The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2005;87:204-213.
© 2005 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the activities for this article:
 Trauma Test 6: Spring 2005
Shoulder/Elbow Test 7: Spring 2005
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 Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Plausinis, D.
Right arrow Articles by Zuckerman, J. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Plausinis, D.
Right arrow Articles by Zuckerman, J. D.
Related Collections
Right arrow Current Concepts Review
Right arrow Instructional Course
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Instructional Course Lecture

Complications Of Humeral Head Replacement for Proximal Humeral Fractures

Derek Plausinis, MASc, MD1, Young W. Kwon, MD, PhD1 and Joseph D. Zuckerman, MD1

1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University-Hospital for Joint Diseases, 301 East 17th Street, New York, NY 10003. E-mail address for J.D. Zuckerman: joseph.zuckerman@med.nyu.edu

An Instructional Course Lecture, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


   Introduction
 
Results after humeral head replacement for the treatment of acute proximal humeral fractures have been mixed. The variability in the reported outcomes reflects the technical factors related to the reconstruction, the timing of the surgery, the nature of the patient population, and the different methods of assessing the results. Hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures provides good-to-excellent pain relief in 73% to 97% of patients1-5. Patients are generally satisfied with the procedure, as reflected by the 70% to 92% satisfaction rates in most series1,4,6-10. Functional outcomes, however, have been variable. One of the more commonly utilized outcome instruments is the Constant score, which measures four clinical parameters, including pain, range of motion, power, and activities of daily living, on a 100-point scale. Using this system, some authors have reported average scores as low as 38 points whereas others have reported average scores as . . . [Full Text of this Article]


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