Variability of orthopedic physician fracture location identification: Implications for bone stimulator treatment - 12/11/20
, Joseph Henningsen a, Andrew Schneider a, Fady Hijji a, Breanna Dominguez a, Andrew Froehle a, Michael Prayson b, Jennifer Jerele b
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
Article gratuit.
Connectez-vous pour en bénéficier!
Abstract |
Introduction |
Aseptic non-union is a significant complication in approximately 5% of long-bone fractures. External bone stimulation treatment is often attempted before more invasive surgical interventions. Bone stimulators can have favorable results, but have a limited 1.7cm therapeutic radius. This study evaluated the accuracy by which clinicians locate a fracture on a cadaveric model. This has implications for the clinician's ability to accurately counsel patients on daily bone stimulator placement. Additionally, physicians (orthopedic attending surgeons and residents) were compared with pre-clinical (M1 and M2) medical students to evaluate if higher levels of training improved accuracy.
Hypothesis |
Orthopedic physicians and pre-clinical medical students will localize a radiographic fracture within 1.7cm less than 100% of the time, which represents the ideal consistency for patient care. Furthermore, orthopedic physicians will achieve a higher percentage accuracy than pre-clinical medical students.
Materials and methods |
The sample included 20 orthopedic physicians and 16 pre-clinical medical students. Upper (radius) and lower (tibia) extremity cadaver models were prepared by inducing a single, transverse diaphyseal fracture. Plain reference radiographs of each model were obtained. Participants placed a radiopaque marker onto each model at the perceived fracture location, and radiographs were taken to document placement. Perpendicular marker-to-fracture distance was measured to the nearest mm along each bone's long axis using the PACS system.
Results |
Placement within the therapeutic radius was achieved by 70–80% of physicians, and 69–75% of medical students. In the remaining participants, improper placement distances were lower among physicians than among medical students (radius: 2.1±0.5 vs. 3.6±0.9cm, p=0.02; tibia: 2.6±0.5 vs 3.5±0.5cm, p=0.89).
Discussion |
In two cadaveric fracture models, up to 30% of orthopedic surgeons perceived a fracture location to be outside a bone stimulator's 1.7cm therapeutic radius. This finding suggests that physicians and their patients may benefit from additional methods for specifying the location of a non-union before commencing daily bone stimulator treatment.
Level of evidence |
Level IV, prospective cohort study-evidence from a well-designed prospective cohort study.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Radiographic identification, Fracture localization, Bone stimulator, Non-union
Plan
Vol 106 - N° 7
P. 1383-1390 - novembre 2020 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Risk factors associated with unsatisfactory hip function in children with late-diagnosed developmental dislocation of the hip treated by open reduction
- YiQiang Li, Wei Hu, FuXing Xun, XueMei Lin, JingChun Li, Zhe Yuan, YanHan Liu, Federico Canavese, HongWen Xu
- Intramedullary nailing versus a locking compression plate for humeral shaft fracture (AO/OTA 12-A and B): A retrospective study
- Ruipeng Zhang, Yingchao Yin, Shilun Li, Zhiyong Hou, Lin Jin, Yingze Zhang
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.