Most recent studies on procedures for stabilizing the glenohumeral joint focus on arthroscopic techniques. A relatively simple open procedure is the modified Putti-Platt procedure. The aim of these retrospective case series was to evaluate the functional outcome, patient satisfaction, and quality of life of patients who underwent this procedure. After a median follow-up time of 4.7 (P25-P75 1.7-6.8) years, fifty-one patients could be enrolled with a mean age of 25 (21-39) years. Five patients (10 %) reported re-dislocations. The median Constant score for the affected side was 84 (P25-P75 75-91). Median loss of motion in abduction, elevation, external rotation, and external rotation in 90° of abduction did not exceed 10° when compared to the healthy shoulder. A median Rowe score of 92 (P25-P75 75-95) was measured. The WOSI score and SF-36 showed excellent quality of life. The VAS proved high patient satisfaction with the outcome; 7.9 (6.8-9.5). We concluded that the modified Putti-Platt procedure leads to excellent outcome scores and only marginal restriction in range of motion combined with a high patient satisfaction. Our data prove that excellent results can be obtained with a relatively simple open procedure.
textabstractBackground: After a complex dislocation, some elbows remain unstable after closed reduction or fracture treatment. Function after treatment with a hinged external fixator theoretically allows collateral ligaments to heal without surgical reconstruction. However, there is a lack of prospective studies that assess functional outcome, pain, and ROM. Questions/purposes: We asked: (1) In complex elbow fracture-dislocations, does treatment with a hinged external fixator result in reduction of disability and pain, and in improvement in ROM, function, and quality of life? (2) Does delayed treatment (7 days or later) have a negative effect on ROM after 1 year? (3) What are the complications seen after external fixator treatment? Methods: During a 2-year period, 11 centers recruited 27 patients 18 years or older who were included and evaluated at 2 and 6 weeks and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery as part of this prospective case series. During the study period, the participating centers agreed on general indications for use of the hinged external fixator, which included persistent instability after closed reduction alone or closed reduction combined with surgical treatment of associated fracture(s), when indicated. Functional outcome was evaluated using the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH; primary outcome) score, the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), the Oxford Elbow Score, and the level of pain (VAS). ROM, adverse events, secondary interventions, and radiographs also were evaluated. A total of 26 of the 27 patients (96%) were available for followup at 1 year. Results: All functional and pain scores improved. The median QuickDASH score decreased from 30 (25th–75th percentiles [P25–P75], 23–40) at 6 weeks to 7 (P25–P75, 2–12) at 1 year with a median difference of −25 (p < 0.001). The median MEPI score increased from 80 (P25–P75, 64–85) at 6 weeks to 100 (P25–P75, 85–100) at 1 year with a median difference of 15 (p < 0.001). The median Oxford Elbow Score increased from 60 (P25–P75, 44–68) at 6 weeks to 90 (P25–P75, 73–96) at 1 year with a median difference of 29 (p < 0.001). The median VAS decreased from 2.8 (P25–P75, 1.0–5.0) at 2 weeks to 0.5 (P25–P75, 0.0–1.9) at 1 year with a median difference of −2.1 (p = 0.001). ROM also improved. The median flexion-extension arc improved from 50° (P25–P75, 33°–80°) at 2 weeks to 118° (P25–P75, 105°–138°) at 1 year with a median difference of 63° (p < 0.001). Similarly, the median pronation-supination arc improved from 90° (P25–P75, 63°–124°) to 160° (P25–P75, 138°–170°) with a median difference of 75° (p < 0.001). At 1 year, the median residual deficit compared with the uninjured side was 30° (P25–P75, 5°–35°) for the flexion-extension arc, and 3° (P25–P75, 0°–25°) for the pronation-supination arc. Ten patients (37%) experienced a fixator-related complication, and seven patients required secondary surgery (26%). One patient reported recurrent instability. Conclusions: A hinged external elbow fixator provides enough stability to start early mobilization after an acute complex elbow dislocation and residual instability. This was reflected in good functional outcome scores and only slight disability despite a relatively high complication rate. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.
textabstractMost recent studies on procedures for stabilizing the glenohumeral joint focus on arthroscopic techniques. A relatively simple open procedure is the modified Putti-Platt procedure. The aim of these retrospective case series was to evaluate the functional outcome, patient satisfaction, and quality of life of patients who underwent this procedure. After a median follow-up time of 4.7 (P25-P75 1.7-6.8) years, fifty-one patients could be enrolled with a mean age of 25 (21-39) years. Five patients (10 %) reported re-dislocations. The median Constant score for the affected side was 84 (P25-P75 75-91). Median loss of motion in abduction, elevation, external rotation, and external rotation in 90° of abduction did not exceed 10° when compared to the healthy shoulder. A median Rowe score of 92 (P25-P75 75-95) was measured. The WOSI score and SF-36 showed excellent quality of life. The VAS proved high patient satisfaction with the outcome; 7.9 (6.8-9.5). We concluded that the modified Putti-Platt procedure leads to excellent outcome scores and only marginal restriction in range of motion combined with a high patient satisfaction. Our data prove that excellent results can be obtained with a relatively simple open procedure.
Abstract Background Upper extremity injuries account for a large proportion of attendances to the Emergency Department. The aim of this study was to assess population-based trends in the incidence of upper extremity injuries in the Dutch population between 1986 and 2008, and to give a detailed overview of the associated health care costs. Methods Age-standardized incidence rates of upper extremity injuries were calculated for each year between 1986 and 2008. The average number of people in each of the 5-year age classes for each year of the study was calculated and used as the standard (reference) population. Injury cases were extracted from the National Injury Surveillance System (non-hospitalized patients) and the National Medical Registration (hospitalized patients). An incidence-based cost model was applied in order to estimate associated direct health care costs in 2007. Results The overall age-adjusted incidence of upper extremity injuries increased from 970 to 1,098 per 100,000 persons (13%). The highest incidence was seen in young persons and elderly women. Total annual costs for all injuries were 290 million euro, of which 190 million euro were paid for injuries sustained by women. Wrist fractures were the most expensive injuries (83 million euro) due to high incidence, whereas upper arm fractures were the most expensive injuries per case (4,440 euro). Major cost peaks were observed for fractures in elderly women due to high incidence and costs per patient. Conclusions The overall incidence of upper extremity injury in the Netherlands increased by 13% in the period 1986–2008. Females with upper extremity fractures and especially elderly women with wrist fractures accounted for a substantial share of total costs.
Abstract Background Elbow dislocations can be classified as simple or complex. Simple dislocations are characterized by the absence of fractures, while complex dislocations are associated with fractures of the radial head, olecranon, or coronoid process. The majority of patients with these complex dislocations are treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), or arthroplasty in case of a non-reconstructable radial head fracture. If the elbow joint remains unstable after fracture fixation, a hinged elbow fixator can be applied. The fixator provides stability to the elbow joint, and allows for early mobilization. The latter may be important for preventing stiffness of the joint. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of early mobilization with a hinged external elbow fixator on clinical outcome in patients with complex elbow dislocations with residual instability following fracture fixation. Methods/Design The design of the study will be a multicenter prospective cohort study of 30 patients who have sustained a complex elbow dislocation and are treated with a hinged elbow fixator following fracture fixation because of residual instability. Early active motion exercises within the limits of pain will be started immediately after surgery under supervision of a physical therapist. Outcome will be evaluated at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome is the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. The secondary outcome measures are the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, Oxford Elbow Score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow joint at both sides, radiographic healing of the fractures and formation of periarticular ossifications, rate of secondary interventions and complications, and health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36). Discussion The outcome of this study will yield quantitative data on the functional outcome in patients with a complex elbow dislocation and who are treated with ORIF and additional stabilization with a hinged elbow fixator. Trial Registration The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR1996 ).
Introduction: The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. It was hypothesized that early mobilization would not lead to higher direct and indirect costs. Materials and methods: This study used data of a multicenter randomized clinical trial (FuncSiE trial). From August 25, 2009 until September 18, 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were recruited and randomized to early mobilization (immediate motion exercises; n = 48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilization (n = 52). Patients completed questionnaires on health-related quality of life [EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form-36 (SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS)], health care use, and work absence. Follow-up was 1 year. Primary outcome were the total costs at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. Results: There were no significant differences in EQ-5D, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS between the two groups. Mean total costs per patient were €3624 in the early mobilization group versus €7072 in the plaster group (p = 0.094). Shorter work absenteeism in the early mobilization group (10 versus 18 days; p = 0.027) did not lead to significantly lower costs for loss of productivity (€1719 in the early mobilization group versus €4589; p = 0.120). Conclusion: From a clinical and a socio-economic point of view, early mobilization should be the treatment of choice for a simple elbow dislocation. Plaster immobilization has inferior results at almost double the cost.
Background After a complex dislocation, some elbows remain unstable after closed reduction or fracture treatment. Function after treatment with a hinged external fixator theoretically allows collateral ligaments to heal without surgical reconstruction. However, there is a lack of prospective studies that assess functional outcome, pain, and ROM. Questions/purposes We asked: (1) In complex elbow fracture-dislocations, does treatment with a hinged external fixator result in reduction of disability and pain, and in improvement in ROM, function, and quality of life? (2) Does delayed treatment (7 days or later) have a negative effect on ROM after 1 year? (3) What are the complications seen after external fixator treatment? Methods During a 2-year period, 11 centers recruited 27 patients 18 years or older who were included and evaluated at 2 and 6 weeks and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery as part of this prospective case series. During the study period, the participating centers agreed on general indications for use of the hinged external fixator, which included persistent instability after closed reduction alone or closed reduction combined with surgical treatment of associated fracture(s), when indicated. Functional outcome was evaluated using the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH; primary outcome) score, the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), the Oxford Elbow Score, and the level of pain (VAS). ROM, adverse events, secondary interventions, and radiographs also were evaluated. A total of 26 of the 27 patients (96%) were available for followup at 1 year. Results All functional and pain scores improved. The median QuickDASH score decreased from 30 (25th-75th percentiles [P25-P75], 23-40) at 6 weeks to 7 (P25-P75, 2-12) at 1 year with a median difference of −25 (p < 0.001). The median MEPI score increased from 80 (P25-P75, 64-85) at 6 weeks to 100 (P25-P75, 85-100) at 1 year with a median difference of 15 (p < 0.001). The median Oxford Elbow Score increased from 60 (P25-P75, 44-68) at 6 weeks to 90 (P25-P75, 73-96) at 1 year with a median difference of 29 (p < 0.001). The median VAS decreased from 2.8 (P25-P75, 1.0-5.0) at 2 weeks to 0.5 (P25-P75, 0.0-1.9) at 1 year with a median difference of −2.1 (p = 0.001). ROM also improved. The median flexion-extension arc improved from 50° (P25-P75, 33°-80°) at 2 weeks to 118° (P25-P75, 105°-138°) at 1 year with a median difference of 63° (p < 0.001). Similarly, the median pronation-supination arc improved from 90° (P25-P75, 63°-124°) to 160° (P25-P75, 138°-170°) with a median difference of 75° (p < 0.001). At 1 year, the median residual deficit compared with the uninjured side was 30° (P25-P75, 5°-35°) for the flexion-extension arc, and 3° (P25-P75, 0°-25°) for the pronation-supination arc. Ten patients (37%) experienced a fixator-related complication, and seven patients required secondary surgery (26%). One patient reported recurrent instability. Conclusions A hinged external elbow fixator provides enough stability to start early mobilization after an acute complex elbow dislocation and residual instability. This was reflected in good functional outcome scores and only slight disability despite a relatively high complication rate. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic study.
Study design: Validation study using data from a multicenter, randomized, clinical trial (RCT). Objectives: To evaluate the reliability, validity, responsiveness, and minimal important change (MIC) of the Dutch version of the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH) in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. Background: Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly important for assessing outcome following elbow injuries, both in daily practice and in clinical research. However measurement properties of the OES and Quick-DASH in these patients are not fully known. Methods: OES and Quick-DASH were completed four times until one year after trauma. Mayo Elbow Performance Index, pain (VAS), Short Form-36, and EuroQol-5D were completed for comparison. Data of a multicenter RCT (n = 100) were used. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach’s alpha. Construct and longitudinal validity were assessed by determining hypothesized strength of correlation between scores or changes in scores, respectively, of (sub)scales. Finally, floor and ceiling effects, MIC, and smallest detectable change (SDC) were determined. Results: OES and Quick-DASH demonstrated adequate internal consistency (Cronbach α, 0.882 and 0.886, respectively). Construct validity and longitudinal validity of both scales were supported by >75% correctly hypothesized correlations. MIC and SDC were 8.2 and 12.0 point for OES, respectively. For Quick-DASH, these values were 11.7 and 25.0, respectively. Conclusions: OES and Quick-DASH are reliable, valid, and responsive instruments for evaluating elbow-related quality of life. The anchor-based MIC was 8.2 points for OES and 11.7 for QuickDASH.
textabstractBackground. Elbow dislocations can be classified as simple or complex. Simple dislocations are characterized by the absence of fractures, while complex dislocations are associated with fractures. After reduction of a simple dislocation, treatment options include immobilization in a static plaster for different periods of time or so-called functional treatment. Functional treatment is characterized by early active motion within the limits of pain with or without the use of a sling or hinged brace. Theoretically, functional treatment should prevent stiffness without introducing increased joint instability. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to compare early functional treatment versus plaster immobilization following simple dislocations of the elbow. Methods/Design. The design of the study will be a multicenter randomized controlled trial of 100 patients who have sustained a simple elbow dislocation. After reduction of the dislocation, patients are randomized between a pressure bandage for 5-7 days and early functional treatment or a plaster in 90 degrees flexion, neutral position for pro-supination for a period of three weeks. In the functional group, treatment is started with early active motion within the limits of pain. Function, pain, and radiographic recovery will be evaluated at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score. The secondary outcome measures are the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, Oxford elbow score, pain level at both sides, range of motion of the elbow joint at both sides, rate of secondary interventions and complication rates in both groups (secondary dislocation, instability, relaxation), health-related quality of life (Short-Form 36 and EuroQol-5D), radiographic appearance of the elbow joint (degenerative changes and heterotopic ossifications), costs, and cost-effectiveness. Discussion. The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of a functional treatment for the management of simple elbow dislocations. Trial Registration. The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR2025).
