Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Purpose This study aimed to investigate practice variation in non-operative treatment methods and immobilisation duration for metacarpal fractures, and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Methods Conducted in 12 Dutch hospitals over three months in 2020, this study included adult patients with non-operatively treated solitary metacarpal fractures. Fractures were classified into intra-articular base, extra-articular base, shaft, neck, and intra-articular head fractures. The treatment methods (functional treatment allowing digit mobilisation or immobilisation) and immobilisation duration were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) at three months post-trauma. Results Of 389 included patients, shaft fractures were most common (n = 150, 39%), with 93% immobilised, followed by fifth metacarpal neck fractures (n = 93, 24%), with 75% immobilised. Immobilisation rates for fifth metacarpal neck fractures varied between hospitals, ranging from 29% (95% CI 0.10–0.58) to 100% (95% CI 0.78–1.00). The median immobilisation duration for all fractures was 23 days (IQR: 20–28), and hospital setting was independently associated with this duration. Patients with metacarpal shaft fractures immobilised for less than 21 days had higher MHQ scores compared to those immobilised for 21 days or more (median (IQR) 83 (76–100) versus 71 (57–89), p = 0.026). Conclusions The results showed practice variation in the treatment of metacarpal fractures, especially in the treatment of fifth MC neck fractures, with some hospitals following the Dutch guideline that advocates functional treatment while others did not. There are suggestions that prolonged immobilisation of metacarpal shaft fractures may lead to a worse MHQ score. These findings underscore the need for adherence to treatment protocols and emphasize functional treatment to potentially improve patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
Purpose This study aimed to investigate practice variation in non-operative treatment methods and immobilisation duration for metacarpal fractures, and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Methods Conducted in 12 Dutch hospitals over three months in 2020, this study included adult patients with non-operatively treated solitary metacarpal fractures. Fractures were classified into intra-articular base, extra-articular base, shaft, neck, and intra-articular head fractures. The treatment methods (functional treatment allowing digit mobilisation or immobilisation) and immobilisation duration were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) at three months post-trauma. Results Of 389 included patients, shaft fractures were most common (n = 150, 39%), with 93% immobilised, followed by fifth metacarpal neck fractures (n = 93, 24%), with 75% immobilised. Immobilisation rates for fifth metacarpal neck fractures varied between hospitals, ranging from 29% (95% CI 0.10–0.58) to 100% (95% CI 0.78–1.00). The median immobilisation duration for all fractures was 23 days (IQR: 20–28), and hospital setting was independently associated with this duration. Patients with metacarpal shaft fractures immobilised for less than 21 days had higher MHQ scores compared to those immobilised for 21 days or more (median (IQR) 83 (76–100) versus 71 (57–89), p = 0.026). Conclusions The results showed practice variation in the treatment of metacarpal fractures, especially in the treatment of fifth MC neck fractures, with some hospitals following the Dutch guideline that advocates functional treatment while others did not. There are suggestions that prolonged immobilisation of metacarpal shaft fractures may lead to a worse MHQ score. These findings underscore the need for adherence to treatment protocols and emphasize functional treatment to potentially improve patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.