桡骨远端可复位不稳定骨折的治疗

J. Neto, J. C. Belloti, J. D. Dos Santos, V. Y. de Moraes, Flávio Galopa, C. Fernandes
{"title":"桡骨远端可复位不稳定骨折的治疗","authors":"J. Neto, J. C. Belloti, J. D. Dos Santos, V. Y. de Moraes, Flávio Galopa, C. Fernandes","doi":"10.1177/1558944716660555BS","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: In the treatment of unstable fractures of the distal radius, there is no conclusive evidence about the greater effectiveness of the reduction and fixation methods: bloodless external fixation (BEF) or open locked volar plate (LVP). The goal is to determine which of the two methods is most effective. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. The primary endpoint was the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and measurement of pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]). The final assessment was given at 12 months postoperatively. Results: In the final evaluation, there was no difference between groups in assessments of the DASH questionnaire (3.71 for the LVP group and 2.72 for the BEF group, P = .58), and pain by VAS (0.84 for the LVP group and 0.53 for the BEF group, P = .39). Treatment with LVP was more effective than one with BEF in early evaluation with 8 weeks to DASH questionnaire (21.82 for the LVP group and 39.88 for the BEF group, P = .0012). In the group treated with LVP, there were 11.7% of complications, and in the group treated with external fixator, 26.3%. There were 3 treatment failures in the group treated with LVP and none in the other group. Conclusions: There were no assessed differences between groups in the final evaluations of the DASH questionnaire and the pain by VAS. In the early 8-week assessment, there was a positive difference to the LVP method.","PeriodicalId":76630,"journal":{"name":"The Hand","volume":"11 1","pages":"45S - 45S"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1558944716660555BS","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treatment of Reducible Unstable Fractures of the Distal Radius\",\"authors\":\"J. Neto, J. C. Belloti, J. D. Dos Santos, V. Y. de Moraes, Flávio Galopa, C. Fernandes\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1558944716660555BS\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: In the treatment of unstable fractures of the distal radius, there is no conclusive evidence about the greater effectiveness of the reduction and fixation methods: bloodless external fixation (BEF) or open locked volar plate (LVP). The goal is to determine which of the two methods is most effective. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. The primary endpoint was the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and measurement of pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]). The final assessment was given at 12 months postoperatively. Results: In the final evaluation, there was no difference between groups in assessments of the DASH questionnaire (3.71 for the LVP group and 2.72 for the BEF group, P = .58), and pain by VAS (0.84 for the LVP group and 0.53 for the BEF group, P = .39). Treatment with LVP was more effective than one with BEF in early evaluation with 8 weeks to DASH questionnaire (21.82 for the LVP group and 39.88 for the BEF group, P = .0012). In the group treated with LVP, there were 11.7% of complications, and in the group treated with external fixator, 26.3%. There were 3 treatment failures in the group treated with LVP and none in the other group. Conclusions: There were no assessed differences between groups in the final evaluations of the DASH questionnaire and the pain by VAS. In the early 8-week assessment, there was a positive difference to the LVP method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Hand\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"45S - 45S\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1558944716660555BS\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Hand\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1558944716660555BS\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Hand","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1558944716660555BS","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:在桡骨远端不稳定骨折的治疗中,无血外固定(BEF)和开放锁定掌侧钢板(LVP)哪一种复位和固定方法更有效尚无确切证据。目标是确定两种方法中哪一种最有效。方法:80例患者入组随机临床试验。主要终点是手臂、肩膀和手的残疾(DASH)问卷和疼痛测量(视觉模拟量表[VAS])。术后12个月进行最终评估。结果:在最终评估中,两组患者DASH问卷评分(LVP组为3.71分,BEF组为2.72分,P = 0.58)和VAS疼痛评分(LVP组为0.84分,BEF组为0.53分,P = 0.39)无差异。在早期8周DASH问卷评估中,LVP治疗的有效性高于BEF治疗(LVP组为21.82,BEF组为39.88,P = 0.0012)。LVP组并发症发生率为11.7%,外固定架组为26.3%。LVP组治疗失败3例,LVP组治疗失败1例。结论:两组患者在DASH问卷最终评分和VAS疼痛评分方面无明显差异。在早期8周的评估中,与LVP方法有正差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Treatment of Reducible Unstable Fractures of the Distal Radius
Objective: In the treatment of unstable fractures of the distal radius, there is no conclusive evidence about the greater effectiveness of the reduction and fixation methods: bloodless external fixation (BEF) or open locked volar plate (LVP). The goal is to determine which of the two methods is most effective. Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. The primary endpoint was the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and measurement of pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]). The final assessment was given at 12 months postoperatively. Results: In the final evaluation, there was no difference between groups in assessments of the DASH questionnaire (3.71 for the LVP group and 2.72 for the BEF group, P = .58), and pain by VAS (0.84 for the LVP group and 0.53 for the BEF group, P = .39). Treatment with LVP was more effective than one with BEF in early evaluation with 8 weeks to DASH questionnaire (21.82 for the LVP group and 39.88 for the BEF group, P = .0012). In the group treated with LVP, there were 11.7% of complications, and in the group treated with external fixator, 26.3%. There were 3 treatment failures in the group treated with LVP and none in the other group. Conclusions: There were no assessed differences between groups in the final evaluations of the DASH questionnaire and the pain by VAS. In the early 8-week assessment, there was a positive difference to the LVP method.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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