercial devices, whereas others did not work well, with poor outcomes. The need for surge capacity availability in these austere environments would enable locally manufactured devices to be quickly made which are fit for purpose, yet regulation and quality control of these remains a challenge in their rollout.

查看原文本刊更多论文

外固定器在能力激增条件下的艰苦环境中的应用：系统回顾

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

Clinical Biomechanics 医学-工程：生物医学

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

5.60%

发文量

189

审稿时长

12.3 weeks

期刊介绍： Clinical Biomechanics is an international multidisciplinary journal of biomechanics with a focus on medical and clinical applications of new knowledge in the field. The science of biomechanics helps explain the causes of cell, tissue, organ and body system disorders, and supports clinicians in the diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment methods and technologies. Clinical Biomechanics aims to strengthen the links between laboratory and clinic by publishing cutting-edge biomechanics research which helps to explain the causes of injury and disease, and which provides evidence contributing to improved clinical management. A rigorous peer review system is employed and every attempt is made to process and publish top-quality papers promptly. Clinical Biomechanics explores all facets of body system, organ, tissue and cell biomechanics, with an emphasis on medical and clinical applications of the basic science aspects. The role of basic science is therefore recognized in a medical or clinical context. The readership of the journal closely reflects its multi-disciplinary contents, being a balance of scientists, engineers and clinicians. The contents are in the form of research papers, brief reports, review papers and correspondence, whilst special interest issues and supplements are published from time to time. Disciplines covered include biomechanics and mechanobiology at all scales, bioengineering and use of tissue engineering and biomaterials for clinical applications, biophysics, as well as biomechanical aspects of medical robotics, ergonomics, physical and occupational therapeutics and rehabilitation.