Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2020; 87(3):191-196 | DOI: 10.55095/achot2020/031

The Injury-Treatment Time Interval of the Most Frequent Limb Fractures - 1-Year Monocentric StudyOriginal papers

V. TOLAR1,*, J. KLIMEŠ2, V. DŽUPA1, J. MARVAN1, P. DOUŠA1, V. BÁČA3, A. M. ČELKO4
1 Ortopedicko-traumatologická klinika 3. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice Královské Vinohrady, Praha, ČR
2 Abteilung für Orthopädie und Traumatologie, Klinik Diakonissen Schladming, Schladming, Spolková republika Německo
3 Ústav anatomie 3. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy, Praha, ČR
4 Ústav epidemiologie a biostatistiky 3. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy, Praha, ČR

INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the injury-treatment time interval in a group of patients with limb bone fractures over the period of one year; and to compare this interval in the most frequent fractures of the upper and lower limb.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:
The followed-up group of the prospective one-year monocentric study included 3,148 patients treated consecutively for 3,909 fractures. For the purpose of sub-analysis of the injury-treatment time interval in limb bone fractures, excluded from the group were the patients with multiple fractures (520 pts), patients with spinal fractures (356 pts) and pelvic fractures (210 pts). The statistical significance of the achieved results was tested with the use of contingency tables (chi-square test of independence). The significance level for the quantified tests was set at 5%.

RESULTS:
The sub-analysis covered 1,727 patients whose medical records mentioned the exact time of injury and first examination.
Within the first 6 hours after the injury, 536 (56.0%) patients with an upper limb bone fracture and 429 (55.7%) patients with a lower limb bone fracture were treated. Within 24 hours after the injury, 683 (71.4%) patients with an upper limb bone fracture and 572 (74.3%) patients with a lower limb bone fracture were treated.
Within the first 24 hours after the injury, 104 (76.4%) patients with a proximal humerus fracture, 240 (84.5%) patients with a distal radius fracture and only 174 (55.5%) patients with metacarpal and phalanx fractures were treated. In the first hours after the injury, most frequently treated were the patients who sustained a distal radius fracture, and the longest injury-treatment time interval was seen in patients with hand bone fractures. The difference in the 24hour injury-treatment interval was significant when comparing distal radius fractures and proximal humerus fractures (p = 0.047) and when comparing distal radius fractures and hand bone fractures (p < 0.001).
Within 24 hours after the injury, 166 (83.3%) patients with a proximal humerus fracture, 128 (79.1%) patients with an ankle fracture and 142 (63.4%) patients with metatarsal and phalanx fractures were treated. The shortest injury-treatment interval was reported in patients with a proximal femoral fracture and an ankle fracture, and relatively the lowest number of treated patients in the first hours after the injury was reported among patients with metatarsal and toe fractures. When evaluating the 24hour injury-treatment time interval, this difference was significant only when comparing proximal femoral fractures and metatarsal and phalanx fractures (p < 0.001), while when comparing proximal femoral fractures and ankle fractures the difference was not significant (p = 0.283).

DISCUSSION:
There are not many studies of other authors focused on monitoring the injury-treatment time interval in the most frequent limb bone fractures. They also confirm that the treatment is sought out most quickly by patients with fractures that make walking or self-care impossible.

CONCLUSIONS:
The results of the study confirmed that the fastest treatment was requested in patients with fractures which made the self-care (distal radius) or walking (proximal femur, ankle) impossible; less painful fractures (metacarpal, phalanx fractures) and fractures that do not compromise walking (metatarsal fractures) were treated in the first 24 hours after the injury significantly less frequently. The patients with ankle fractures sought out treatment the most quickly compared to the patients with other fractures; it concerned largely occupational or sports injuries sustained by young men who were brought for treatment immediately after the injury, directly from their workplace or sports ground. The treatment of osteoporotic fractures (proximal humerus, distal radius, proximal femur) was spread over the first 6 hours due to the lack of independence of elderly patients after sustaining a fall at home; in majority of them transport to treatment was arranged for by relatives or neighbours only with a certain delay, once they became aware of their injury.

Keywords: fracture epidemiology, limb bone fractures, trauma-treatment time interval

Published: June 1, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
TOLAR V, KLIMEŠ J, DŽUPA V, MARVAN J, DOUŠA P, BÁČA V, ČELKO AM. The Injury-Treatment Time Interval of the Most Frequent Limb Fractures - 1-Year Monocentric Study. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2020;87(3):191-196. doi: 10.55095/achot2020/031. PubMed PMID: 32773020.
Download citation

References

  1. Anthony CA, Duchman KR, Bedard NA, Gholson JJ, Gao Y, Pugely AJ, Callaghan JJ. Hip fractures: appropriate timing to operative intervention. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32:3314-3318. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  2. Arastu MH, Demcoe R, Buckley RE. Current concepts review: Ankle fractures. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2012;79:473-483. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Báča V, Klimeš J, Tolar V, Zimola P, Balliu I, Vitvarová I, Lásková H, Džupa V, Grivna M, Čelko MA. 1-year prospective monocentric study of limb, spinal and pelvix fractures: Can monitoring fracture epidemiology impact injury prevention programs? Centr Eur J Publ Health. 2018;26:298-304. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Badekas T. Foot and ankle injuries during the Athens 2004 Olympic Games. Medicine et Chirurgie du Pied. 2010;26:9-12. Go to original source...
  5. Balaram AK, Bednar MS: Complications after the fractures of metacarpal and phalanges. Hand Clin. 2010;26:169-177. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  6. Balk R, Hahn F, Tarcea B. Die proximale Femurfraktur. Häufigkeit, Demographie, Etiologie, Prophylaxe. OP-Journal. 2002;17:80-84. Go to original source...
  7. Beerekamp MSH, de Muinck Keizer RJO, Schep NWL, Ubbink DT, Panneman MJM, Goslings JC. Epidemiology of extremity fractures in the Netherlands. Injury. 2017;48:1355-1362. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  8. Fields KB. Running injuries: changing trends and demographics. Curr Sport Med Rep. 2011;10:299-303. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  9. Herron J, Hutchinson R, Lecky F, Bouamra O, Edwards A, Woodford M, Eardley WGP. The impact of age on major orthopaedic trauma: an analysis of the United Kingdom Trauma Audit Research Network database. Bone Joint J. 2017;99-B:1677-1680. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  10. Hertel R. Fractures of the proximal humerus in osteoporotic bone. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16(Suppl 2):S65-S72. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  11. Chandler H, MacLeod K, Penn-Barwell JG; Severe Lower Extremity Combat Trauma (SeLECT) Study Group. Extremity injuries sustained by the UK military in the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts: 2003-2014. Injury. 2017;48:1439-1443. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  12. Cho CH, Song KS, Min BW, Lee SM, Chang HW, Eum DS. Musculoskeletal injuries in break-dancers. Injury. 2009;40:1207-1211. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  13. Chung KC, Spilson SV. The frequency and epidemiology of hand and forearm fractures in the United States. J Hand Surg Am. 2001;26:908-915. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  14. Jerrhag D, Englund M, Karlsson MK, Rosengren BE. Epidemiology and time trends of distal forearm fractures in adults - a study of 11.2 million person-years in Sweden. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18:240. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  15. Li Y, Lin J, Wang P, Yao X, Yu H, Zhuang H, Zhang L, Zeng Y. Effect of time factors on the mortality in brittle hip fracture. J Orthop Surg Res. 2014;9:37. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  16. Lombardo DJ, Jelsema T, Gambone A, Weisman M, Petersen-Fitts G, Whaley JD, Sabesan VJ. Extremity fractures associated with ATVs and dirt bikes: a 10-year national epidemiologic study. Musculoskelet Surg. 2017;101:145-151. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  17. Madadi F, Farahmandi MV, Eajazi A, Besheli LD, Madadi F, Lari MN. Epidemiology of adult tibial schaft fractures: a 7-year study in a major referral orthopedic center in Iran. Med Sci Monitor. 2010;16:CR217-CR221.
  18. Mall NA, Carlisle JC, Matava MJ, Powell JW, Goldfarb CA. Upper extremity injuries in the National Football League - Part I: Hand and digital injuries. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:1938-1944.
  19. Märdian S, Schasser KD, Scheel F, Gruner J, Schwabe R. Quality of life and functional outcome of periprosthetic fractures arend the knee following knee arthroplasty. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2015;82:113-118. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  20. Marvan J, Bělehrádková H, Džupa V, Báča V, Krbec M. Epidemiologické, morfologické a klinické aspekty zlomenin v oblasti hlezna. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2012;79:269-274. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  21. Min BW, Kim SJ. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head after osteosynthesis of femoral neck fracture. Orthopedics. 2011;34:6-11. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  22. Nilsson M, Eriksson J, Larsson B, Odén A, Johansson H, Lorentzon M. Fall risk assessment predicts fall-related injury, hip fracture, and head injury in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2016;64:2242-2250. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  23. Osmaya-Moreno H, Romero-Espinosa JF, Mondragon-Chimal MA, Ochoa-Gonzales G, Escoto-Gomez JA. [Epidemiological study of traumatic hand injuries in Toluca, State of Mexico]. Cir Cir. 2014;82:511-516. Go to PubMed...
  24. Pincus D, Desai SJ, Wasserstein D, Ravi B, Paterson JM, Henry P, Kreder HJ, Jenkinson R. Outcomes of After-Hours Hip Fracture Surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99:914-922. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  25. Popelka O, Skála-Rosenbaum J, Bartoška R, Waldauf P, Krbec M, Džupa V. Typ zlomeniny a interval úraz-operace jako rizikové faktory pro vznik avaskulární nekrózy hlavice femuru po osteosyntéze intrakapsulárních zlomenin krčku. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2015;82:293-298. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  26. Swenson DM, Yard EE, Collins CL, Fields SK, Comstock RD. Epidemiology of US high school sports-related fractures, 2005-2009. Clin J Sport Med. 2010;20:293-299. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  27. van den Bekerom MP, Kloen P, Luitse JS, Raaymakers EL. Complications of distal tibiofibular syndesmotic screw stabilization: analysis of 236 patients. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2013;52:456-459. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...