Comparative evaluation of external chest wall fixator treatment effectiveness in patients with rib fractures

IF 2 3区医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE

Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured Pub Date : 2025-08-06 DOI:10.1016/j.injury.2025.112675

Gizem Kececi Ozgur , Tevfik Ilker Akcam , Kutay Arkoc , Ahmet Kayahan Tekneci , Ayse Gul Ergonul , Ali Ozdil , Kutsal Turhan , Alpaslan Cakan , Ufuk Cagirici

{"title":"Comparative evaluation of external chest wall fixator treatment effectiveness in patients with rib fractures","authors":"Gizem Kececi Ozgur , Tevfik Ilker Akcam , Kutay Arkoc , Ahmet Kayahan Tekneci , Ayse Gul Ergonul , Ali Ozdil , Kutsal Turhan , Alpaslan Cakan , Ufuk Cagirici","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2025.112675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>External chest wall fixators may provide a new approach as part of multimodal treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effect of external chest wall fixator on patients' pain level, complication development and hospital stay in patients with rib fractures.</div></div><div><h3>Material and method</h3><div>Patients who were admitted due to trauma and had serial rib fractures between December 2020 and December 2021 were evaluated. There were 14 patients in case group and 20 in control group. External chest wall fixator was applied to the case group in addition to standard treatment. Pain levels, development of complications and duration of hospitalization were recorded.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Pain levels in first and third months were lower in case group than control group. Mean pain levels in the first month were 1.79 (SD 0.80) in case group and 2.85 (SD 1.53) in control group, in the third-month were 0.43 (SD 0.64) in case group and 1.34 (SD 1.59) in control group, and the difference was significant (<em>p</em> = 0.022 and 0.032, respectively). Complications were more common in patients with more rib fractures (<em>p</em> = 0.002). While complications developed in 2 patients in the case group and 8 patients in the control group, the difference was not statistically significant (<em>p</em> = 0.216). Duration of hospital stay was shorter in the case group and the difference was significant (2.7 (SD 0.9) days versus 2.0 (SD 0.7) days, <em>p</em> = 0.049).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>It has been shown in our study that external fixator can be an effective method in reducing patients' pain and hospital stay. This method can be included as part of multimodal treatment in patients with rib fractures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54978,"journal":{"name":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","volume":"56 10","pages":"Article 112675"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138325005352","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

External chest wall fixators may provide a new approach as part of multimodal treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effect of external chest wall fixator on patients' pain level, complication development and hospital stay in patients with rib fractures.

Material and method

Patients who were admitted due to trauma and had serial rib fractures between December 2020 and December 2021 were evaluated. There were 14 patients in case group and 20 in control group. External chest wall fixator was applied to the case group in addition to standard treatment. Pain levels, development of complications and duration of hospitalization were recorded.

Results

Pain levels in first and third months were lower in case group than control group. Mean pain levels in the first month were 1.79 (SD 0.80) in case group and 2.85 (SD 1.53) in control group, in the third-month were 0.43 (SD 0.64) in case group and 1.34 (SD 1.59) in control group, and the difference was significant (p = 0.022 and 0.032, respectively). Complications were more common in patients with more rib fractures (p = 0.002). While complications developed in 2 patients in the case group and 8 patients in the control group, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.216). Duration of hospital stay was shorter in the case group and the difference was significant (2.7 (SD 0.9) days versus 2.0 (SD 0.7) days, p = 0.049).

Conclusion

It has been shown in our study that external fixator can be an effective method in reducing patients' pain and hospital stay. This method can be included as part of multimodal treatment in patients with rib fractures.

查看原文本刊更多论文

胸壁外固定架治疗肋骨骨折疗效的比较评价

目的胸壁外固定架可作为多模式治疗的新途径。本研究旨在探讨胸壁外固定架对肋骨骨折患者疼痛程度、并发症发生及住院时间的影响。材料与方法对2020年12月至2021年12月期间因创伤和连环肋骨骨折入院的患者进行评估。病例组14例，对照组20例。病例组在标准治疗的基础上应用外胸壁固定器。记录疼痛程度、并发症发生情况和住院时间。结果病例组第1、3个月西班牙语水平低于对照组。病例组患者第一个月的平均疼痛水平为1.79 (SD 0.80)，对照组为2.85 (SD 1.53)；第三个月的平均疼痛水平为0.43 (SD 0.64)，对照组为1.34 (SD 1.59)，差异有统计学意义（p分别为0.022和0.032）。并发症在肋骨骨折较多的患者中更常见（p = 0.002）。病例组出现并发症2例，对照组出现并发症8例，差异无统计学意义（p = 0.216）。病例组住院时间较短，差异有统计学意义（2.7 （SD 0.9）天和2.0 （SD 0.7）天，p = 0.049）。结论外固定架是减少患者疼痛和缩短住院时间的有效方法。该方法可作为肋骨骨折患者多模式治疗的一部分。

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

Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured 医学-急救医学

CiteScore

4.00

自引率

8.00%

发文量

699

审稿时长

96 days

期刊介绍： Injury was founded in 1969 and is an international journal dealing with all aspects of trauma care and accident surgery. Our primary aim is to facilitate the exchange of ideas, techniques and information among all members of the trauma team.