患者年龄对第五跖骨骨折模式、处理和疗效的影响

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 Medicine
Manasa L Kadiyala, Matthew T Kingery, Raymond Walls, Abhishek Ganta, Sanjit R Konda, Kenneth A Egol
{"title":"患者年龄对第五跖骨骨折模式、处理和疗效的影响","authors":"Manasa L Kadiyala, Matthew T Kingery, Raymond Walls, Abhishek Ganta, Sanjit R Konda, Kenneth A Egol","doi":"10.1053/j.jfas.2024.09.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patients with 5th metatarsal (MT) fractures encompass a broad age distribution. This study evaluated the impact of age on the differences in clinical outcomes and management of these fractures. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting to a single large, urban, academic hospital system with a 5th MT fracture over a 10-year period. Patients were stratified into groups of younger than 65 years old and equal to or greater than 65 years old. Initial and successive radiographs were reviewed, and fractures were categorized as Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3, Shaft, Neck, or Head fractures. 2,461 patients with 5th MT fractures were evaluated. Patients who did not follow up after initial evaluation in the emergency department or urgent care were excluded. Among 2,020 patients with mean follow-up of 1.03 years who met inclusion criteria, 76.2% were younger than 65 years and 23.8% were greater than or equal to 65 years. There was a significant difference in fracture type between groups as older patients were more likely to sustain metatarsal neck fractures but less likely to sustain Zone 1 base fractures (p < 0.05). There was no difference in time to clinical healing (p = 0.108) or time to radiographic union (p = 0.367) for all fractures between age groups. In conclusion, older patients sustain different 5th metatarsal fracture patterns compared to younger patients. However, despite the differences in age, there was no evidence for any difference in clinical and radiographic outcomes between groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":50191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of patient age on fifth metatarsal fracture pattern, management, and outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Manasa L Kadiyala, Matthew T Kingery, Raymond Walls, Abhishek Ganta, Sanjit R Konda, Kenneth A Egol\",\"doi\":\"10.1053/j.jfas.2024.09.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Patients with 5th metatarsal (MT) fractures encompass a broad age distribution. This study evaluated the impact of age on the differences in clinical outcomes and management of these fractures. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting to a single large, urban, academic hospital system with a 5th MT fracture over a 10-year period. Patients were stratified into groups of younger than 65 years old and equal to or greater than 65 years old. Initial and successive radiographs were reviewed, and fractures were categorized as Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3, Shaft, Neck, or Head fractures. 2,461 patients with 5th MT fractures were evaluated. Patients who did not follow up after initial evaluation in the emergency department or urgent care were excluded. Among 2,020 patients with mean follow-up of 1.03 years who met inclusion criteria, 76.2% were younger than 65 years and 23.8% were greater than or equal to 65 years. There was a significant difference in fracture type between groups as older patients were more likely to sustain metatarsal neck fractures but less likely to sustain Zone 1 base fractures (p < 0.05). There was no difference in time to clinical healing (p = 0.108) or time to radiographic union (p = 0.367) for all fractures between age groups. In conclusion, older patients sustain different 5th metatarsal fracture patterns compared to younger patients. However, despite the differences in age, there was no evidence for any difference in clinical and radiographic outcomes between groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2024.09.001\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2024.09.001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第五跖骨(MT)骨折患者年龄分布广泛。本研究评估了年龄对这些骨折的临床结果和管理差异的影响。这是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象是10年间因第5跖骨骨折到一家大型城市学术医院就诊的患者。患者被分为小于65岁组、等于或大于65岁组。对初次和连续的X光片进行复查,并将骨折分为1区、2区、3区、轴部、颈部或头部骨折。共对 2461 名第 5 MT 期骨折患者进行了评估。在急诊科或急诊室进行初步评估后未进行随访的患者被排除在外。符合纳入标准的 2020 名患者的平均随访时间为 1.03 年,其中 76.2% 的患者年龄小于 65 岁,23.8% 的患者年龄大于或等于 65 岁。两组患者的骨折类型存在明显差异,年龄较大的患者更容易发生跖骨颈骨折,但发生1区基底骨折的几率较低(P < 0.05)。各年龄组之间所有骨折的临床愈合时间(p = 0.108)和影像学结合时间(p = 0.367)均无差异。总之,老年患者的第五跖骨骨折模式与年轻患者不同。然而,尽管年龄存在差异,但没有证据表明不同年龄组的临床和放射学结果存在任何差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of patient age on fifth metatarsal fracture pattern, management, and outcomes.

Patients with 5th metatarsal (MT) fractures encompass a broad age distribution. This study evaluated the impact of age on the differences in clinical outcomes and management of these fractures. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting to a single large, urban, academic hospital system with a 5th MT fracture over a 10-year period. Patients were stratified into groups of younger than 65 years old and equal to or greater than 65 years old. Initial and successive radiographs were reviewed, and fractures were categorized as Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3, Shaft, Neck, or Head fractures. 2,461 patients with 5th MT fractures were evaluated. Patients who did not follow up after initial evaluation in the emergency department or urgent care were excluded. Among 2,020 patients with mean follow-up of 1.03 years who met inclusion criteria, 76.2% were younger than 65 years and 23.8% were greater than or equal to 65 years. There was a significant difference in fracture type between groups as older patients were more likely to sustain metatarsal neck fractures but less likely to sustain Zone 1 base fractures (p < 0.05). There was no difference in time to clinical healing (p = 0.108) or time to radiographic union (p = 0.367) for all fractures between age groups. In conclusion, older patients sustain different 5th metatarsal fracture patterns compared to younger patients. However, despite the differences in age, there was no evidence for any difference in clinical and radiographic outcomes between groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery ORTHOPEDICS-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
234
审稿时长
29.8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery is the leading source for original, clinically-focused articles on the surgical and medical management of the foot and ankle. Each bi-monthly, peer-reviewed issue addresses relevant topics to the profession, such as: adult reconstruction of the forefoot; adult reconstruction of the hindfoot and ankle; diabetes; medicine/rheumatology; pediatrics; research; sports medicine; trauma; and tumors.
×
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