The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2008;90:1862-1868.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.G.01580
© 2008 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the activity for this article:
 CME 3: July, August, September 2008 (publication date October 3, 2008; expi...
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Corrales, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Miclau, T.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Corrales, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Miclau, T., III
Related Collections
Right arrow Adult Trauma
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Variability in the Assessment of Fracture-Healing in Orthopaedic Trauma Studies

Luis A. Corrales, MD1, Saam Morshed, MD, MPH3, Mohit Bhandari, MD, MSc, FRCSC2 and Theodore Miclau, III, MD3

1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California at San Francisco School of Medicine, 500 Parnassus Avenue, MU-320W, San Francisco, CA 94143
2 Hamilton General Hospital, 7 North, Suite 727, 237 Barton Street East, Hamilton, ON L8L 2X2, Canada
3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco General Hospital, 1001 Potrero Avenue, Room 3A-36, San Francisco, CA 94110. E-mail address for T. Miclau III: miclaut{at}orthosurg.ucsf.edu
Investigation performed at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California; and the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Disclosure: In support of their research for or preparation of this work, one or more of the authors received, in any one year, outside funding or grants in excess of $10,000 from a Doris Duke Clinical Research Fellowship, an Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation (OREF) Clinical Research Training Fellowship, and the National Institutes of Health. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.

Background: There is a lack of consensus among orthopaedic surgeons in the assessment of fracture-healing. We conducted a systematic review of recent clinical studies of long-bone fracture care that were published in three major orthopaedic journals to identify current definitions of fracture-healing.

Methods: MEDLINE and the computerized databases for The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume), The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British Volume), and the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma were searched from January 1996 through December 2006 with use of title, abstract, keyword, and medical subject headings. Therapeutic clinical studies of long-bone fractures of the appendicular skeleton in adults in which fracture-healing was assessed were selected. Two reviewers independently identified articles and extracted data. Any disagreement was resolved by consensus. We qualitatively and quantitatively summarized the definition of fracture union and the reliability of the assessment of radiographic fracture-healing.

Results: One hundred and twenty-three studies proved to be eligible. Union was defined on the basis of a combination of clinical and radiographic criteria in 62% of the studies, on the basis of radiographic criteria only in 37%, and on the basis of clinical criteria only in 1%. Twelve different criteria were used to define fracture union clinically, and the most common criterion was the absence of pain or tenderness at the fracture site during weight-bearing. In studies involving the use of plain radiographs, eleven different criteria were used to define fracture union, and the most common criterion was bridging of the fracture site. A quantitative measure of the reliability of the radiographic assessment of fracture union was reported in two studies.

Conclusions: We found a lack of consensus with regard to the definition of fracture-healing in the current orthopaedic literature. Without valid and reliable clinical or radiographic measures of union, the interpretation of fracture care studies remains difficult.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?