Browsing by Subject "distal radius fracture"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-4 of 4
  • Luokkala, Toni; Laitinen, Minna K.; Hevonkorpi, Teemu P.; Raittio, Lauri; Mattila, Ville M.; Launonen, Antti P. (2020)
    We found no clear evidence of the clinical superiority of distal radius fracture surgery among older adults at one year.Surgical treatment, however, may yield a faster recovery to previous level of activity in elderly patients.With operative treatment, hardware-based problems may warrant secondary operations and implant removal, whereas in non-operative treatment, symptomatic loss of alignment and malunion can occur.In elderly patients, non-operative treatment can be considered to be the gold standard.
  • Raudasoja, Leena; Aspinen, Samuli; Vastamäki, Heidi; Ryhänen, Jorma; Hulkkonen, Sina (2022)
    A distal radius fracture (DRF) is one of the most common fractures in emergency units, the treatment of which requires considerable health care resources. We analyzed the incidence rate for DRFs and the incidence rate of operative treatment over a five-year period, 2015-2019, for the entire population of Finland and all ages. Data was obtained from the Finnish National Care Register for Health Care. The results were counted as cases per 100,000 person/years and standardized with the European Standard Population 2013. The mean annual incidence rate of DRF was 204.90 (203.21-206.59) in specialist care and 69.53 (68.55-70.52) in primary care. It peaked among the pediatric population and among elderly women, in whom it was more than four times as common compared to men of the same age. No increase in the incidence rate of DRFs was found. The mean incidence rate of operative treatment was 45.66 (45.66-45.66)/100,000 person/years, 2015-2019; women were more likely to undergo operative treatment. Altogether, 15-18% of DRFs were operated on over the study period. The annual incidence rate of operations seemed to plateau compared to earlier studies in Finland.
  • Suojärvi, Nora; Lindfors, Nina; Höglund, Theresa; Sippo, Robert; Waris, Eero (2021)
    We examined the reliability of a computer-aided cone-beam CT analysis of radiographic parameters of 50 normal distal radii and compared it with interobserver agreement of measurements made by three groups of physicians on two-dimensional plain radiographs. The intra-rater reliability of the computer-aided analysis was evaluated on 33 wrists imaged twice by cone-beam CT. The longitudinal axis, anterior tilt, radial inclination and ulnar variance were measured. The reliability of computer-aided analysis was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.94-0.96) while the interobserver agreement of two-dimensional radiograph interpretation was good (ulnar variance, ICC 0.80-0.84) to poor (anterior tilt and radial inclination, ICC 0.20-0.42). We conclude that computer-aided cone-beam CT analysis was a reliable tool for radiographic parameter determination, whereas physicians demonstrated substantial variability especially in interpreting the angular parameters.
  • Sandelin, Henrik; Jalanko, T.; Huhtala, H.; Lassila, H.; Haapala, J.; Helkamaa, T. (2016)
    Background and Aims: Patient-rated outcome measures have become increasingly important in clinical research. They provide research and clinical tools which can be utilized in the assessment of patient recovery and treatment efficacy. The purpose of our study was to translate and validate the original version of the PRWE form into Finnish. Material and Methods: We conducted the translation of the PRWE questionnaire according to standardized guidelines. Patients (N=119) with an acute distal radius fracture were recruited, and they completed the PRWE and QuickDASH questionnaires at 2months and 4months after the wrist injury. Results: The mean answering times were 52days (standard deviation [SD] 9.8 days) and 116days (standard deviation [SD] 14.8 days), respectively. Both the internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of 0.976 and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.992 (95% CI 0.966-0.998) showed excellent reliability for the total PRWE score. The correlation coefficients between the total score, the subscales, and for improvement over time for PRWE and QuickDASH were excellent. The responsiveness was good with an effect size of 0.83 and a standard response mean of 1.22. Conclusion: Our study shows that the Finnish version of the PRWE is reliable, valid, and responsive for the evaluation of pain and disability after distal radius fracture.