Santiago A. Lozano-Calderon

Wrist Mobilization Following Volar Plate Fixation of Fractures of the Distal Part of the Radius

BACKGROUND Plate fixation of the distal part of the radius is believed to improve wrist motion by allowing earlier exercises. We performed a clinical trial comparing mobilization of the wrist joint within two weeks (early motion) or at six weeks (late motion) after volar plate fixation of a fracture of the distal part of the radius in order to test the null hypothesis that there are no differences in the flexion-extension arc three and six months after surgery. METHODS Sixty patients with an isolated fracture of the distal part of the radius that was treated with a single, fixed-angle volar plate and screws were enrolled. Thirty patients were randomized to the early motion group, and thirty were randomized to the late motion group. Three and six months after surgery, patients underwent range of motion measurements, grip strength measurements, and radiographic evaluation. The patients also were evaluated according to the modified Gartland and Werley score and the Mayo wrist score, rated pain on a 10-point ordinal scale, and completed the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. RESULTS There were no significant differences between the early motion group and the late motion group with regard to the average flexion-extension arc of the injured wrist at three months (104 degrees compared with 107 degrees; p = 0.61) or six months (124 degrees compared with 126 degrees; p = 0.65) after surgery. In secondary analyses, there were no significant differences in terms of selected other motions, grip strength, radiographic parameters, or the Gartland and Werley, Mayo, pain, or DASH scores. CONCLUSIONS The initiation of wrist exercises six weeks after volar plate fixation of a fracture of the distal part of the radius does not lead to decreased wrist motion compared with the initiation of wrist motion within two weeks after surgery.

Diagnosis of Scaphoid Fracture Displacement with Radiography and Computed Tomography

BACKGROUND Displacement is an important risk factor for nonunion of scaphoid wrist fractures. We compared computed tomography with radiographs with regard to their ability to detect displacement. METHODS Six blinded observers rated thirty scaphoid fractures (ten displaced and twenty nondisplaced) with use of radiographs and computed tomography. The radiographs were evaluated separately from the computed tomography scans and then, in a third evaluation, the two imaging studies were reviewed simultaneously. The evaluations were repeated four weeks later. Observers were asked to evaluate specific measures of fracture displacement and then to judge the fracture as being displaced or nondisplaced. RESULTS Intraobserver reliability was better for computed tomography alone and the combination of radiographs and computed tomography than it was for radiographs alone (kappa values, 0.65, 0.63, and 0.54, respectively; all p<0.001). The interobserver reliability was also better for computed tomography alone and the combination of radiographs and computed tomography than it was for radiographs alone (kappa values, 0.43, 0.48, and 0.27, respectively; all p<0.001). The average sensitivity was 75% for radiographs alone, 72% for computed tomography alone, and 80% for both; the average specificity was 64%, 80%, and 73%, respectively; the average accuracy was 68%, 77%, and 75%, respectively. The positive predictive values (assuming a 5% prevalence of fracture displacement) were low (0.10, 0.13, and 0.16) and the negative predictive values were high (0.97, 0.98, and 0.99) for the radiographs, computed tomography, and combined modality. CONCLUSIONS Computed tomography improves the reliability of detecting scaphoid fracture displacement but has a more limited effect on accuracy, which remains <80%. The utility of computed tomography scans for diagnosing scaphoid fracture displacement is affected by the low prevalence of fracture displacement. This study suggests that computed tomography scans are useful for ruling out displacement but not for diagnosing it. We recommend that all scaphoid fractures be evaluated with computed tomography in order to rule out displacement.

The Quality and Strength of Evidence for Etiology: Example of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

PURPOSE The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the quality and strength of scientific evidence supporting an etiologic relationship between a disease and a proposed risk factor using a scoring system based on the Bradford Hill criteria for causal association. METHODS A quantitative score based on the Bradford Hill criteria (qBHs) was used to evaluate 117 articles presenting original data regarding the etiology of carpal tunnel syndrome: 33 (28%) that evaluated biological (structural or genetic) risk factors, 51 (44%) that evaluated occupational (environment or activity-related) risk factors, and 33 (28%) that evaluated both types of risk factors. RESULTS The quantitative Bradford Hill scores of 2 independent observers showed very good agreement, supporting the reliability of the instrument. The average qBHs was 12.2 points (moderate association) among biological risk factors compared with 5.2 points (poor association) for occupational risk factors. The highest average qBHs was observed for genetic factors (14.2), race (11.7), and anthropometric measures of the wrist (11.3 points) with all studies finding a moderate causal association. The highest average qBHs among occupational risk factors was observed for activities requiring repetitive hand use (6.5 points among the 30 of 45 articles that reported a causal association), substantial exposure to vibration (6.3 points; 14 of 20 articles), and type of occupation (5.6 points; 38 of 53 articles), with the findings being much less consistent. CONCLUSIONS According to a quantitative analysis of published scientific evidence, the etiology of carpal tunnel syndrome is largely structural, genetic, and biological, with environmental and occupational factors such as repetitive hand use playing a minor and more debatable role. Speculative causal theories should be analyzed through a rigorous approach prior to wide adoption.

Quality of prospective controlled randomized trials: Analysis of trials of treatment for lateral epicondylitis as an example

BACKGROUND The Oxford Levels of Evidence are now routinely assigned at many orthopaedic journals. One disadvantage of this approach is that study designs with a higher level of evidence may be given greater weight than the overall quality of the study merits. In other words, there is no guarantee that research is scientifically valid simply because a more sophisticated study design was employed. The aim of this study was to review Level-I and II therapeutic studies on lateral epicondylitis to measure variation in quality among the highest-level study designs. METHODS Fifty-four prospective randomized therapeutic trials involving patients with lateral epicondylitis were evaluated by two independent reviewers according to the Oxford Levels of Evidence, a modification of the Coleman Methodology Score (a 0 to 100-point scale), and the revised CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) score. RESULTS The two reviewers were consistent in their use of the Oxford Levels of Evidence (kappa = 0.73, p < 0.01), the modified Coleman Methodology Score (kappa = 0.73; p < 0.01), and the CONSORT score (kappa = 0.53; p < 0.01). Both reviewers rated the majority of studies as Level II (91% and 94%) and as unsatisfactory according to the Coleman Methodology Score (87% and 89%) and the CONSORT score (62% and 63%). Areas of deficiency included poor descriptions of recruitment (>90% of the trials), power-level calculations (73%), randomization (58%), blinding (90%), and participant flow (50%) as well as inadequate follow-up, sample size, and blinding. CONCLUSIONS The use of the gold-standard trial design, the prospective randomized therapeutic study (Level-I or II evidence), does not ensure quality research or reporting. Critical analysis of scientific work is important regardless of the study design. Clinical scientists should be familiar with the CONSORT criteria and adhere to them when reporting clinical trials.

Injection of Dexamethasone Versus Placebo for Lateral Elbow Pain: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE We tested the hypothesis that there is no difference in disability, pain, and grip strength 1 and 6 months after corticosteroid and lidocaine injection compared with lidocaine injection alone (placebo). METHODS Sixty-four patients were randomly assigned to dexamethasone (n = 31) or placebo (n = 33) injection. At enrollment, disability (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand [DASH] questionnaire), pain on a visual analog scale, grip strength, depression (the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale; CESD), and ineffective coping skills (the Pain Catastrophizing Scale; PCS) were comparable between treatment groups. At 1 and 6 months, DASH, pain, and grip strength measures were repeated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine predictors of disability. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS One month after injection, DASH scores averaged 24 versus 27 points (dexamethasone vs placebo), pain 3.7 versus 4.3 cm, and grip strength 83% versus 87%. At 6 months, DASH scores averaged 18 versus 13 points, pain 2.4 versus 1.7 cm, and grip strength 98% versus 97%. CESD and PCS scores correlated with disability as measured by the DASH questionnaire. The best multivariate models included CESD at 1 month and PCS scores at 6 months and explained the majority of variability in DASH scores. CONCLUSIONS Corticosteroid injection did not affect the apparently self-limited course of lateral elbow pain. In secondary analyses in a subset of patients, perceived disability associated with lateral elbow pain correlated with depression and ineffective coping skills. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic I.

Predictors of Wrist Function and Health Status After Operative Treatment of Fractures of the Distal Radius

PURPOSE To identify the most important determinants of physician-based and patient-based scoring systems for the wrist and upper extremity after operative treatment of a fracture of the distal radius, with the hypothesis that pain is the strongest determinant of both types of scores. METHODS Eighty-four patients were evaluated a minimum of 6 months after operative fixation of an unstable distal radius fracture using 2 physician-based evaluation instruments (the Mayo Wrist Score and the Gartland and Werley Score) and an upper extremity-specific health status questionnaire (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand; DASH). Multivariate analysis of variance and multiple linear regression modeling were used to identify the degree to which various factors affect variability in the scores derived with these measures. RESULTS The physician-based scoring systems showed moderate correlation with each other and with DASH scores. The results of multiple linear regression modeling were as follows (percent variability accounted for by the best fit model/model with top factor alone): Mayo: 54% grip and flexion arc/47% grip alone; Gartland and Werley: 70% pain, flexion arc, radiocarpal arthritis, and duration of follow-up/53% pain alone; DASH: 71% pain, forearm arc, and type of fracture/65% pain alone. CONCLUSIONS At early follow-up, pain dominates the patients perception of function after recovery from an operatively treated distal radius fracture as measured by the DASH score and the physician-based rating according to the system of Gartland and Werley. The Mayo Wrist Score is determined primarily by grip strength rather than pain. Because perception of pain and strength of grip have been shown to be influenced by psychosocial factors in some individuals, both patient-based and physician-based measures of wrist function may be vulnerable to illness behavior. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Prognostic III.

Interposition arthroplasty of the elbow with hinged external fixation for post-traumatic arthritis

This retrospective case series reviewed 9 men and 4 women (mean age, 41 years) with severe post-traumatic elbow arthrosis treated with interposition arthroplasty and temporary hinged external fixation. In 2 patients, treatment was considered to have failed because of early postoperative instability, and their results were classified as poor. The remaining 11 were followed up for a mean of 4 years (range, 1-11 years). The mean arc of flexion improved from 48 degrees before surgery to 110 degrees after surgery. The mean postoperative Broberg-Morrey score was 77 points, reflecting a mean improvement of 41 points (range, 13-68 points) and corresponding with 1 excellent, 4 good, 4 fair, and 4 poor results. Four patients had severe instability associated with bone loss of the distal humerus or trochlear notch. Interposition arthroplasty can improve elbow motion and function but at the expense of elbow stability despite hinged external fixation.

Imaging for Suspected Scaphoid Fracture

M A ress t for t sens 6%. T AcHE PATIENT 21-year-old collegiate football player presents reatment of a wrist injury from a fall onto his tretched hand during practice. An evaluation in mergency room identified slight swelling, no ecc osis, tenderness in the anatomic snuffbox, tendern ver the distal pole of the scaphoid, and limitatio rist motion. Radiographs of the wrist, includ blique views and a posteroanterior view with the n ulnar deviation, were interpreted as normal. He iagnosed with a suspected scaphoid fracture, placed splint immobilizing the wrist and thumb, and refe o your office. He presents 1 week after the injury, o return to play. The physical and radiographic ex nations are repeated and the findings have not chan

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Injection of Dexamethasone Versus Triamcinolone for Idiopathic Trigger Finger

PURPOSE This study was designed to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference in resolution of triggering 3 months after injection with either a soluble (dexamethasone) or insoluble (triamcinolone) corticosteroid for idiopathic trigger finger. METHODS Eighty-four patients were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing dexamethasone and triamcinolone injection for idiopathic trigger finger. Sixty-seven patients completed the 6-week follow-up (35 triamcinolone arm, 32 dexamethasone arm), and 72 patients completed the 3-month follow-up (41 triamcinolone arm, 31 dexamethasone arm). Outcome measures included the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, trigger finger grading according to Quinnell, and satisfaction on a visual analog scale. To preserve autonomy, patients were permitted additional injections and operative treatment at any time. Twenty-five patients requested a second injection (10 triamcinolone arm, 15 dexamethasone arm), and 21 elected operative treatment (10 triamcinolone arm, 11 dexamethasone arm) during the study period. The analysis was according to intention to treat principles. RESULTS Six weeks after injection, absence of triggering was documented in 22 of 35 patients in the triamcinolone cohort and in 12 of 32 patients in the dexamethasone cohort. The rates 3 months after injection were 27 of 41 in the triamcinolone cohort and 22 of 31 in the dexamethasone cohort. The triamcinolone cohort had significantly better satisfaction and Quinnell grades than did the dexamethasone cohort at the 6-week follow-up but not at the 3-month follow-up. There were no significant differences between Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores at the 6-week follow-up and the 3-month follow-up. After the close of the study, there were 8 recurrences among patients with documented absence of triggering in the triamcinolone cohort and 1 in the dexamethasone cohort. CONCLUSIONS Although there were no differences 3 months after injection, our data suggest that triamcinolone may have a more rapid but ultimately less durable effect on idiopathic trigger finger than does dexamethasone.

Predictors of Acute Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Associated With Fracture of the Distal Radius

PURPOSE A better understanding of the risk factors for acute carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) associated with fracture of the distal radius might influence recommendations for prophylactic carpal tunnel release. METHODS Fifty patients who had release of an acute CTS in association with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a fracture of the distal radius were identified from orthopedic trauma databases at 2 institutions. Each patient was matched with a control patient (ORIF, but no acute CTS) of the same gender, similar age (+/-4 years), and similar injury mechanism. RESULTS The prevalence of acute CTS among patients with a surgically treated fracture of the distal radius was 5.4%. In univariate analysis, only fracture translation was a significant predictor of acute CTS, but ipsilateral upper extremity trauma and status as a multitrauma patient were nearly significant. The best multivariate model included fracture translation alone and accounted for 60% of the observed increase in risk. A subgroup analysis using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) identified a threshold of approximately 35% fracture translation associated with a significantly increased risk of acute CTS in women less than 48 years of age. No threshold was identified in the other 3 subgroups. CONCLUSIONS Fracture translation is the most important risk factor for acute CTS in patients who subsequently had ORIF of a fracture of the distal radius. On the basis of these data, prophylactic carpal tunnel release might be appropriate in women less than 48 years of age with greater than 35% fracture translation, but further investigation is needed to confirm that a true threshold exists.