No abstract

Thirty-seven patients were treated over a 7-year period using the "S" Quattro dynamic external fixator. There were 30 intra-articular and nine extra-articular fractures. Patients were reviewed at an average of 22.5 months. The average total range of motion for the affected digit at follow-up was 232 degrees for intra-articular and 241 degrees for extra-articular fractures. We believe that this device is a simple, reliable technique in the treatment of these difficult fractures.

The purpose of this study was to assess functional outcome of patients with a Lisfranc fracture dislocation of the foot by applying validated patient-and physician-based scoring systems and to compare these outcome tools. Of 25 injuries sustained by 24 patients treated in our institution between January 1995 and June 2001, 16 were available for review with a mean followup period of 36 (10-74) months. Injuries were classified according to Myerson. Outcome instruments used were: (a) Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), (b) Baltimore Painful Foot score (PFS) and (c) American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) mid-foot scoring scale. Four patients had an excellent outcome on the PFS scale, seven were classified as good, three fair and two poor. There was a statistically significant correlation between the PFS and Role Physical (RP) element of the SF-36. Résumé Le but de cette étude était d'étudier le résultat fonctionnel du traitement d'une fracture luxation du Lisfranc en utilisant des scores validés Patient et Médecin et en les comparant. A partir de 24 malades traités entre janvier 1995 et juin 2001 pour 25 lésions, 16 malades étaient disponibles pour la révision avec une moyenne de suivi de 36 (10-74) mois. Les blessures ont été classées d'après Myerson. Les échelles d'appréciation utilisées étaient: (a) l'échelle de qualité SF-36, (b) le score Pied douloureux de Baltimore (PFS) et, (c), le score de l'American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS). Quatre malades avaient un excellent résultat sur l'échelle de Baltimore, sept ont été classés comme bon, trois comme moyen et deux mauvais. Il y avait une corrélation statistiquement significative entre le score de Baltimore et le score SF-36.

No abstract

No abstract