The Effect of Thumb Immobilization on Fractures of the Hook of the Hamate: A Cadaver Study

Triplet, Jacob J.; Gellman, Harris; Clause, David; Halikis, Nicholas M.

doi:10.1177/1558944718795307

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(112 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, of the 22 studies included, only 9 used a universal classification system for DRFs. Six studies used the AO classification system, 14,15,20,24,25,30 2 used the Frykman system, 22,33 and 1 used the Older system. 29 In addition, of the 13 studies that did not use a classification system, none reported sufficient information to determine fracture location (eg, intra-articular vs extra-articular).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9,13,17 The theoretical benefit of spica or gutter casts and splints may relate to the additional stability these casts provide to the carpal bones by immobilizing the metacarpals and phalanges. 33 There are still limited results to differentiate the effects of spica/gutter casts. Gutter and spica constructs had better DASH scores than the above-elbow casts and above-elbow splints that did not immobilize the phalanges.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect Immobilization Mechanisms Have on Radiographic Outcomes and Complication Rates in the Conservative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures: A Systematic Review

Jamnik

Chacón

Xiao

et al. 2022

Hand (New York, N,Y.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are among the most common fractures in the United States. Despite their high incidence, there is no consensus on the optimal type of cast or splint to treat these fractures. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the available literature pertaining to the outcomes for different constructs used to conservatively treat DRFs. A literature search of PubMed, Medline, and Embase was conducted to identify research comparing the outcomes of various immobilization mechanisms. In particular, endpoints included complications (eg, loss of reduction, pain), radiographic outcomes, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. A total of 1655 articles were identified during the literature search, and 22 ultimately fulfilled inclusion criteria. These 22 studies included 1826 conservatively treated DRFs. The different immobilization mechanisms were divided into 8 groupings: above-elbow casts, above-elbow splints, below-elbow casts, below-elbow splints, gutter or spica casts, gutter or spica splints, dorsal-volar splints, and dorsal splints. Qualitative review of the studies determined that below-elbow constructs result in equal or better functional and radiologic outcomes when compared with above-elbow constructs. Meta-analysis demonstrated that a statistically significant difference ( P = .04) existed in the incidence of loss of reduction between the immobilization constructs, although post hoc analysis did not detect significant differences between 2 particular constructs.

show abstract